the name of G-d

[jewscout]

To think that gods name should not be used is rediculous. Jewish superstition took the name out of the bible for many years. The entire theme of the bible is the vindication of Gods name Jehovah. Its a theme that starts in Genesis and ends in Revelation.

name Jehovah appears beginning in the 11th century...how can a 11th century name be in a document dating back, traditionally, 3500 years? (not counting the gospels)

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=206&letter=J&search=jehovah

A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash"). This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the "ḳere" (marginal reading of the Masorites:

= "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading:

= "Yhwh")—"Adonay" (the Lord) being substituted with one exception wherever Yhwh occurs in the Biblical and liturgical books


Jehovah" is generally held to have been the invention of Pope Leo X.'s confessor, Peter Galatin ("De Arcanis Catholicæ Veritatis," 1518, folio xliii.), who was followed in the use of this hybrid form by Fagius (= Büchlein, 1504-49). Drusius (= Van der Driesche, 1550-1616) was the first to ascribe to Peter Galatin the use of "Jehovah," and this view has been taken since his days (comp. Hastings, "Dict. Bible," ii. 199, s.v. "God"; Gesenius-Buhl, "Handwörterb." 1899, p. 311; see Drusius on the tetragrammaton in his "Critici Sacri, i. 2, col. 344). But it seems that even before Galatin the name "Jehovah" had been in common use (see Drusius, l.c. notes to col. 351). It is found in Raymond Martin's "Pugio Fidei." written in 1270 (Paris, 1651, iii., pt. ii., ch. 3, p. 448; comp. T. Prat in "Dictionnaire de la Bible," s.v.).

some catholic took the vowels in Adonai and put them in between the YHVH, and since all the Y sounds are J's in the German language you get JaHoVaH=Jehovah

 

[wiskeychris]

This argument is poor. We know how to pronouce other names that were written in Hebrew. They all follow the same rules as YHWH. Jehovah is simply the english translation of Gods name.

 

[jewscout]

This argument is stupid. We know how to pronouce other names that were written in Hebrew. They all follow the same rules as YHWH. Jehovah is simply the english translation of Gods name.

but YHVH has no vowels, the other names of G-d have them so they can be pronounced. the pronounciation of the word was lost by the 3rd century CE.

 

[may]

To think that gods name should not be used is rediculous. Jewish superstition took the name out of the bible for many years. The entire theme of the bible is the vindication of Gods name Jehovah. Its a theme that starts in Genesis and ends in Revelation.

Yes i agree with you here, i think you are soooooooooooo right.you must know what i know lol

 

[wiskeychris]

Yea May, we are on the exact same page.

 

[may]

"From the sun’s rising even to its setting my name will be great among the nations."—Mal. 1:11

And I shall certainly magnify myself and sanctify myself and make myself known before the eyes of many nations; and they will have to know that I am Jehovah.’(ezekial 38;23)

Yes, when we read God’s own declared purpose to have his name "declared in all the earth" and that his name "will be great among the nations," how can we hold back from using that name in our worship because of some superstition?

At that time those in fear of Jehovah spoke with one another, each one with his companion, and Jehovah kept paying attention and listening. And a book of remembrance began to be written up before him for those in fear of Jehovah and for those thinking upon his name(malachi 3;16)
Sym´e·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name(acts 15;14)

And I have made your name known to them and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them(john 17;26)no Jehovah does not want his name to be lost every thing that Gods word says will come true
Translators who have felt obligated to include the personal name of God in the bible , have evidently followed the example of William Tyndale, who included the divine name in his translation of the Pentateuch published in 1530, thus breaking with the practice of leaving the name out altogether.

 

[roli]

'elohiym (Strong's 0430) occurs 2606 times in 2249 verses:
TWOT - 93c
plural of 0433Part of Speechn m pOutline of Biblical Usage

1) (plural)

a) rulers, judges

b) divine ones

c) angels

d) gods

2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)

a) god, goddess

b) godlike one

c) works or special possessions of God d) the (true) God e) God



Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count — Total: 2606AV - God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2,
angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + 04136 1, godly 1; 2606
Hebrew Lexicon (Help)

KJV English Concordance for "'elohiym (Strong's 0430) "​

[font=Arial, Helvetica]King James Word Usage - Total: 6519[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]LORD 6510, GOD 4, JEHOVAH 4, variant 1[/font]


Here the word Lord is most commonly used meaning master,lord used interchangably with God and 'elohiym (Strong's 0430) occurs 2606 times in 2249 verses: is plural from Genisis on
My point is your particular religion is not favored or set apart unto God because you speak God's name with out the vowels,or that your sect has his name as the title of a particular ministry
The first name of God given to us in the Bible is in Genesis 1:1. It states "In-the-beginning Elohim created the heavens and the-earth." The term "Elohim" (!yhla) is actually not a name but the Hebrew term for God, the Hebrew term referring to the Supreme Being. Elohim is a compound term: "El" and "him". "El" is the word "God" and "him" is the masculine plural suffix meaning "they." Together they mean "These-are-God", God singular because Elohim is followed by a singular verb "Bara" (arB) which is 3rd masculine singular meaning "He-created". This makes Elohim a singular plural which means it does not mean "These-are-gods" but rather "These-are-God", thus indicating the Triune Nature of God in the very first verse of the Bible. God is not three individiual persons who make up a Godhead like a counsel, but rather God is Father and Son and Holy Spirit of one essence in eternal relations. God is of one essence manifested in three individual persons.

 

[jewscout]

G-d has many names, each representative of His many characteristics...

But when Moses asked HaShem His name it was not in order to know what to call Him but know what He was...and so His name is YHVH...for the hebrew root "To be" for "He is, He was, He always will be"

 

[Damien Bishop]

First I wanted to say, Damn you Roli, you tookk my idea, unintentionally of course, thats exactly where I was heading, but since you touched on that, ELOHIM, being Plural. Lets move onto the other part. No, I dont think you people are stupid, but maybe uneducated in your religion. Judaism was adopted from Earlier Mesopotamian religions, and the name of god, then, or should I say gods, were: En.Ki, En.Lil, Anu, Nin.Mah....your torah stories are selectively edited texts from older religions, and judaism was a concocted religion, nothing in the torah is true, relating to the main myths we all know and loive: creation, Noah, the Flood, Jacob, Babel, 10 commandments, these stories as too, the name of god, comes from older civilizations like: Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian...respectively.

Just thought you all should know this.

 

[Pah]

This thread has been moderated.

Several post have crossed the line of respectfull debate and they have been editted to remove even the hint of disrespect. It is an action we have taken to tone down the tenor of the thread before it seriously breaks our rules.

In addition, we have removed portions that we consider "preaching" or "proselytizing" that are also contrary to the decorum we expect to be followed in debate.

I encourage the posters in this thread to re-read the rules available in our FAQ (in the navigation bar under "Quick Links") before more serious action needs to be taken. Continuence of the disregard of rules will lead to explicit warnings that will accrue possibly to banning.

This is not pleasant for us nor for you but we are charged with keeping order for the complete membership.

 

[jewscout]

First I wanted to say, Damn you Roli, you tookk my idea, unintentionally of course, thats exactly where I was heading, but since you touched on that, ELOHIM, being Plural. Lets move onto the other part. No, I dont think you people are stupid, but maybe uneducated in your religion. Judaism was adopted from Earlier Mesopotamian religions, and the name of god, then, or should I say gods, were: En.Ki, En.Lil, Anu, Nin.Mah....your torah stories are selectively edited texts from older religions, and judaism was a concocted religion, nothing in the torah is true, relating to the main myths we all know and loive: creation, Noah, the Flood, Jacob, Babel, 10 commandments, these stories as too, the name of god, comes from older civilizations like: Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian...respectively.

Just thought you all should know this.

regardless of the many views on the origins of Judaism what i'm trying to say is that the tradition holds that the YHVH is the name of G-d in the Jewish faith, it is a name of which the pronunciation has been lost since about the 3rd century CE and that the word "Jehovah" was a name that did not come into being until, at earliest, the 11th or 12th century and is generally agreed to not be the way the name was probably actually pronounced by the Kohanim during the Temple period

Damien you and other non-theists may view the Torah as a collection of ancient bedtime stories, and that you, sir, are entitled to, but that doesn't take away from the beliefs of devout and observant Jews who enrich their lives by it.

 

[Damien Bishop]

Why enrich your lives or worse yet, your kids lives on the premise of lies and plagiarism. This isnt the dark ages, science has brought alot to light about religion and its origins. I was a christian until age 15, I believed, until I really lookked into the origin of faiths. I understand that you wnat to teach you kids good healthy moral values, but I think, and alot of people think that teaching this based on lies is wrong, in this day and age, maybe a few thousand years ago, when mankind was more barbaric and unruly, they wanted to "scare" some common sense into them. But today? No need for it in my opinion. I hear what you are saying, but i think, sorry, I know that the origin of the god of Judaism and Christianity , were in fact the names I mentioned and even those were myths too. Its science, its proven, its fact, so i cant understand how you all accept the earth is round and we are not in the center of the universe and sacrificing goats to god is wrong

 

[jewscout]

I spent 23 years of my as an agnostic, then discovering the beauty of Judaism and the richness of culture and life and faith and it has touched me in a way nothing ever has. where you see "the dark ages" i see a living and loving faith that doesn't require that everyone needs to be Jewish in order to be a good person. Where you see "lies and plagerism" i see tradition and culture of a proud people and faith that has stood the test of time against countless enemies that have tried to wipe them off the face of the earth. Where you see a "need to 'scare' common sense" into people, i see adding richness and purpose into one's life. Whats wrong w/ doing good deeds, not working at least one day a week, a family oriented community, or even a selected diet (i'm sure the vegans and vegetarians can feel me on that). Yes science works on the element of proof, but after we discover one thing in science new quesitons emerge...sometime things come out which totally change the way we, including the scientific community, look at the world. you see one of the things we have to realize is we can be looking at the same text and get 2 completely different opinions out of it. That's why historians spend all their time arguing over things, because they all have different opinions and outlooks on the way the world is. Does it make one more true than another, not necessarily often both have valid opinions they are just looking at things from a different perspective.

 

[Damien Bishop]

Sorry, im done here

Have a nice life Jewscout....I suppose Im too "rude" for you all, nice talking to ya

 

[Exis]

Imagine some concept, now relate it to another concept, now relate it to how a god would think... What's a name anyway?

 

[may]

This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ(john 17;3)so if we have to take in knowledge of the true God to get everlasting life, we have to know who the true God is .

The NAME of Jehovah is a strong tower. Into it the righteous runs and is given protection(PROVERBS 18;10)

That people may know that you, whose name is JehovahYou alone are the most high over all the earth(psalm 83;18)

In spite of the efforts of many translators to restore God’s name in the Bible, there has always been religious pressure to eliminate it. The Jews, while leaving it in their Bibles, refused to pronounce it. Apostate Christians of the second and third centuries removed it when they made copies of Greek Bible manuscripts and left it out when they made translations of the Bible. Translators in modern times have removed it, even when they based their translations on the original Hebrew, where it appears almost 7,000 times.​

How does Jehovah view those who remove his name from the Bible? If you were an author, how would you feel about someone who went to great lengths to remove your name from the book you authored? Translators who object to the name, doing so on account of problems of pronunciation or because of Jewish tradition, might be compared to those who Jesus said "strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel!" (Matthew 23:24) They stumble over these smaller problems but end up creating a major problem—by removing the name of the greatest personage in the universe from the book that he inspired.​

The psalmist wrote: "How long, O God, will the adversary keep reproaching? Will the enemy keep treating your name with disrespect forever?"—Psalm 74:10.


http://www.watchtower.org/library/na/article_06.htm

 

[Katzpur]

The first name of God given to us in the Bible is in Genesis 1:1. It states "In-the-beginning Elohim created the heavens and the-earth." The term "Elohim" (!yhla) is actually not a name but the Hebrew term for God, the Hebrew term referring to the Supreme Being. Elohim is a compound term: "El" and "him". "El" is the word "God" and "him" is the masculine plural suffix meaning "they." Together they mean "These-are-God", God singular because Elohim is followed by a singular verb "Bara" (arB) which is 3rd masculine singular meaning "He-created". This makes Elohim a singular plural which means it does not mean "These-are-gods" but rather "These-are-God", thus indicating the Triune Nature of God in the very first verse of the Bible. God is not three individiual persons who make up a Godhead like a counsel, but rather God is Father and Son and Holy Spirit of one essence in eternal relations. God is of one essence manifested in three individual persons.

I'll go along with Elohim as referring to God (even though I'd agree that, particularly when not capitalized, it is technically not a name). I've never heard of a singular plural before, though, and my B.A. degree is in English. That may be your own terminology, but as far as I'm concerned, the words "singular" and "plural" are mutually exclusive. My understanding is more along the line of "God" being a collective noun. Consequently, "These-are-God" makes perfect sense.

But, at this point, it appears as if we part ways. To me, "These-are-God" implies a Godhead made up of three distinct persons, each of whom is "God." Perhaps, though, if you were to explain what "God is one one essence manifested in three individuals persons" means in plain English, I'd be able to relate more to what you're saying. I certainly haven't read anything of the sort in the Bible, and I tend to trust what it has to say about God more than I do what the neo-platonist philosophers of the 4th and 5th centuries have to say.

Kathryn

 

[Betho_br]

The mistakes that the scribe allowed by not omitting the vowels in the Greek Septuagint reveal the Name of God. Jews are aware of this

 

[Soapy]

Wrong. Gods name is, "I Am".

‘I am’ is not a name…. It is the MEANING of the name.

The MEANING of THE NAME, ‘Joshua’, is “God is deliverance”.

The MEANING of THE NAME, ‘Peter’ (‘Cephas’, in Greek), is “Rock”, or “Stone”, or even “Pebble”, as derivatives.

What do you notice about A NAME and THE MEANING OF THE NAME?

Jesus [the Christ], is simply, ‘Joshua [the Christ]’.

‘Jesus’ is simply THE GREEK VERSION of ‘JOSHUA’. There were many people who’s NAME was ‘JOSHUA / JESUS’… It’s simply that we DISTINGUISH ‘the son of God’ by using a TITLE, ‘The Christ’ / ‘The anointed one’ which no other ‘Joshua / Jesus’ was appointed as.

Similarly, ‘YHWH’ is only the MEANING that God gave as His name becauss, as is said, God did not have a name before He GAVE HIMSELF one to DISTINGUISH HIMSELF orally and in Spirit, from OTHER SO-CALLED GODS… of the Philistines, of the Greeks, of the Egyptians, of the Romans, of the Mezzirites, of the Pezzirites, of the [all others….]!! One God for ALL THISE WHO ARE JEWS (Formerly Israelites, and now spiritually all those who believe in Him and the Son, Jesus Christ.)

No, people, ‘I Am’ is NOT the NAME of the Pne True God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, David, Solomon, Daniel….. prophets and priests etc. This God gave His NAME as ‘YHWH’ (we don’t need to go into the different Hebrew pronunciation of transcriptions - the name carries the meaning that this God is “NEVER CHANGING, ALWAYS WAS, ALWAYS IS, ALWAYS WILL BE…who He is!!” now call that a Name??? No, it’s the MEANING of the name.

So, ‘EIGO EIMI’ also is NOT the NAME of God. It simply means, ‘I AM…’ as a verb…

If it meant, ‘[I am] God’ then how many people would be blaspheming the name of God every time they said ‘I am …’!!?

Hey, ask the Devil: ‘Are you [The] Satan?’ And he will answer you, “I AM”!!!

So, no, Jesus Christ did not call himself God in answering the question the Jews asked him: ‘Ard you greater than our forefather, Abraham’, to which Jesus answered, in short,

• ‘Yes, I am [greater than your forefather, Abraham, … Abraham foresaw my day (to come) and that the messiah was to come from his loins - and was glad’

That is why the Jews picked up stones to try to stone him….!!! Simples!!!!!!!….

 

[Soapy]

I'll go along with Elohim as referring to God (even though I'd agree that, particularly when not capitalized, it is technically not a name). I've never heard of a singular plural before, though, and my B.A. degree is in English. That may be your own terminology, but as far as I'm concerned, the words "singular" and "plural" are mutually exclusive. My understanding is more along the line of "God" being a collective noun. Consequently, "These-are-God" makes perfect sense.

But, at this point, it appears as if we part ways. To me, "These-are-God" implies a Godhead made up of three distinct persons, each of whom is "God." Perhaps, though, if you were to explain what "God is one one essence manifested in three individuals persons" means in plain English, I'd be able to relate more to what you're saying. I certainly haven't read anything of the sort in the Bible, and I tend to trust what it has to say about God more than I do what the neo-platonist philosophers of the 4th and 5th centuries have to say.

Kathryn

“…I've never heard of a singular plural before… my B.A. degree is in English…’!!!

Kathryn, you’ve never heard of ‘Sheep’, ‘Fish’… How about, ‘My friend asked me a question… they didn’t expect a response - it was a rhetorical question!!’… hmmm….!