Bob Dixon

Yeah, it's pretty easy to use Spivak in writing; they do not look unnatural. I've seen a person or two call God 'it' to be gender neutral, and it does mentally jarr me a little, lol. I used to use Spivak to refer to God, but I just relented and end up using the male as a neuter nowadays.

I just use Spivak pronouns, lol.

Ey (subject), em (object), eir (possessive), emself (reflexive).

Ey is cute. I see em. This is eir toy. Ey can bite emself.

The other gender-neutral neologisms out there sound so weird and artificial... zie, hir... *shudder*

I guess its because we are english and would not say the name as Yahweh just as we dont call Jesus, Yeshuah or Yoshua. However, the WT society produce magazines in many languages and in whatever language they print, they adjust the names according to how they would be translated in that particular language. For example, in Indonesian, Jehovah is Yehuwa, in Turkish its Yehova', in Romanian its Iehova... so the name is translated and pronounced depending on the language being spoken. For english speakers it is Jehovah and has been for several centuries.

Hi Bob, im sorry i missed your question. The answer is that 'Jehovah' is the english equivalent of the hebrew name Yahweh. Its the same with Jesus name, we dont say the hebrew version in english, we say the english version even though his name would have been Yeshuah or even Yoshua.
The name Jehovah has traditionally been used for many centuries...you will find the rendering 'Jehovah' in the King James bible for instance. There is no way to know the exact way the name was used in the first century or before... we can really only go by the earliest sources of the name which is why we continue to use 'Jehovah'

Thanks for the advice and kindness.

Ya mon! Is there anything I 'DO' particularly well or exhibit that you would like to see present in my Staffing/Moderating, since you are obviously excited by the news

And thanks for the vote of confidence

Unfortunately not. :-/

It works mostly like acronyms work in English. The most usual form is to take the first letter of sequential words and make a new word out of them. Sometimes in Hebrew, the result may sound very different than the way the letters sound at the beginning of the original words, because the letters are taken as is, unvoweled, and so can be voweled as sounds (or "feels") natural to the construction of the acronym word. And also, of course, some letters can be hardened or softened according to where in a word they fall, so for example, the caf that begins the word ketuvim ("Writings"), when it falls at the end of Tanach, is softened from a "k" sound to a "ch" sound. You will occasionally find other ways of combining, especially when what is being turned into an acronym is a name or a phrase, but first letter of each word is definitely the go-to standard.

Exactly.
Unfortunately many people aren't inclined to find the deeper truths behind things, happy with going because their parents went, and happy with the empty rituals.

That's definitely a danger of memorisation. I think this is the case with many mantras and scriptures of Hinduism.

I think it's the structure, the ease of memorability, and how songs speak to our very souls -- our deepest, inner core. And -- people can generally always remember songs and poetry. You can pick up any CD on your shelf, and play it. If you knew the words before, chances are you will either remember the words immediately, or you will remember them quickly -- even if the lyrics are in another language, in some cases.

That's not the case for a book or speech.

Hehe, yeah - by calling each other bhai, we're calling each other "Brother" and "My friend", or if you like, sibling of destiny.

Yeah, it's a decent translation. It goes not word-by-word, but by idea and word. If you're using srigranth.org, you can have the option of seeing the transliteration. You can then see how it rhymes.

I'm glad you're liking it. It's an amazing piece IMHO. Then of course, I'm a little biased.

Hi Bob. Good question.

In short, siblings of destiny is just "bhaī" in the text. The "of destiny" bit is an addition for equality and so you know it's not him referring to his specific family members, as it usually is in English.

My guess is Siblings of destiny was chosen by the translator (Dr. Sant Singh Khālsā j&#299 to reflect the double-meaning of the text: "Bhaī" means both "brother", and "loved/liked (in a familial way) one", which is why I call Gursikh "Gursikh bhai".

The "of destiny" bit is because we're all involved in the same reality, I guess.

Siblings was chosen because it's a gender-neutral term and so it shies away from any possible misconstrued sexism which isn't the case.

Does that explain it?

Hey Brother, thanks for the Friend request

Oh, I only get to choose one? Lol, I guess the only one that I have been pretty interested in would be Ghost In The Shell and Bleach. How about yourself?

You're so witty! n__n

You cannot compare their infallibility to that of God, God in our opinion is on a whole different level, and we believe God purified them.

Scholars yes, but the 14 Infallibles fall into a different category.

It should also be added that Khilafate was abolished by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, so in our opinion it could not be divine if a human-being was able to destroy it.