JW Insider

I've also heard it argued that it showed the greatest example of humility by Jehovah to allow his name to go into obscurity to allow his Son's name to be placed above every other name.
But I don't really buy it. It was through human superstition, not Jehovah's laws, that the name was obscured. The Bible certainly didn't obscure it. It's the most common, proper name in the Bible.

Dear sister. Wishing, hoping, and praying you will be well. The hospitals are truly dangerous places now. Just heard a woman (originally from Senegal) "screaming" about what she says happened to her husband in a French hospital. (He was a well known football player, who went in for a non-Covid checkup -a bad headache- and died hours later of a heart attack. She was treated with such disdain, and she is a medical professional.) Things that happen regularly in hospitals today were mostly unheard of in past years.

Dear sister. Wishing, hoping, and praying you will be well. The hospitals are truly dangerous places now. Just heard a woman (originally from Senegal) "screaming" about what she says happened to her husband in a French hospital. (He was a well known football player, who went in for a non-Covid checkup -a bad headache- and died hours later of a heart attack. She was treated with such disdain, and she is a medical professional.) Things that happen regularly in hospitals today were mostly unheard of in past years.

I've also heard it argued that it showed the greatest example of humility by Jehovah to allow his name to go into obscurity to allow his Son's name to be placed above every other name.
But I don't really buy it. It was through human superstition, not Jehovah's laws, that the name was obscured. The Bible certainly didn't obscure it. It's the most common, proper name in the Bible.

I read that the the Catholic "Jerusalem" Bible and later the Catholic "New Jerusalem" Bible, were going to use Jahve, thinking it was possibly more accurate and more consistent with how other Hebrew names were translated, but they decided to stick with Yahweh because it was better known. Similar reasoning with the NWT translators in sticking with Jehovah.

I read that the the Catholic "Jerusalem" Bible and later the Catholic "New Jerusalem" Bible, were going to use Jahve, thinking it was possibly more accurate and more consistent with how other Hebrew names were translated, but they decided to stick with Yahweh because it was better known. Similar reasoning with the NWT translators in sticking with Jehovah.

Tom, I guess you are hoping to get very old or live through Armageddon. I am sick a second time.  I had these symptoms 6 weeks ago and got over it....... but it came back today.... lol.   I worked with tourists......
I remain in quaranteen and doctor myself. I will never go to a hospital.
This world-wide lockdown reminds me of the 66CE lockdown  in Jerusalem....... I believe we are on our way to that situation we have been waiting for!
After this the money system will be digital and all governance controlling..... central policies by UN....... maybe after our JW message a second lockdown? Like 70CE?
 

The whole point is that for English speaking people Jehovah is how it is written. In other languages it is written differently and pronounced slightly differently. I never understood why it is such a problem, since many names are written and pronounced differently depending on which country you live in. 

http://www.vernonjohns.org/snuffy1186/movies.html#V-10
One glance at this website tells me it was definitely not put together this year.
 

The Epoch Times is Falun Gong's media outlet. My opinion is that The Epoch Times is a media outlet that takes advantage of the stupidity and anti-Chinese racism of the West. It is therefore designed to appeal to Western racists and mostly American stupidity. As a financial maneuver, those tactics tap into a goldmine. Falun Gong's rabidly fascist political agenda is not hidden at all. The "movie" starts out:
"This is just the essential nature of Chinese Communism. Chinese Communism is evil. Every person it harms is directly attributable to the Chinese Communist Party."
I think that the world was extremely fortunate that this particular virus started out in China. China was extremely quick to detect it and give the proper warnings to officials and to the rest of the world. We have never seen such a quick response with so few mistakes for any other virus that has started either here or elsewhere. China made a few errors, and 3,000+ Chinese persons lost their lives, but the overall response was an excellent model for all other countries to follow. It put into operation a combination of testing, lock-down, recommendations, quarantines, notifications, equipping medical personnel, equipping medical research, and sharing the research with the world.
The "movie" is full of too many flat-out lies and inconsistencies to even think about taking seriously.
I wish I had time to discuss how so much of the anti-Chinese propaganda has already been completely debunked. However, I have a non-Covid health issue to take care of with one of my parents, and will likely be completely logged out of the forum for a couple of weeks. I'd love to get back to this when I'm back. But who knows? By then the U.S. will probably be talking some kind of war with China.
 

The Epoch Times is Falun Gong's media outlet. My opinion is that The Epoch Times is a media outlet that takes advantage of the stupidity and anti-Chinese racism of the West. It is therefore designed to appeal to Western racists and mostly American stupidity. As a financial maneuver, those tactics tap into a goldmine. Falun Gong's rabidly fascist political agenda is not hidden at all. The "movie" starts out:
"This is just the essential nature of Chinese Communism. Chinese Communism is evil. Every person it harms is directly attributable to the Chinese Communist Party."
I think that the world was extremely fortunate that this particular virus started out in China. China was extremely quick to detect it and give the proper warnings to officials and to the rest of the world. We have never seen such a quick response with so few mistakes for any other virus that has started either here or elsewhere. China made a few errors, and 3,000+ Chinese persons lost their lives, but the overall response was an excellent model for all other countries to follow. It put into operation a combination of testing, lock-down, recommendations, quarantines, notifications, equipping medical personnel, equipping medical research, and sharing the research with the world.
The "movie" is full of too many flat-out lies and inconsistencies to even think about taking seriously.
I wish I had time to discuss how so much of the anti-Chinese propaganda has already been completely debunked. However, I have a non-Covid health issue to take care of with one of my parents, and will likely be completely logged out of the forum for a couple of weeks. I'd love to get back to this when I'm back. But who knows? By then the U.S. will probably be talking some kind of war with China.
 

It seems how we are all "afflicted" with many things. Not only with Corona, religious doctrines, economy .... but also with pronunciation of letters and words :)))

I honestly had no idea that there was really so much concern over picking one pronunciation of YHWH over another. Especially when the actual original pronunciation is not perfectly known.
You keep saying things that make me think you really aren't really serious about this at all. I get the feeling you are only interested in the opinions that make it seem like the WTS is wrong, but you take no interest in understanding the entire picture. For example, I don't think that you are the least bit concerned about the transition in English from Hebrew "Y" to English "J." 
If I see you typing "Yeshua" for Jesus, or typing the Greek form "Iesous" for Jesus, then I'll really believe you are really serious about the Y and J issue. There is really no controversy. I don't think you really believe it's controversial yourself, unless you start spelling Jeremiah with a Y or Jesus or Joshua with a Y.
It's almost the same story here. Some languages don't really use a W sound the way English does. In German, it's almost always used only to make a V sound. Even though a lot of English words came from an older Germanic or Saxon word with the W in it. There were evidently differences in the ancient Hebrew pronunciations too. Remember that there were differences in the way that persons in Israel pronounced Shibboleth, where some said Sibboleth, instead. Other differences between Northern Israel and Southern Israel became more "pronounced" over the centuries. Semitic languages, like Aramaic, Amharic, Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac all evidently had differences from each other with respect to the U, the V, and the W sounds. 
Reminds of the old joke where a man visits Hawaii, and goes up to an old, distinguished Hawaiian man:
Visitor: Excuse me. Can you finally settle this question for me? Is this place pronounced "Hawaii, or Havaii?"
Old Man: "Havaii"
Visitor: Ah!! Thank you! Thank you!
Old Man: You're Velcome.
Of course, there is evidence that if a language has cognates in a closely related language, where a "W" (vav) is pronounced as a "B" then it probably had transitioned there from a V sound before it transformed to a B sound. Gordon is correct in claiming that this gives evidence for a V sound, at least among some speakers of ancient Hebrew. In this he agrees with a few scholars that came before him. Of course, this transition might well have occurred 1,000 years after the Hebrew/Aramaic of Jesus's day.
Not exactly. Just because the "H" was silent and not sounded out like a hiss, it still has an effect on the previous vowel, so that we can be sure the last syllable was NOT pronounced like "wee." Also, it was just as likely not pronounced in the first syllable, "Yah." It's pretty clear that the shortened form of "Yahweh" was "Yah" as in the Bible phrases: "Praise Yah" or "Hallelujah." (You might want to think about how most people pronounce 'hallelujah' before getting too comfortable with a definitive pronunciation of J or Y.)
You don't pronounce the silent H in Jah or Yah, do you?
Thanks. You too.

I tend to agree with that statement. It can appear that some of the questions, while feigning interest, are little more than "click-bait" trying to lure JW's into yet more counterproductive interchanges - to attack them and try to weaken their faith. It's a trap the way I see it. While examining the "facts" and how much merit opposing points of view may have, can be valid in my world, there comes a point where you know that with some people it will be just a pointless back-and-forth. They used to be with us but no longer are and I respect their choice to leave. But why would I want to engage with individuals who basically are their own religion? They have have their own personal and singular point of view, but are now on their own - while we as an organization continue to flourish. "Every plant that my heavenly Father did not plant will be uprooted. Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into the pit."
  "And another thing..." It appears that even the experts are in disagreement on exactly how the Divine Name should be pronounced - and this, still going on thousands of years later. It seems to me that the exact pronunciation of how it was originally pronounced is not as important as loving and acknowledging who the name identifies - regardless of whether we pronounce it exactly as it was thousands of years ago. My name is pronounced differently in many different languages, but I still know when I am being addressed and am not so thin-skinned so as to take offence if someone in a different language pronounces it differently from that of my native language. I still know when I am being called in a crowd of people if someone yells it in a different language. It would be entirely different if someone yelled a generic title like "hey Mister" which could refer to anyone. God's name is distinctive enough that most if not all people would know who is being referred to as the Supreme Deity regardless of how it is pronounced in their particular language. It seems to me to be similar to another "tempest-in-a-teapot" argument regarding whether Jesus died on a cross or on a stake. Who cares? The big picture is that his death means something very important to all imperfect humans and we should honour and remember that sacrifice. Not overshadow it with doctrinal posturing (I know both sides do that - I am not really concerned about cross vs stake except for when people find it necessary to act like they are worshipping it.) 
 

This probably is getting tedious, but just three more important points from the same author. One is about how Josephus, who as a priest claimed to know the pronunciation, indicated that YHWH was not 4 consonants but 4 "vowels," which matches additional historical information from the centuries just surrounding Josephus. This is from page 86/87 and I have also included some of the author's quote of Gesenius, p.87, and Gerard Gertoux, p.25. (Gerard Gertoux is often quoted by Witnesses.)


Gertoux reference, p. 25:

I can't quote the book forever, but again, much of it can be found here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=k9JEAgAAQBAJ
 

There's another really good book (imo) on the topic which has large parts available for free on Google books: Pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton: A Historico-LInguistic Approach, by Steven Ortlepp.
The whole book is good, but the most relevant part is a long quote within the book from the Theological Workbook of the Old Testament (TWOT):

...

...

I think that if you read about these manuscripts (especially Aleppo and the ones derived from the same sources as Aleppo) you will see that these manuscripts have been studied and copied and recopied for a thousand years. It's impossible that no one noticed a consistent pattern of using at least two major vowel pointings on YHWH. In fact, if any reader of Hebrew had found mistakes on a Masorete scroll, there was a Masorete procedure to fix it as soon as possible, or if unfixable, to never use the scroll, even bury it.
There is an excellent description of the reason for two major vowel pointings in the Aleppo scroll (and Leningrad) here: https://yrm.org/yehovah-deception/
For example, the Leningrad codex, a codex that many advocates of Yehovah rely on, contains additional Hebrew spellings. Below are six examples where the Divine name contains different vowel points (transliteration approximate):
יְהוָה – Yehwah (Genesis 2:4)
יְהֹוָה – Yehowah (Genesis 3:14)
יֱהֹוִה – Yehowih (Judges 16:28)
יֱהוִה – Yehuwih (Genesis 15:2)
יְהֹוִה – Yehowih (1Kings 2:26)
יְהוִה – Yehwih (Ezekiel 24:24)
The Adonai Preceding Yehovah Dilemma
Those who argue that the vowels for Yehovah have no relation to Adonai have some explaining to do. Within the Leningrad codex and the Aleppo codex (see image below) is it merely coincidence that when the Tetragrammaton is preceded by Adonai, it receives different pointing? If Yehovah contains the proper and correct vowels, then why do we see the pattern of inserting the vowels for Elohim in the Tetragrammaton when Adonai proceeds it? This is a serious dilemma for the Yehovah proponents and clearly proves a redundant pattern. This is one of those elementary concepts that slips past the unlearned but is well understood in scholarship.

As seen (on p. 15) in the Aleppo Codex in Judges 16:28, the name YHWH appears twice with two different sets of vowel points with the approximate renderings “Yehwoh” and “Yehohiw.” “Yehwoh” derives from the vowel points of Adonai and “Yehohiw” derives from the vowel points of Elohim. When the word Adonai was in close proximity in the text to  YHWH, the Jews added the vowel points from Elohim to YHWH, indicating the reader was to read “Elohim.” This was to reduce redundancy with the Hebrew Adonai.  Strong’s OT:3069 explains this process: “Yehovih (yeh-ho-vee’); a variation of OT:3068 [used after OT:136, and pronounced by Jews as OT:430, in order to prevent the repetition of the same sound, since they elsewhere pronounce OT:3068 as OT:136]” (for clarification, OT:136 correspondents to “Adonai” and OT:430 to “Elohim”). According to the Englishmans Concordance, OT:3069 is found a total of 615 times in the Hebrew Old Testament.
Those who support Yehovah do so entirely on the vowel points added by the Masoretes. However, as we find in the Leningrad and Aleppo codices, along with many others, there are several different renderings for the Tetragrammaton. How it is possible to reconcile that the Jews both preserved the name Yehovah and explain why they introduced these alternate Hebrew spellings? Those who believe that Yehovah is the correct pronunciation, their only recourse would be to state that these other spellings were mistakes. However, based on the Talmud, the thought of a Jewish scribe making such a mistake, especially to the Divine name, is unthinkable. Jewish scribal rules required that if a Torah Scroll was found to contain any mistakes it could not be used, unless the mistake was resolved within  30 days. If not, the scroll was to be buried. Knowing this, even if these alternative pronunciations were mistakes, to believe that they were all missed and allowed to remain in the text is incredulous.
The other explanation is that the Jews willfully concealed the name with the vowel points from Adonai (as seen in Genesis 2:4 within the Leningrad codex) and Elohim (as seen in Judges 16:28 of the Leningrad and Aleppo codices). Considering the implausibility that the Jews overlooked these alternative spellings, the only logical conclusion is that they were aware and added the vowel points to instruct the reader not to pronounce the Divine name and replace it with the words “Adonai” and “Elohim.” As a side note, the Masoretes would often add the vowel points from Elohim to YHWH when the Tetragrammaton preceded the word “Adonai.” This was to reduce redundancy within the text.

Please remember that we are not experts. What people like me say on a forum like this is my opinion. It might be based on facts, and it's possible that I don't understand all the facts. Please don't make such a big deal out of my opinion, no matter how strongly I believe it and state it.

Actually, that's what literally THOUSANDS of people have done, specifically to determine the original pronunciation of God's name. He SAYS no one had thought of doing this kind of research, but he is just trying to get attention for himself. Evidently a lot of people have believed him.
He has never pointed to a manuscript that didn't already have exactly the vowel points that were expected. All the manuscripts he is finding are KNOWN manuscripts with the same vowel pointings that have been known for centuries among scholars.
And like I said these are NOT the oldest manuscripts. They are almost all from a THOUSAND YEARS after Jesus and the apostles. Some are even newer than that.

ZERO
But, like picking at scabs that itch ... it makes a lot of people feel better, and other people see the bleeding scabs, and moonwalk..

When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (1940) that children MUST salute WHEN told to do so, with NO excuses, the phrase “freedom of the human mind” was used to defend the minority, Jehovah’s Witnesses. The words were employed in the minority opinion. Today, the phrase “freedom of mind” is used to attack them! along with other ‘cults.’ It is an amazing reversal—from defending the rights of the minority from majority assault, to defending the rights of the majority from minority assault!
How does the minority pull off such a threatening stunt? Through ‘mind control’ and “brainwashing!’ It is an incredible charge and an 180 reversal of history! Freedomofmind.com is the url of the “cultexpert,” the founder of the BITE model, the means through which the nefarious minority manipulates members of the majority—through Behavioral control, Informational control, Thought control, and Emotional control. It is always someone else’s fault with these ‘anti-cultists”—its founder has progressed to calling half the country a victim of political mind-control! He’s not drunk too much of the Kool-Aid himself?
THAT is the takeaway point to be gleaned from the following article. It is not the point I had in mind when I initially wrote it. But it is the point that best endures:
....
Dave McClure
I worked with Dave McClure the circuit overseer—I used to stick to those guys like glue—one fine morning in the 1980’s. “We’re just calling on our neighbors in order to....” he began. The householder glanced at the Michigan plates on his car—it didn’t exactly suggest to a New Yorker that the man was a neighbor. “Neighbor?” he said. But Dave was never ever at a loss for words. “Well, I’ve got to fly the flag!’ was his chipper comeback. 
It was a perfect comeback. Michigan plates that year featured the most colorful backdrop of numerals against a flag that I have ever seen. Brother McClure was newly assigned to our circuit and hadn’t yet switched over his plates—you’re allowed a certain time interval to do so, I believe. I mean, it can’t be a requirement from the moment you cross the state line.
But it was a perfect comeback for another reason. When he was a boy, Dave McClure routinely got beat up by classmates for not flying the flag, or at least not saluting it. He told his experiences at a special assembly in Niagara Falls, New York. As only Brother McClure could do, he made getting beat up almost sound like fun—I mean, this is the fellow who, when in the presence of friends and confronted with something unexpected, would repeatedly and furiously move his hand from breastbone to abdomen and back again. He was just “staking himself,” as he would explain.
In 1940, the Minerville School District v Gobitis U.S. Supreme Court ruling held that Witness children could be compelled to salute the flag. Walter Gobitus was a Jehovah’s Witness whose child did not. Witnesses view declining the flag salute in any nation as a matter of avoiding idolatry. They connect the salute with God’s words to Moses that “you must not make for yourself...a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth. You must not bow down to them...for I, Jehovah your God, am a God who requires exclusive devotion...” 
Walter, then 10, had told the local school authorities: ''I do not salute the flag not because I do not love my country. I love my country, but I love God more, and must obey his commandments.'' Didn’t cut it with the Supreme Court.
The Court decision signaled open hunting season on Jehovah’s Witnesses. Mobs surrounded them in their public preaching work. Many were accosted. Some were tarred and feathered, some were forced to drink castor oil. At least one was lynched. They were rounded up in their ministry and crammed into local jails, sometimes without charge—they were contemptible enough in the eyes of respectable society so as to be denied the rights afforded everyone else. One brother tells of how he would always carry a toothbrush with him in the ministry so as not to be unprepared should he spend the night in the hoosegow.
Note the majority Supreme Court opinion of Justice Felix Frankfurter: “National unity is the basis of national security. To deny the legislature the right to select appropriate means for its attainment presents a totally different order of problem from that of the propriety of subordinating the possible ugliness of littered streets to the free expression opinion through handbills.” Note his contempt for the “possible ugliness of littered streets” from handbills, such as Witnesses were known for.
Justice Harlan Stone was the lone dissenter. He wrote that “the guarantees of civil liberty are but guarantees of freedom of the human mind and spirit and of reasonable freedom and opportunity to express them .” Note how “guarantees of freedom of the human mind and spirit” were presumed defenses for those who would think outside of the mainstream; note today how ‘anti-cultists’ have turned that logic on its head so that a ‘cult’ taking ones outside of the mainstream constitutes a violation of “the freedom of the human mind and spirit.”
Shortly thereafter, probably aghast at the violence they had unleashed, the Court had a change of heart. Three members signaled their changed views. Two others retired and were replaced by those thought more attuned to individual liberties. The matter came up for review again, wending its way though lesser courts until it ascended to the top Court. The plaintiffs in the case were named Barnett, Stull, and Lucy McClure. Dave was the young son of Lucy.
The decision reversed. The new majority opinion (released on June 3rd, Flag Day, 1943):
''If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein,'' Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote. 
The new minority opinion , written by the former winner, now the loser, Felix Frankfurter, included the grumbling:
“As has been true in the past, the Court will from time to time reverse its position. But I believe that never before these Jehovah’s Witnesses cases (there were many more besides those concerning flag salute) …..has this Court overruled decisions so as to restrict the powers of democratic government.”
Yes, that’s how it is with governments, democratic or not. They want more power. They don’t want to give it up. A certain amount is necessary, of course, so as to maintain public order and safety. Witnesses cede it to them willingly and render obedience. But when they grab for yet more - the consciences and souls of their citizens, someone has to call them on it. And that someone has often been Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The topic came up 45 years later. The first George Bush thought it a fine idea for teachers to lead their classes in mandatory flag salute. His electioneering opponent, Michael Dukakis, did not. The New York Times reviewed the JW items of decades past and even tracked down some of the original participants. “Mr. Gobitis,” it wrote, “now a 62-year-old piano tuner in Belgium, Wis., has followed the 1988 salute debate closely, and a bit disgustedly. ‘It's hard to comprehend why they're raising this issue again,’ he said. ‘They're ignoring our constitutional development and history.’ It reminded him, he said, of a passage in Chapter 16 of the Book of Revelations. ‘To Jehovah's Witnesses,’ he said, ‘all this political fanfare boils down to is 'the croaking of frogs and expressions inspired by demons.’”
And you know, I just can’t get over the reversed use of that phrase, “guarantees of freedom of the human mind and spirit and of reasonable freedom.” Then it was used to protect the minority from the majority. Today anti-cultists use it to protect the majority from the minority, lest ones of that minority ‘deceive’ them by ‘manipulation’ and ‘mind control.’ 
As for Dave McClure, my old Circuit Overseer, he would have been serving our circuit somewhere around that time. But if he ever had thoughts about the 1988 brouhaha, he never shared them with me. He passed away in Florida several years ago.

Please remember that we are not experts. What people like me say on a forum like this is my opinion. It might be based on facts, and it's possible that I don't understand all the facts. Please don't make such a big deal out of my opinion, no matter how strongly I believe it and state it.

To me, the problem arises when you attempt to slice and dice a name/word that is not meant to be and infer meanings that were never intended. For instance just using the example of "fortune" listed earlier. "Fortune" is one word. But if I slice it up into "for" as in pro something and "tune" as in music, I might come up with the conclusion that "fortune" actually means someone is Pro-Music. An entirely wrong definition of what "fortune" really means. But to be sure, before I finish this response, I will attempt to find a better example that directly relates to this discussion. Be back in a while...
OK, I'm  back now...here is something you might find interesting: (Not written by JW's or the organization btw. I won't include the site because I don't want to direct people to a non-JW site but it/and others are easy enough to find...)                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Culprits Turn “God” into “evil” (The Loaf of Bread Illustration)
Let’s call this my “loaf of bread” theory, for lack of a better illustration. Many former Jehovah’s Witnesses, as well as others who are either fooled by others or who denounce the name, suggest that the name of God Jehovah means “god of ruin”, or “god of destruction”. They take to this by watching others lay out the word “Jehovah” like a loaf of bread, and slicing it up into parts. They then attempt to butter the bread and flavor it. Essentially, they redefine the parts slice by slice. They turn a word that was already previously translated from Hebrew to English, and double or triple translate it into “buttered pieces” of English, and then mash it all together and call it a conclusive meaning. This does not work. The name has already been translated. Hebrew language “rules” must be taken into consideration to properly translate certain words or names. Masoretic vowel points are even critical to understand.
For example, the Masorites added the mappiq to the letters “jah” in order to remind the readers to say “Lord” (Adonai) instead of “Jah“. (See photo below) Their intentions were to prevent those in synagogues from saying God’s name. In addition, many names that ended in “yah” were translated “iah“, which some believe was also done by the Masorites out of fear of people speaking the holy name of God out loud.

“Jewah” and “Jehouah” were also written forms adapted and accepted through the ages. Christian theologians began to make the pronunciation or spelling as “Jehovah“, choosing to disregard or dismiss the Masoretic translations of the word. Further, some scholars prefer the pronunciation “Jehwah” over the name “Yahweh”, feeling that it is seen in the most reliable translations, including the Masoretic MSS, versions of the LXX (Septuagint) and the Samaritan Pentateuch. Still, the topic of translations is disputed, as it probably always will be.
 
God of Ruin? 
With the intricacies of the languages and tedious translations involved, it is beyond ludicrous for anyone to chop apart the name “Jehovah” and convert it to a meaning such as “God of ruin”. In fact, most language experts would find this uneducated, unscholarly nonsense as borderline ludicrous.
The Culprits
It should also be noted that there is a Guyanese woman who demands that “Jehovah” means “god of ruin”. She dedicates her website to this assertion,  as well as her alleged desire to “unite Israelites”. Her website reveals horrendous English, including grammar, punctuation and spelling. If one does not recognize the difference between “there” and “they’re”, and repeatedly capitalizes the word “history”, then credibility is that of a novice, at best. One might also deduce that repeatedly yelling to readers by using multiple exclamation points denotes poor judgement and suggests lack of basic intellectual written communication.
The Rumor Mill
Those who parrot these type of people also show their dangerous susceptibility to believe just about anything they read. In addition, the woman I refer to also states that one cannot “put yah in front of God’s name”. She calls herself a Hebrew, and believes Jesus Christ is “Ba’al”. Enough said on that.
God’s Name Mocked by Many
Please use caution when repeating what you hear or read. Many have lashed out in anger, believing that “Jehovah means evil”. Do you see what has just happened? One thinks they’re stating irrefutable fact, and begins telling the world, “Jehovah is evil… Jehovah is Satan”. Some even profess to be Christians, and spout off this unfounded jargon. Through a simple smokescreen, many self professed Christians are blaspheming in an effort to prove a religion wrong, as some sort of “dirt” they’ve uncovered. Many former JWs have fallen into the trap of saying “their God” (when referring to Jehovah’s Witnesses) and including abusive speech directly against God, possibly without even realizing it. Hence, the Jehovah’s Witnesses may in turn have grounds to view most of these people as unbelievers in God, or atheists, or even blasphemers. This may give Jehovah’s Witnesses more “ammunition” against former JWs and others, who already have a reputation and stereotype of being “tricked” by alleged “false information”, and led by Satan.
It is highly important then, that Christians and even non-Christians use extra caution in spreading false information that has no intellectual basis whatsoever."
So while the authors are not JW's, they seriously caution others about specious and false arguments in support of their hatred of JW's since it will ultimately backfire and actually make them look gullible and bad, rather than prove JW's wrong.