I know this is long...please don't be upset with me...
LORD:
Some are making a lot of false statements that the Old Testament "LORD" is a pagan name that comes from BAAL because "Baal" also has the usurped meaning of being "master or lord". Let's not be to eager to make accusations and tend to be a little stupid here. When Nimrod usurped for himself a throne and began a kingdom line disconnected to the true genealogical line from Adam to Jesus Messiah, he by nature usurped the titles "master and lord" as a god manifest (Nimrod Ephipanes). Sarah called Abraham "lord" but she did not mean by it that he was a God, nor did Abraham usurp to himself some theory he was a God. The theft by Nimrod of the titles used by the Patriarchs in honor and worship of God does not give Nimrod exclusive rights to these identities. He stole them from God and made himself a god. Do we say that the word "Elohim" is a pagan name because it is used inappropriately by pagans and attributed to idols, angels, and men, etc.? No we do not. So, ok, lay off the accusations and let's deal in facts and honor to our God.
The names of many men ended or began with "baal (ba-al)" to signify "lord" in the sense of "master and owner and even king" (Strongs #1167 see also Genesis 36:38 for an example). If these titles were not used to usurp away from God his worship, and if they are not used to usurp for a person some idea he was a god, then the use of the titles are not evil or criminal. God certainly made no protest through the prophets for use of these titles in a correct manner. In the Hebrew Scriptures the true God of Israel is identified as Israel's ba-al! In Isaiah 54:5, the prophet declares: "For your Maker is your husband (Hebrew, ba-al) the LORD of hosts is His name." Also in Jeremiah 31:32 we find: "I was a husband (Hebrew ba-al) to them, says the LORD."
In Genesis 20:3 Abraham is called "ba-al"; in Exo 21:22 husband is called "ba-al"; in Exo 21:29 an owner of an ox is called a "ba-al"; in Exo 22:8 a master of a house is called "ba-al"; in Lev 21:4 a chief man is called "ba-al"; in Judges 9:2,3,6,7,18,20,23,24,25,26,46,47, the men of Shechem are all called "ba-al"; in 1Sam 23:2 David calls the men of Keilah "ba-al"; in Esther 1:17 husbands are called "ba-al"; in Proverbs 1:19 owners are called "ba-al"; in Isaiah 16:8 Lords of the heathen are called "ba-al"; in Jer 3:20 husband is called "ba-al"; in Jer 37:13 captain is the word "ba-al"; and in Joel 1:8 husband is called "ba-al". All these instances illustrate that different men in different times understood the word "ba-al" not to have a pagan or idolatrous meaning. It is when this word is applied to a pagan god and the pagan god replaces the true God and the word Baal is used to identify a false god as God that the word becomes misused.
The sacred-name sects and cults not only want to destroy and blot out the name of Jesus from the earth, they also claim that the word "God" is pagan and the words "Lord or Adonai" are also pagan. Some of these cult groups also reject "Elohim" as the name of a pagan god and substitute instead of God, "mighty one." This of course offers no escape because such was also used for pagan gods.
God himself spoke to the Prophets and claimed he was God, Elohim, and Adonai. If God has no problem using these titles for himself, why should we follow some sacred-name cult leader who now wants to correct not only the Word of God which he is not qualified to do, but he is going to CORRECT GOD HIMSELF!
It is when man elevates himself up to a god or uses the titles attributed to God for idols, and uses these titles to deceive others, that he has committed the sins of the devil. So, when the Jews attributed to Nimrod the title of Baal as a god and gave the same qualities they attributed to God to Nimrod, this was wrong and sin. To say that the title LORD is an exclusive name for only Baal, is error. To say LORD is a replacement of the tetragrammaton is also error. Abraham called God "ADONAI" (LORD) in Genesis 18:3 and then knew God only as Elshaddai (ADONAI Elshaddai; Lord God Almighty; found four times in the book of Revelation). LORD in all capitals signifies only honor to God and the most high God who is LORD! LORD in nearly all the 5,000 places where it is found is ADONAI and it other places it is the substitute for the sacred name EHYEH! It is wrong and a sin to lead the unlearned to blaspheme against the name of Jesus by giving them false information. We are not to give or attribute the glorious titles of God to idols. I would lay the charge against the Yahwist that they have done just that. They have given names and titles of the true God over to the pagans to be used by the pagans exclusively for their pagan gods and idols. They now want to say in a twisted way that the name Jesus is really Zeus therefore the name of Zeus is really Jesus. This is a blasphemous falsehood. They then dare anyone to attribute to the true God what they have given to the pagans.
The Jews removed the name of Nimrod from the text of the scrolls and left remaining only his usurped title as "lord" and translated this as "Baal." They are so dumb, to have left the names of the other two of that Babylonian trinity, namely "Ashtoreth and Tammuz." It is no great thing then to reconstruct that "Baal" is Nimrod, the husband-god of Ashtoreth and the alleged father of the god Tammuz (the first trinity). Why is it that so many want to correct errors in text and this one slips by all the translators and the pundits? That some Jews did attribute God's titles to idols does not mean we are forbidden to use these titles correctly in worship of the true God. God is LORD because he said the heavens and the earth are his (EXO 9:29; PSA 24:1; 1COR 10:26).
Kurios:
Some make the claim that the word "LORD" is also a Greek word and is foreign to the Hebrew language. This is false. The fact is that the word "LORD" is a Hebrew word and comes from the Hebrew word "ADOWN" (Strongs #113 & 136 a king or sovereign) from which comes "ADONAI" which is a Hebrew word translated into the Septuagint Greek version of the Old Testament became "Kurios" and both are CORRECTLY translated "LORD" and this refers to kingship or sovereignty. It was Jews in 280BC, 307 years before the day of Pentecost, who translated the name ADONAI into Greek as Kurios. The Apostles did not do this! They used the same translation of words that were used 307years before them. When Jesus quoted the Septuagint he did not say "Yahweh or Jehovah" in the text were the word "Kurios or in English Lord" is now used. In saying the word LORD is a correct translation of the Greek Kurios, we are saying that the word "LORD" is a substitute name of God replacing ADONAI. It is not correct to substitute ADONAI or LORD with the interpolated YHWH or JHVH which is done in every Yahwist Bible ever fabricated. The name ADONAI when used of God is a name. When used of man it is a title like Father. In may hundreds of places it is a substitute word REPLACING the ancient sacred name EHYEH which the Jews at once time considered to be the ineffable and unutterable name of God. But they replaced this SACRED NAME with a substitute. They capitalized LORD from "ADONAI" to designate the one true God from other gods who were called lord. We do know that every time they came to the HYH "Ehyeh" they would pronounce ADONAI. This was not just a habit or a fill-in to keep from saying some other secret hidden name. For the record: The holy name LORD is ADONAI in Hebrew; the holy name ADONAI is MORYO in Aramaic; the holy name ADONAI is Kurios in Greek; the holy name ADONAI is DOMINUS in Latin; and the holy name ADONAI is LORD in English (A Remarkable Biblical Discovery, William P. Hall, p34). Now if Jesus spoke Aramaic did he say MORYO when he meant ADONAI or LORD? If he spoke Greek did he say KURIOS to mean LORD? Or did he say ADONAI in the original Hebrew when he meant LORD?
He who was ELOHIM (GOD), ADONAI (LORD), ELSHADAI (GOD ALMIGHTY), MORYO, DOMINUS, KURIOS, was "EHYEH" (I-JEH). EHYEH is no other than God and adding "the articulation "IAH" or "iah" anciently known to be pronounced as "I-JEH" and incorporated into personal names, can NEVER be perverted into YAH, YAHWEH, JEHOVAH, or YAHSHUA without absolute fraud upon the Word of God. All these so-called "sacred name bibles" are pure fraud, junk, and incorporating pagan god names into the true Sacred Text! Here is a historical fact that is undeniable: of the thirty-seven (37) quotations made by Jesus of the Old Testament text, thirty (30) are almost verbatim from the Greek Septuagint (LXX) and they do not agree with many, many words from the Masoretic text of the eighth century! This forces us to examine if Jesus spoke Greek as well as Aramaic as well as ancient Hebrew. And if the Apostles can be counted to have transferred to us the actual words of Jesus would they have used different words and names than he used? If Jesus used ADONAI or KURIOS, or THEOS, or MORYO, for the English LORD, would we not expect the Apostles to place this as well in their written text? It is only in later post-apostolic translations that there is an attempt to interoplate the tetragrammation and other substitutes into these texts. Many point the finger at Origen and his Hexpla as the place where this perversion took place!
We do not know accurately where all the places might have been where EHYEH once existed in the original Hebrew Scriptures. The sacred name of "HYH" was taken out of the text and Adown and LORD inserted in its place to keep from pronouncing it. It was the sacred name EHYEH that was the target of Leviticus 24:11,16---"An Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the name of the LORD, and cursed;" ..."And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death." It is apparent that the name of God here was one other than LORD, and LORD was used as a substitute for that name. It is also apparent that since Moses was commanded to deliver the Israelites using the name EHYEH, that this was the salvation name cursed. If the name ADONAI or LORD in English was the name to not be uttered, then they violated that rule over 5,000 times when it was placed in the Septuagint as Kurios. We know then that the name the son cursed was the name Moses used to deliver the children of Israel. And that name was EHYEH, not Yah, not Yahweh, and not Jehovah! All we have are traditions why the Jews removed a particular sacred name and no actual recorded facts to back these up. But what does this matter if we have a GREATER name for salvation in the name of JESUS? A name that would be GREATER than any Old Testament name or title of God! We would NEVER need to know or try to figure out any lost or secret name and the tetragrammaton would become obsolete and worthless for salvation!
To then say the word LORD in English when worshiping or in Preaching, and mean by this Kurios, Adown, or ADONAI in Hebrew, is to honor God as Sovereign KING, the supreme ruler of the universe! The word "LORD or Kurios" here is as much a name as any other title of God. In Genesis 4:26 when Enos began to call upon the name of the "LORD" this is in reference to God as supreme sovereign ruler of the earth. This word LORD here must be from ADOWN or ADONAI. Anytime anyone calls Jesus "Lord" they are saying he is the one sovereign ruler over them and all the earth. They are acknowledging his reign OVER THEM as the "last" heir upon the throne of David in the Kingdom of God. To backward interpolate into this text of Enos the sacred name EHYEH first given to mankind at the burning bush is false. To backward interpolate into this text the tetragrammaton is false. Jews and Gentiles have incorrectly substituted the name "LORD" when applied to EHYEH, the name of I AM is placed in these prior text in many instances. Jews and Gentiles have attempted to give the title "LORD" the same identity as the sacred name EHYEH. This is wrong! Thus, when they see LORD in the text they suppose it automatically means they can insert their guess names and the tetragrammaton where ever the word LORD is found. Correctly, the sacred name should be in the text only "after" it was revealed to Moses. Before and after the revelation at the burning bush, the text of the Scriptures could have God and LORD (as meaning ELOHIM and ADONAI) with no intent of the sacred name being intended or to be spoken. In the text that says LORD GOD all that is meant is ADONAI ELOHIM meaning the one Sovereign God above all other gods of men. In some cases the word LORD or (ADOWN) was in the text originally and the scribes inserted into the scrolls EHYEH, the sacred name, later this was substituted with LORD and finally this was further substituted with the interpolation of the tetragrammaton and its many variant spellings.
The sacred name "Ehyeh" can also be spelled "Ehieh" or Ehjeh" since in the ancient Hebrew there is no "y" in the alphabet and the letter "i" can be a "y" or even a "j" sound. How come we hear nothing of the Yahwist that there is no "Y" in Palo Hebrew? How come we hear nothing from the Yahwist about the sound of the letter "Y" that is supposed to be associated with the letter "I" although the letter "I" itself is NOT the sound of the "Y?" How come they do not tell those they deceive when the "Y" letter was invented and claim its sound was also invented at that time like they cry about the letter "J?"
However, we are not dealing so much in how the letters are stacked on a line but the pronunciation of the letters that in modern languages a particular sounding letter satisfies the same sound in trying to speak the ancient word forms and subsequently the name.
Tetragrammaton Fraud:
Below is an actual copy of a portion of the Dead Sea Scroll of Psalms 119:59-64, written in ancient Aramaic (Babylonian) alphabet. The text is Talmudic-Babylonian (Aramaic) and is no older than perhaps around 30BC-50AD. While scholars will wail and scream, these scrolls may come from the era from 100-700AD. Some want these texts to be very old so they can authenticate the tetragrammaton and or other teachings they want to claim the Christians stole or borrowed from the Essenes. There existed in Israel up to the eighth century several religious groups who could have and did use these caves. The artifacts found in them demonstrate a continious use for several centuries. The scroll is said to be from the library of the Essenes but this cannot be proven. We are told without proof that the Essenes devoted their lives to expunge from the manuscripts corruptions placed in them by Babylonian tainted scribes. We do not know if this Psalm scroll was considered by them to be authentic or among those that were corrupted. Scholars themselves are at disagreement with them when compared to the Septuagint and other versions. There are thousands of differences. The text below contains two different types of alphabet letter characters. Yet many hail this forgery as authentic.