Has God got a name!

JimiTime

In the Hebrew scripture's, God is named YHWH. This translates to either Yahweh or Jehovah? If this is the case, why is it no longer use in the majority of christendom? I'm interested to hear some christian view on this.

UU

I suppose maybe a lot of people feel more comfortable using the word "God". Although many Jews will actually spell it like this "G-d" in English because they consider the name to be most divine and they won't even say Jehovah or Yahweh in everyday speech. "Jehovah" has been more or less adopted by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Lord is quite common in the Christian tradition. I generally use call God "Allah" - not because I'm Muslim but because the name feels more personal to me than the others. Mormons call God "Heavenly Father" (sometimes "Heavenly Mother"). Names are only names of course and God is still the same regardless of what name you call him/her/it.

Why Christians don't call God "Jehovah" or "Yahweh"? I really don't know as I'm not Christian but Unitarian. From my estimation, it is probably the same reason why Christians don't have Sabbath on Friday evening to Saturday evening, circumcise their males and eat only kosher meat as traditions and customs change over time. The early Christians probably called God by the Hebrew names but considering most Christians at present don't speak Hebrew, it would probably suit them to call God in their own language - Dieu, Dia, etc. I think Excelsior would know better than I as he's Christian and he might have the facts right.

Good luck!

JimiTime

UU wrote:

Names are only names of course and God is still the same regardless of what name you call him/her/it.

The reason I ask this question is that I believe that a name is not just a name. God changed Jacobs name to Israel. The Hebrews had meaning in their name's, and I'm sure if God has a name it should not be forgotton. I'm told that the meaning of Jehovah is 'I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be'. Does Allah mean Father?

kittex

In Judaism Yahweh is too sacred a word to utter. It is the word, encompassing the Logos of creation.

With Christianity having come from the Jewish tradition, it is unlikely it would have suddenly changed when the faith split and entered language use.

UU

JimiTime wrote:

The reason I ask this question is that I believe that a name is not just a name.

Yes I suppose you're right! You changed my mind!

God changed Jacobs name to Israel. The Hebrews had meaning in their name's, and I'm sure if God has a name it should not be forgotten. I'm told that the meaning of Jehovah is 'I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be'.

Yes, well I'm not sure - I thought "Jehovah" was just another word for God. You must remember that there are many various names meaning God in both holy Hebrew and Christian scriptures as well as the holy Qur'an (it has approx. 92 different names!). One must remember though that Christians believe that Jesus Christ [peace be upon him] is in fact God (and the son of God). In the Christian tradition God is given a male gender. The English word God is masculine and comes from German "Goot" meaning "good one". To be exact, Jesus himself called God "Alahah" in Aramaic which was the language he spoke. This link is great and it explains more: Click here!

Does Allah mean Father?

No it doesn't. "Allah" is the Arabic word used frequently by Muslims for God. It is perhaps the most suitable word:

Where Does the word "Allah" Come From?

"Allah" comes from the Arabic word "elah" - (Arabic) means 'a god' or something that is worshipped. This word (elah) can be made plural, as in "aleha" and it can be male or female. "Allah" comes from "elaha" but it brings more clarification and understanding.

Allah = Has no gender (not male and not female)
* "He" is used only out of respect and dignity - not for gender
Allah = Always singular - Never plural
* "We" is used only as the "Royal WE" just as in English for royalty
Allah =Means "The Only One to be Worshipped"

Is "Allah" only for Islam and Muslims?

"Allah" is the same word used by Christian and Jewish Arabs in the Bible, before Islam came.

On page one [1] of Genesis in the Old Testament, we find the word "Allah" seventeen [17] times.

Link

I hope I was of some help? :rolleyes:

MOGSA

If you were in competition for a kingdom and had extraordinary powers, you would subvert the population and attempt to debase and obliterate any mention of your competitor. This has slowly occured over the ages through well identified 'christian' and other satanic entities. (eg no christian TV etc or studies at school etc.)

The Bible is not the only prophetic word and it was foretold that at the end of the last century, that our children would indeed be taught about witchcraft etc after preparing the environment. Well, look at the various movies eg Startrek, Jedi and then, most infamously, Harry Potter - a thoroughly researched and presented satanic entity to teach witchcraft to our kids.

I said earlier on another thread that Satan is the ruler of this world for the moment and his powers can only be likened to a god compared to us. When people speak about god, they unwittingly refer to him instead in utter ignorance.

I also said that if you are not for Jehovah then you belong to Satan - I was not kidding, knowing that this statement will cause much ill-conceived ire in the boards.

My contention is that we have been virtually brainwashed into firstly a neutral position ie Jehovah into God and then god.

If you think I am joking then observe how many 'christians' celebrate Halloween in the USA. The computer rags I read become full of halloween 'ideas' for parties and where to rent costumes for them.

I will open a separate thread for this over the next few days if needed.

BrianCalgary

The name Jehovah comes fom the four letters YHWH which God uses to call himself at the burning bush when Moses asks God His name. The Hebrews removed the vowels and didn't utter God's name because of it's Holiness.

There are many other names for God that are used to indicate His different attributes of character, ie. redeemer, counsellor, etc. (don't have the list with me. He is also called Adonai and Elohim.

Jehovah's Witnesses will claim that Jehovah is the proper name for God and it should be used. With all the names used I have a real problem with narrowing His name to just the one.

Qoute by UU:
Mormons call God "Heavenly Father" (sometimes "Heavenly Mother").

Mormons never call their god heavenly mother. The only way a womacan get into Heaven under the Mormon theology is through their husbands calling them through the veil. The Mormon god is definitely male with his wife who populates anothet planet. All Mormons desire to become the god of their own planet somewhere.

4-age

As Brian stated Jehova comes from yhwh. when the torah was translated to greek the greek wrote this as ieova wich was then misconstrued as jehova.although strictly speaking yhwh is translated LORD.in translations from hebrew elohim is generally translated as god as we the LORD God or yahway Elohim
when Moses asked god for his name he replied 'i am who i am' or 'i will be who i will be' depending on which translation you use.

The Hill Billy

MOGSA wrote:

I will open a separate thread for this over the next few days if needed.

Please do. You went a bit off-topic there.

Rest of you guys - Interesting stuff. Thanks!

Excelsior

Just to lend some concrete facts to the correct assertions Brian and others have made, Jehovah is a conjunction first recorded in the 1600s. It is not some magical ancient name as some psuedo-Christian sects would sometimes have it.

IrishLDS

Excelsior wrote:

Just to lend some concrete facts to the correct assertions Brian and others have made, Jehovah is a conjunction first recorded in the 1600s. It is not some magical ancient name as some psuedo-Christian sects would sometimes have it.

It should also be noted that Hebrews would never even conceive of the name "Jehovah" as we have it. Hebrew lacks an equilivant of "J." The Hebrew letter _yod_ is often, in translated material, not used as "y" but "I" or, in some cases, "J."E.g., the various renditions of "Yesh'yah (YHWH is [my] salvation) in the Bible, such as Isaiah, Jesiah and Jesaiah.

hairyheretic

I know I'm going OT here, but I'd like to reply to this

MOGSA wrote:

If you were in competition for a kingdom and had extraordinary powers, you would subvert the population and attempt to debase and obliterate any mention of your competitor. This has slowly occured over the ages through well identified 'christian' and other satanic entities. (eg no christian TV etc or studies at school etc.)

Funny, christianity did exactly the same thing as it spread. The gods of any other people encountered were turned into demons, their holy places destroyed, or churches built over the top of them. Those who held to their ancestors beliefs were discriminated against or killed.

MOGSA wrote:

The Bible is not the only prophetic word and it was foretold that at the end of the last century, that our children would indeed be taught about witchcraft etc after preparing the environment.

Educating people about others beliefs means you're better able to understand them. Removing centuries of propaganda and brainwashing would be a good thing.

I doubt this was what you meant though.

MOGSA wrote:

Well, look at the various movies eg Startrek, Jedi and then, most infamously, Harry Potter - a thoroughly researched and presented satanic entity to teach witchcraft to our kids.

Oh, please. What on earth has Star Trek to do with witchcraft?

And for that matter, what do you know of witchcraft? Do you know any wiccans, or have any personal experiences with them, or are you simply regurgitating tired old cliches?

MOGSA wrote:

I said earlier on another thread that Satan is the ruler of this world for the moment and his powers can only be likened to a god compared to us. When people speak about god, they unwittingly refer to him instead in utter ignorance.

I also said that if you are not for Jehovah then you belong to Satan - I was not kidding, knowing that this statement will cause much ill-conceived ire in the boards.

So are you trying to claim that those who call themselves christians are in fact satanists? Who are the 'real' christians then?

MOGSA wrote:

My contention is that we have been virtually brainwashed into firstly a neutral position ie Jehovah into God and then god.

Your belief is one amongst many. The fact that you believe something to be true does make it so.

MOGSA wrote:

If you think I am joking then observe how many 'christians' celebrate Halloween in the USA. The computer rags I read become full of halloween 'ideas' for parties and where to rent costumes for them.

If they're so terrible, why do you read them? And how are you being directly affected by people choosing to dress up and have fun?

MOGSA wrote:

I will open a separate thread for this over the next few days if needed.

Please do, or have one of the mods split this off. I can't wait to see your thoughts on how Star Trek leads to satanism.

BrianCalgary

Alright let's get back on topic all. It looks as though MOGSA is going to be around for a while. I hope so at least, he brings an interesting perspective to the boards.

The opportunities will be there to question him and discuss his experiences in ministry.

Thanks

Suff

Personally...

I dont think you can give a name to the Creator.
In Islam names are given to describe hi, like the Creator, the One (Allah), the Merciful, the All Knowing,.. it goes on to 100 names.

as back to what Christ called GOD well in Aramic and Arabic it means
"My GOD"

Excelsior

No it actually means "my father". When Christians are praying their most famous prayer they are literally quoting Jesus.

Suff

Excelsior wrote:

No it actually means "my father". When Christians are praying their most famous prayer they are literally quoting Jesus.

Sorry,.. but I speak both languages and it does mean "My GOD" !
remember that Abraham in bible "ENGLISH translation" called GOD "My Father"
so does it mean that he's the other son!? ofcourse not. It's a language thing in my own opinion.

Dades

MOGSA wrote:

I will open a separate thread for this over the next few days if needed.

I also am looking look forward to this one.

Asiaprod

The Atheist wrote:

I also am looking look forward to this one.

Guess the Babylon 5 crowd are safe then.

MOGSA

Asiaprod wrote:

Guess the Babylon 5 crowd are safe then.

From business to monastories, one has to prepare the environment before use. Business processes can only function effectively in proper business environments. Same with religious or any other organisation.

The plethora of 'alien' and 'star wars' type films are used to condition us (preparing the environment) for introducing aliens formally into our society - none more than 'men in black'. The main objective is to offset the effects of the 'rapture' on the remaining population.

Many of these are great with fantastic effects. It's just the sinister purpose behind them thats the problem.

I havent done any positioning statement on the spiritual warfare thread yet but there is some material on the 'Image of Mahmoud Abbas ' thread with links on which to hone your swords on for debate.

The Hill Billy

MOGSA wrote:

From business to monastories, blah, blah, blah...

The plethora of 'alien' and 'star wars' blah, blah, blah...

Many of these are great with fantastic blah, blah, blah...

I havent done any positioning statement blah, blah, blah...

What in the name of God has that got to do with the name of God?

MOGSA - Get a separate thread.
Stop watching Sky 1 & the Sci-Fi channels (either you are not ready for them yet or we are not ready for you).

MOGSA

Hill Billy wrote:

What in the name of God has that got to do with the name of God?

MOGSA - Get a separate thread.
Stop watching Sky 1 & the Sci-Fi channels (either you are not ready for them yet or we are not ready for you).

There is already a thread. I was merely pointing them to the thread with an explanation of why they should go there.

Dale Carnegie made money out of people with your attitude. :cool:

I watch everything I can find the time for, to try to understand the views of others, even if it is just a frivolous one about who could pee on my lawn. You clearly havent understood where this is coming from or going to - so you would not be ready

C U in the other thread, but not until the weekend!

Zombrex

MOGSA wrote:

If you think I am joking then observe how many 'christians' celebrate Halloween in the USA. The computer rags I read become full of halloween 'ideas' for parties and where to rent costumes for them.

You missed the point of dressing up at Halloween then :rolleyes:

The reason people traditionally dress up in scary costumes at Halloween is not to celebrate satan or anything like that. The point of it is to scare away evil spirits from your house on All Hallows Day (1st November).

MOGSA

Wicknight wrote:

You missed the point of dressing up at Halloween then :rolleyes:

The reason people traditionally dress up in scary costumes at Halloween is not to celebrate satan or anything like that. The point of it is to scare away evil spirits from your house on All Hallows Day (1st November).

Wrong - it was originally, among other things, a deceptive ploy to get to meet your dead loved ones that you still grieved for over a multi-day ceremony. You have to join with Satan to do this one, the same as the Belthane ceremony in Edinburgh.

Dont you know about human sacrifice at these times in every city and suburb, just about, in the world? I have some terrible videos on the subject. (no, not eye witness accounts again, hey)

Dont post to me here please! I will get into crap again.

Zombrex

MOGSA wrote:

Wrong - it was originally, among other things, a deceptive ploy to get to meet your dead loved ones that you still grieved for over a multi-day ceremony. You have to join with Satan to do this one, the same as the Belthane ceremony in Edinburgh.

Dont you know about human sacrifice at these times in every city and suburb, just about, in the world? I have some terrible videos on the subject. (no, not eye witness accounts again, hey)

Dont post to me here please! I will get into crap again.

Not sure what you mean by "deceptive" but the old pagan tradition was that on All Hallows Day the spirit world was closest to the real world. You invited the spirts of dead friends and relatives into your house with treats and sweet things, and you warded off the spirits of enemies and evil spirits from your home with scary costumes and artificats.

It is the same principle that puts gargoyles all over medieval churches in Europe. These are scary grotesque statues but they don't signify that something evil was happening within the church. Their purpose was to scare off evil spirits from entering the church. But I would imagine if someone were to put a gargoyle on a church these days it would be missunderstood and they would be accused of worshiping Satan. :rolleyes:

The dressing up at Halloween has nothing to do with Satan, or the occult or devil worship. That is a myth that has grown up around Halloween by people who don't understand its origins or the purpose of dressing up.

But you are right, this is way off topic from the original thread.

sinead_t

If any of you are still interested in reading up more about God's name you should go here http://www.watchtower.org/library/na/article_05.htm

You may not agree with many of the beliefs if the Jehovah's Witnesses but you have to admit they are very educational and well researched.

I like the part where they say if using the name Jehovah is wrong then why is it used over 7,000 times in the Bible!

Talliesin

sinead_t wrote:

I like the part where they say if using the name Jehovah is wrong then why is it used over 7,000 times in the Bible!

The point is though, is "Jehovah" a reasonable transcription of יהוה or not?

It certainly doesn't work as a direct transcription, being inaccurate not only in the vowels (which are not known, the pronounciation of יהוה being only ever used by the High Priest in the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur - of course this hasn't happened since the destruction of the temple), but even in the consonants.

It's a reasonable adaption for the English language, just as while ישוע or יהושוע wouldn't be transcribed as "Jesus", but "Jesus" is a reasonable English adaption.

There's nothing mysterious about this. If your name's used in a language long enough it'll change as that language changes, Plato as an English form of Πλάτων (more accurately transcribed as Platon) would be another example.

I don't know of any form of Jewish, Christian or Muslim worship where knowing the Abrahamic God's name is important other than the ritual in the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur, which of course is no longer performed and never will be unless the Temple is rebuilt and the Jewish priesthood reinstated.

Forms of the name do impact upon qabbalic work of various types, both יהוה and the other names used in or derived from Hebrew scripture (Elohim, Agla, Adonai, and so on).

Dirk Gently

Robbie Fowler, everyone knows that. :rolleyes:

BrianCalgary

clown bag wrote:

Robbie Fowler, everyone knows that. :rolleyes:

After Saturday his name is Steven Gerrard.

MeditationMom

It is:
"I AM.", also sometimes sounds like "Mmmmm", "Ohmmm" or "Amen". It is not so much a name as a sound, you cannot make, but hear in deep meditation. It feels like the most loving parent, neither male nor female, it tastes like nectar and it smells like mint. It looks like blinding light. Your brain in heaven.

It is very annoying to the logical mind, but that is the "name." If you need to address God in prayer, just say "Hi", could you help me with this...or, "Hi" thank you for the other day when....

You go beyond that - there is no name, no sound, no light, no taste, no smell, no world, no you - then you are with God, no need for names.

BrianCalgary

MeditationMom wrote:

It is:
"I AM.", also sometimes sounds like "Mmmmm", "Ohmmm" or "Amen". It is not so much a name as a sound, you cannot make, but hear in deep meditation. It feels like the most loving parent, neither male nor female, it tastes like nectar and it smells like mint. It looks like blinding light. Your brain in heaven..

Actually in Hebrew it is understood to be 'yahweh'. Which sounds absolutely nothing like "Ohmmmmmm" or Amen (which I believe translates roughly as 'let it be so'). God doesn't feel like anything. He is a reality who brings unbelievable peace which passes all understanding to thoses in His presence.

MeditationMom wrote:

It is very annoying to the logical mind, but that is the "name." If you need to address God in prayer, just say "Hi", could you help me with this...or, "Hi" thank you for the other day when......

I agree with just talking to Him, and then take the time to listen. Don't empty yourself though, who knows what yoy invite in.

MeditationMom wrote:

You go beyond that - there is no name, no sound, no light, no taste, no smell, no world, no you - then you are with God, no need for names.

Sorry, but God has a name, He has a special name for me when I am with Him, and I exist in my full personality, I do not disappear and become a part of Him.

Where do you come up with this?

Sapien

It is not so much "I am" as "I am He who is" or "I am that I am", (depending on which Hebraist translates it for you) from the Hebrew: Eheieh ashare eheieh (phon.).

Discussion of the names of God is really not best held in a christianity forum, but is more properly the auspices of Judaism, particularly the Kabbalah. The Kabbalah is, in some senses, an entire spiritual system built around the various names of God. There is a different name of God for every one of the ten spheres in the Tree of Life - the Kabbalistic rendering of the Pleroma: Adonai ha-Aretz, Shaddai El Chai, Elohim Tzabaoth, Yahweh Tzabaoth, Yahweh Eloah va Da'ath, Elohim Gibor, El, Yahweh Elohim, Yahweh Ya and Eheieh. There is a different name of God for every one of the 24 permutations of the letters of the Tetragrammaton: Y (yud) H (heh) V (vau) and H (heh). Some say that Emet, the Hebrew word for "life", is the true name of God. Then there's the Shem ha-Mephorash, the 72-fold name of God, derived from verses 19, 20 and 21 of chapter 14 of the Book of Exodus.

Of all of these YHVH, the Tetragrammaton (Greek: four letter word), is the most common and important. The Tetragrammaton, by the way, is supposed to be ineffable. That means not only that it's not supposed to be said aloud, but that it cannot be pronounced properly by a human mouth. This isn't so obvious given that Hebrew is an unpointed language anyway (devoid of vowels), in which one is used to reading words from consonants alone. In this case it makes no difference - vowels would do no good, or rather, the appropriate vowels could not exist. Neither Yahweh nor Jehovah is correct. Nothing that can be said or written is.

From somewhere above:

Allah = Always singular - Never plural

Erm, not really. Allah comes from the Semitic root El, meaning god, as in "a god" or "any old god" - purely lower case. The Semitic peoples were not always monotheists. It can very much be pluralised to (in Hebrew at least) Elohim, meaning "gods". This word is most commonly used to refer to a severalty of entities which we would call angels in English. I presume had El by way of Allah not been consumed by the monomaniacal meaning it now serves, it could just as correctly have been used in the plural.

BrianCalgary wrote:

The name Jehovah comes fom the four letters YHWH which God uses to call himself at the burning bush when Moses asks God His name. The Hebrews removed the vowels and didn't utter God's name because of it's Holiness.

Nope. The name God gave in this instance was "Eheieh ashare eheieh" - I am that I am. The Hebrews did not remove the vowels. The Hebrews were unacquainted with the concept of the written vowel.

Talliesin wrote:

It's a reasonable adaption for the English language, just as while ישוע or יהושוע wouldn't be transcribed as "Jesus", but "Jesus" is a reasonable English adaption.

An interesting Kabbalistic interpretation links the origin of the name "Jesus" to the Tetragrammaton. It posits that Jesus (יהושו) comes from Jeheshuah (יהשוה) which is the Tetragrammaton with the letter ש (shin) in the middle. Shin represents the Divine Spark in Kabbalistic symbolism, while the letters יה represent the upper, celestial world, or the unknowable part of God and וה represent the physically manifest part of God. As such Jeheshuah is the Divine Spark that bridges the gap between God and his Creation. Could be bullsh1t, but I like it.

MOGSA wrote:

Tonnes of crazy-delicious nonsense.

Oh joy! Are you for real? A real, live book-burner - wow! Bated breath, and all that.

MeditationMom

Where do you come up with this?

It comes up when I meditate. The sound that cannot be made, the sweetest nectar imaginable, the minty smell, the light, the infinite love, were just meditation experiences that happened to me at different times over the last 40 years. Each time is was so beyond a normal experience of taste, smell, sound, etc I thought I was in the presence of God.

We are always in the presence of God. So that is not what these experiences are. They are deep meditation experiences, and those are the good ones, there are also horrible ones. Yes, one needs to be brave to empty oneself, strange and scary things happen. No, I never did drugs, and my whole life is about this longing for truth, so I have given it my all.

Luckily I had guidance and learned not to identify with any idea that something special had happened to me. I was told that as long as there was still someone there to experience and to say "I had that experience" it was just a brain event, not a spiritual or consciousness event, just another trick of the material world, the work of the devil, if you will. Among people who meditate also a competition starts about who had the most amazing experiences, another trap I fell into for a while.
Well, then something entirely different happened and the only way it could be described would be to say the Truth, God, Love, Existence, Being, the Great Mystery unveiled itself - it was a surprise and relief. Now I am free to make outrageous statements, either because the truth simply is outrageous or just to try to get someone's attention.

A priest told me when I was 5 that God's name was "I am". It highly annoyed me for decades, since it made no logical sense and did not help me understand anything about God, except maybe that he wouldn't have a regular name like us. But today I understand what the scriptures are trying to get across. "I am that I am", "I am he who is", "Eheieh ashare eheieh" - I am that I am- this is so very beautiful it makes me cry. And he had me at "I am".

"An interesting Kabbalistic interpretation links the origin of the name "Jesus" to the Tetragrammaton. It posits that Jesus (יהושו) comes from Jeheshuah (יהשוה) which is the Tetragrammaton with the letter ש (shin) in the middle. Shin represents the Divine Spark in Kabbalistic symbolism, while the letters יה represent the upper, celestial world, or the unknowable part of God and וה represent the physically manifest part of God. As such Jeheshuah is the Divine Spark that bridges the gap between God and his Creation. Could be bullsh1t, but I like it."

I like that, too. If it weren't for that spark...

oh, and Brian - I was just trying to revive this thread with a little outrageousness- looks like I managed that. Also I liked that you talked about your inner experience of how you feel when you pray. That it is personal, that you don't disolve into God, that to you God has a distinct name when you pray. I am very interested in people's experiences, and the conclusions from the experiences, especially when someone wants to test or explore a conclusion, as I have made so many mistakes over the years. I am also expecting to be making many mistakes in trying to express myself and count on you and everybody else to call me on it. You seem grounded and strong in your relationship to God. I like it.

As far as scholarship and scripture goes, well Brian, you and I better be a little less enthusiastic - Wow - Sapien - thanks for educating us - are you a scholar or a good surfer

"He is a reality who brings unbelievable peace which passes all understanding to those in His presence."

That's what I was trying to say -
You go beyond that ( God's name, taste, sound....) - there is no name, no sound, no light, no taste, no smell, no world, no you - then you are with God, no need for names.
This is unbelievable peace - a still mind and body and...just being.

Is this your experience or are you quoting? We are always in God's presence. So at any given moment, by God's grace, this unbelievable peace and understanding is available, if we can get out of our own way.

Asiaprod

Sapien wrote:

It is not so much "I am" as "I am He who is" or "I am that I am", (depending on which Hebraist translates it for you) from the Hebrew: Eheieh ashare eheieh (phon.).

Nice post Sapien, your breath of knowlege constantly impresses me.:)

Sapien

MeditationMom wrote:

"I am that I am", "I am he who is", "Eheieh ashare eheieh" - I am that I am- this is so very beautiful it makes me cry.

I know, right?:)

MeditationMom wrote:

are you a scholar or a good surfer

A surfer of the ether, old bean, perhaps not unlike yourself.

Asiaprod wrote:

Nice post Sapien, your breath of knowlege constantly impresses me.

I wouldn't bother but for the fact that there are one or two 'round these parts who tend to appreciate nice ideas.;)

UU

I like to use the name "Allah" as it has meaning. "God" comes from German "Goot" to mean "Good one" which isn't a very strong word. Sure then we could all call ourselves "God"? "Allah" is non-gender, and reflects a more divine being. That's my preference, but I suppose "Allah" is still "Allah" whichever word one uses. A woman I know refuses to call god by he but instead she. So when she was asked whether she believes in god. She replied "I believe in Goddess!"

MeditationMom

I like to use the name "Allah" as it has meaning. "God" comes from German "Goot" to mean "Good one" which isn't a very strong word. Sure then we could all call ourselves "God"? "Allah" is non-gender, and reflects a more divine being.

Sorry, UU - God in German is "Gott" or "Herrgott", with "Herrgott" being closer to "Lord". "Good" translated into German is "gut" ( you spelled it right from an english sound viewpoint, read out it sounds correct ).

I don't know the root of the word "Gott" - any German linguists out there? - I'd be interested. My German and female intuition tells me "gut" and "Gott" are not related in language. The word "Gott" has the quality or language flavor of "Zeus", a very powerful superbeing responsible for thunder and lightening etc. It doesn't feel that people had goodness in mind when they came up with it but Power, Good or Bad simply not being an issue.

This powerful image changes when we address "Gott" as "Lieber Gott". Instantly "Zeus" changes into a loving, kind, all-knowing, full of humor, dear, wise, old man with a jolly twinkle in his eye, watching over us. The RC god of my childhood - in Koelln - by the way for all of you soccor god worshipers

So you love Allah. I am with you on the idea of a genderless, devine being. In Christian Science Mary Baker Eddy also attempts this within Christianity by refereing - in prayer - to God as "Dear Father Mother God". In reflection and contemplation God is synonymus (excuse my spelling - English is my second, not first language and I still have to figure out how to spellcheck on these pages. Clicking on the ABC thing up there doesn't seem to work) with Truth, Love, Principle, Omnipotence, Omniscience, Mind, Spirit etc.

After deeply dwelling into many religions, philosophies, belief systems, etc and many patient years of meditation, prayer and exploration I can say, for now, today, and it is hard for me to imagine what would change my mind on this, that the greates religious statement ever made by anyone is :"There is no God, but God" (- again I am moved to tears - a silly and strange side effect I live with when it comes to scripture) And if this is what was given to us by Mohammed, I can also say, "and Mohammed is his prophet." Just stating that, apparently, makes you a Muslim. This is the extent of my "knowledge" of Islam. It has been all I needed to know about it, to be deeply in love with it. Where all this present fundamental insanity comes from - that is the big question of the century. If there is as much non-sense in the Koran as there is in the Bible besides the true treasures, at least we know that Jesus didn't dictate the Bible personally, unlike Mohammed who did dictate the Koran himself. Big Problem. And as in all religions, it is the interpretations of the unenlightened ones after the enlightened ones leave us that cause most mayhem. As Osho said to his devotees before he died : "When the master dies, don't walk, run! away from the ashram, for now it becomes an organization - and everyone wants to grab the top spot, left empty by the master, by declaring themselves to be the best interpreters of the master's teachings. Become a light onto yourself or find another enlightened master."

Asiaprod

MeditationMom wrote:

And as in all religions, it is the interpretations of the unenlightened ones after the enlightened ones leave us that cause most mayhem. As Osho said to his devotees before he died : "When the master dies, don't walk, run! away from the ashram, for now it becomes an organization - and everyone wants to grab the top spot, left empty by the master, by declaring themselves to be the best interpreters of the master's teachings. Become a light onto yourself or find another enlightened master."

Well done, never were truer words spoken. IMO, man's need to organize and control beliefs is also mans downfall.

BrianCalgary

Sapien wrote:

Nope. The name God gave in this instance was "Eheieh ashare eheieh" - I am that I am. The Hebrews did not remove the vowels. The Hebrews were unacquainted with the concept of the written vowel.
.

Thanks for this. I went and looked it all up. Appreciate the insight and the correction.

(I did know about the vowels, just screwed up on the post.):)

BrianCalgary

Jehovah
the special and significant name (not merely an appellative title such as Lord [adonai]) by which God revealed himself to the ancient Hebrews (Ex. 6:2, 3). This name, the Tetragrammaton of the Greeks, was held by the later Jews to be so sacred that it was never pronounced except by the high priest on the great Day of Atonement, when he entered into the most holy place. Whenever this name occurred in the sacred books they pronounced it, as they still do, "Adonai" (i.e., Lord), thus using another word in its stead. The Massorets gave to it the vowel-points appropriate to this word. This Jewish practice was founded on a false interpretation of Lev. 24:16. The meaning of the word appears from Ex. 3:14 to be "the unchanging, eternal, self-existent God," the "I am that I am," a convenant-keeping God. (Comp. Mal. 3:6; Hos. 12:5; Rev. 1:4, 8.)

The Hebrew name "Jehovah" is generally translated in the Authorized Version (and the Revised Version has not departed from this rule) by the word LORD printed in small capitals, to distinguish it from the rendering of the Hebrew _Adonai_ and the Greek _Kurios_, which are also rendered Lord, but printed in the usual type. The Hebrew word is translated "Jehovah" only in Ex. 6:3; Ps. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4, and in the compound names mentioned below.

It is worthy of notice that this name is never used in the LXX., the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Apocrypha, or in the New Testament. It is found, however, on the "Moabite stone" (q.v.), and consequently it must have been in the days of Mesba so commonly pronounced by the Hebrews as to be familiar to their heathen neighbours.

MeditationMom

So, does God have a name? One name?

Aren't we, and the ancient Hebrews, (and we haven't even explored the many names the Hindus and other ancient religions ascribe to God) all trying to name the un-nameable? Indescribable? Our words fail us, but the attempt, and the divinely inspired, beautiful "names", and our monumental failure in naming God, all ends up to be wonderful. What a great thread this has been...

Of course religions claim that "God gave them his true name" - that's were eveyone just goes back to silly human squabbling, throwing scripture at each other until we all run around with black eyes. ( I don't mean the scripture "throwing" in this thread, as that was part of our exploration and search for an answer to our question, and I loved that very much )

My conclusion to this question- God is un-namable, therefore many names that try to desribe the reality of God can be used. It is our human need to give names and to "address by name" that makes this whole thing an issue. I for one will just continue the name "God" for God, or use no name, as in "Hi, thank you for all my new friends in the Irish Forum"

UU

Actually from an earlier post, I just remembered that Jesus, himself, referred to God as father but also at times as "Alaha" in Aramaic which was the language he spoke. Arabic came from Hebrew, Aramaic and some other Middle-Eastern languages.

Does it really matter what word is used for God? In French it is "Dieu", Irish: "Dia", Russian: "Бог" (bok), Chinese: "上帝", Arabic: "الله" (Allaah), German: "Gott". Some call God, Heavenly Father, others: "Our Lord". God is still god regardless of the name used. It just seems unfair that God is always referred to by many as a male. Perhaps, because God isn't human, he (she) is non-gender? Although, many Christians will disagree in saying that God is male due to the whole belief of people being made in his (her) image but I don't believe that.

MeditationMom, Islam is a beautiful religion indead but it's the whole misinterpretation and the fundalmentalism which bothers me and doesn't reflect the religion at all! I don't agree with their views on women, homosexuals, non-Muslims, etc. but still it teaches a lot of goodness and is certainly a valuable resource in my beliefs as is Christianity, Judaiam, Buddhism and others. Sometimes one needs to look past the barriers and into the heart's core of true faith. It is there I truly feel the presence of Allah.

MeditationMom

Sometimes one needs to look past the barriers and into the heart's core of true faith. It is there I truly feel the presence of Allah.

UU, Allah is a very good name for God, for that in you that is the highest, truest, eternal and infinite. Bless your heart! It in no way means you subscribe to the nonsence that is done in "Allah's" name, just as I would not subscribe to any nonsence commited in the name of Jesus or Buddha.

Namaste! ( "I greet that in you that is God" - the Hindu greeting. You fold your hands and bow when you say it.)

Pocari Sweat

Probably Albert or Fred, if not, then Sue or Shiela.

Pocari Sweat

Actually it is also polite to call someone by what they would want to be referred to by. If god wants to be known as bart rather than bert, then don't be rude and call him all sorts of other names.

MeditationMom

Any name you chose because you love him will be acceptable to him and be welcomed by him. Chose a name that moves your heart to prayer or silence.

Talliesin

Sapien wrote:

An interesting Kabbalistic interpretation links the origin of the name "Jesus" to the Tetragrammaton. It posits that Jesus (יהושו) comes from Jeheshuah (יהשוה) which is the Tetragrammaton with the letter ש (shin) in the middle. Shin represents the Divine Spark in Kabbalistic symbolism, while the letters יה represent the upper, celestial world, or the unknowable part of God and וה represent the physically manifest part of God. As such Jeheshuah is the Divine Spark that bridges the gap between God and his Creation. Could be bullsh1t, but I like it.

Most of the time this explaination has seemed to me like an apologetic against the idea that Christians shouldn't use the Qaballa, with the exception that when Israel Regardie states it it seems to me he's a tad worried he's in danger of losing his Christian audience in other bits of the book, and he'd better throw that part of his readership a bone - and hence its an apologetic against the idea that Christian Qaballists should read someone else.

Now, I'm certainly not going to say the Qaballa should only be used by Jews (that'd make me a hypocrite), but I'm aware of the argument some have made along those lines, and this strikes me as more of a counter-argument than anything else.

It's interesting, but depends too much upon an uncommon Hebrew transcription (ever seen it outside of a Qaballic context?) and I find it ultimately uncovincing.

Sapien

Talliesin wrote:

It's interesting, but depends too much upon an uncommon Hebrew transcription (ever seen it outside of a Qaballic context?) and I find it ultimately uncovincing.

The name Jeheshuah isn't uncommon, though the contention that Jesus is a version of that name, or vice versa, is not beyond dispute, I agree.

Anyway, I don't think Regardie seriously proposed it as the origin of the name. In the Qaballah, as in all fields of Hermetic thought, causality is immaterial. Alphabetic (Alephbethic?) wordplay is the stuff of the Qaballah - meaning is often found at the expense of reason.

robindch

> meaning is often found at the expense of reason

I would amend this to say that transcendent meaning arises from the frequent absence of rational meaning. In this simple way, religious texts can, literally, become all things to all men.

Sapien

robindch wrote:

> meaning is often found at the expense of reason

I would amend this to say that transcendent meaning arises from the frequent absence of rational meaning. In this simple way, religious texts can, literally, become all things to all men.

Transcendent meaning, yes. (:p)

The Hermetic mode of thought distinguishes itself clearly from the religious, in any event. Religion falls prey to ambiguity of meaning and conflict of interpretation, while mysticism, such as the Qabalah, embraces a multiplicity of meanings as a way of gaining higher insight.

Asiaprod

Sapien wrote:

Transcendent meaning, yes. (:p)
Religion falls prey to ambiguity of meaning and conflict of interpretation, while mysticism, such as the Qabalah, embraces a multiplicity of meanings as a way of gaining higher insight.

I think that would be a very good way to explain the differences between eastern and wester religions and beliefs. While Christianity holds doggedly to the written word, as written, eastern faiths view the written word far more flexibly as a key to unlocking higher understanding. Of course, they don't all get it right, especially when they use the words as a means to justify or condone outrageous actions.

robindch

> Religion falls prey to ambiguity of meaning and conflict of interpretation,
> while mysticism, such as the Qabalah, embraces a multiplicity of meanings
> as a way of gaining higher insight.

"falls prey" is an excessively polite way of putting it. Religion actively, if unconsciously, seeks out ill-defined and contradictory modes of expressing ill-defined and contradictory ideas. It does this, not to light up the darkness of ignorance with any specifically-oriented flashlamp of truth, but more mundanely, to produce a vast mess of contradictory ideas from which the greatest number of people possible are able to dip in and pick out just enough to vindicate, to themselves, the confused whole.

If religion and mysticism were clear and unambiguous, they'd have great difficulty in appealing to enough people to sustain their own existences.

Meanwhile, the kids who say that the religion has no clothes are pitied and prayed for