do you know God by name

[mee]

In the Hebrew language it is written יהוה. These four letters, called the Tetragrammaton, are read from right to left in Hebrew and can be represented in many modern languages as YHWH or JHVH. God’s name, represented by these four consonants, appears almost 7,000 times in the original "Old Testament," or Hebrew Scriptures.

The name is a form of a Hebrew verb ha·wah´ (הוה), meaning "to become," and actually signifies "He Causes to Become." Thus, God’s name identifies him as the One who progressively fulfills his promises and unfailingly realizes his purposes. Only the true God could bear such a meaningful name.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by mee

As you are not a spiritual Jew ,then you most be one of the potential OTHER SHEEP that Jesus said would listen to his voice

What "potential"? Nothing potential here. I am a human being, and a child of God. I already have a place in heaven (don't know where yet, but I'll let God deal with the details).

See that's the difference between you and me. While you are still hoping and praying and working for salvation, I'm not. Salvation is already guaranteed, to those who simply ask of Him, and accept the gift that Jesus offers.

And with that "little issue" out of the way, we can roll up our sleeves and get down to the business of hoping, doing works and prayers for the Glory of God, instead of for trying to put ourselves in a favorable light in God's eyes.

Also, instead of watching us from some otherworldly plane, God is right next to us, urging us on; giving comfort, encouragement, strength, and acting as our defender, advocate, counselor...

And that by the way, is why one of God's names is "Imanuel" (God with us)".


v/r

Q

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by mee

A certain one of his disciples said to him: ‘Lord, teach us how to pray.’LUKE 11:1. in his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus had provided his disciples with a model upon which to base their prayers. (Matthew 6:9-13) Possibly this particular disciple was not present at that time, so Jesus kindly repeated the essential points of that model prayer
The opening petition immediately puts first things first. It states: "Let your name be sanctified." (Matthew 6:9) Yes, the sanctification of Jehovah’s name should be of primary concern to us because we love him and hate to see all the reproach that has been heaped upon his name. Satan’s rebellion and his inducing the first human couple to disobey Jehovah God slandered His name by calling into question the way God was exercising his universal sovereignty. (Genesis 3:1-6) Furthermore, through the centuries, Jehovah’s name has been reproached by the shameful acts and teachings of those claiming to represent him.
Our prayer for the sanctification of Jehovah’s name shows where we stand on the issue of universal sovereignty—squarely behind Jehovah’s right to govern the universe.
The second petition in the model prayer is: "Let your kingdom come." (Matthew 6:10) This request is closely related to the preceding one. Jehovah’s instrument for sanctifying his holy name is the Messianic Kingdom, his heavenly government, of which his Son, Jesus Christ, is the duly appointed King. (Psalm 2:1-9)

Mee,

The word used in Mathew 9 for name is .....
onoma,on'-om-ah; from a presumed derivative of the base of Greek 1097 (ginosko) (compare Greek 3685 (oninemi)); a "name" (literal or figurative) [authority, character]

It can be FIGURATIVE and since Jesus used the word Father as our example it seems to me it must refer to the 'authority' or 'character' of God as santified. If it were as important as you lead us to believe then Jesus would obviously have not told us to use the word Father but rather Jehovah. The disciple is not above his Master so if Father was good enough for Jesus to use, and he taught us to pray likewise then it is good enough for me.

Which is more important? A mans given name or character? It seems to me the answer is obvious. We santify God's authority and character and not some linguistic name that he without a tongue would not even be able to speak. It seems to me that one can put so much importance on the details and names and places and neglect that which is of greater importance. Perhaps the saying of 'not seeing the forest because of all of the trees' is appropriate here. Just some thoughts to consider.

Love and Peace,
JM

P.S. In my view, God is not a man that he is slandered by a name or reproached by men. Neither can God be insulted by that which he has made with his own hands. Perhaps such pettiness and emotions is limited to humans.

[wil]

Originally Posted by mee

How

Is God’s Name Pronounced?

The truth is, nobody knows for sure how the name of God was originally pronounced. Why not? Well, the first language used in writing the Bible was Hebrew, and when the Hebrew language was written down, the writers wrote only consonants—not vowels. Hence, when the inspired writers wrote God’s name, they naturally did the same thing and wrote only the consonants.
While ancient Hebrew was an everyday spoken language, this presented no problem. The pronunciation of the Name was familiar to the Israelites and when they saw it in writing they supplied the vowels without thinking

Namaste Mee, this is interesting however since you don't give credit for your cut and paste we can't check out the source. I have always read and heard me the Isrealites never pronounced the name, that that would be sacrilege and demeaning...hence why the writers never wrote the name either...they referred to it, but never wrote it completely....I believe adonai was the word used to substitute...

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, mee!

Originally Posted by mee

The name first appeared in an English Bible in 1530, when William Tyndale published a translation of the first five books of the Bible. In this he included the name of God, usually spelled Iehouah, in several verses,

Genesis 15:2; Exodus 6:3; 15:3; 17:16; 23:17; 33:19; 34:23; Deuteronomy 3:24. Tyndale also included God’s name in Ezekiel 18:23 and 36:23, in his translations that were added at the end of The New Testament, Antwerp, 1534.

and in a note in this edition he wrote: "Iehovah is God’s name . . . Moreover as oft as thou seist LORD in great letters (except there be any error in the printing) it is in Hebrew Iehovah." From this the practice arose of using Jehovah’s name in just a few verses and writing "LORD" or "GOD" in most other places where the Tetragrammaton occurs in the Hebrew text.

In 1611 what became the most widely used English translation, the Authorized Version, was published. In this, the name appeared four times in the main text. (Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; 26:4) "Jah," a poetic abbreviation of the name, appeared in Psalm 68:4. And the name appeared in full in place-names such as "Jehovah-jireh." (Genesis 22:14; Exodus 17:15; Judges 6:24) However, following the example of Tyndale, the translators in most instances substituted "LORD" or "GOD" for God’s name. But if God’s name could appear in four verses, why could it not appear in all the other thousands of verses that contain it in the original Hebrew?

The Tyndale Bible predates the KJV by some number of years, enough that it was the Bible of choice for awhile amongst English Christians. Did you notice you are actually reinforcing what I pointed to, that "Jehovah" / "Iehovah" is an English corruption of the Hebrew Name of the Most High? ("The name first appeared in an English Bible in 1530") Note please that you also reinforce what I said about the letter "j," which didn't come along until about 1555 AD.

Allow me to posit an example to further the literary complications. How does one pronounce the name "Jan?" In America, we instinctively pronounce it to rhyme with "can," as a shortened form of the female name Janet or Janice. However, in certain Northern European countries the name "Jan" is a male name that is pronounced more like "yawn." Add the Celtic twist of Ian. And what we end up with properly translated into American English is the name "John." However, we cannot say definitively that a name spelled by this example is in fact to be translated as "John" without first considering linguistic and cultural context. For all we can know, not being linguists and dependent upon what *real* linguists tell us, it may even be a shortened form of "janitor" or some such. I jest, but only to make the point.

The Tetragrammaton begins with a Hebrew letter yod. A word that begins with a "y" shouldn't by proper English linguistic construction be pronounced as a "j." A j is a j, a y is a y, and an i is an i.

Of course, it is probably just as well to continue using the English corruption of the Name and maintain a semblance of innocence, rather than risk fool heartedly breaking the Command not to vainly utter the name (or cause others to). I am no rabbi or preacher, but this is how I understand this issue. There is a bit of a difference though, in suggesting that the corrupted name is the one and only name, which any student of Bible translation would see right through as not being correct. Jehovah is a Name of the Most High, but it is merely another appointed by humans. Jehovah is not the Name of the Most High.

Dondi brought up an excellent point (Thanks Dondi!). "Which does bring up the question, should we be using the original pronounciation of God and Jesus in our praise and worship, or is it enough that we understand the concept behind the names we are familiar in our own language?" We (protestants) have a number of denominations among us who claim to be taking themselves back to the foundational or fundamental aspects of the faith...but how can this be when something as patently simple as properly pronouncing a name is overlooked? I have raised this issue before, even among those who use another corrupted form of the Name (which I will not repeat because it does head a bit closer to the forbidden zone). Always the same response, that it doesn't matter except when it does matter...denominational interpretation. Depends who is behind the pulpit. Lord help you if you actually dare to read and cipher the text yourself! I stand by the idiom "what is good for the goose, is good for the gander." If one is going to insist upon names being properly pronounced, then one must be consistent and pronounce all names precisely in their original tongue. Alternately, I think one should lay off the heavy handed rhetoric and accept that most names (if not all, included that of the Most High) are transliterations at best once one leaves the confines of the native languages. Jesus was Yashua (proper English translation "Joshua"). Mary was Miriam. Joseph was something like Yosef. James was Yacob. I have seen John spelled Iohannen, which might be Latin. And on and on and on.

So, how much stock are we to put into "intent." I think G-d responds to those who beseech Him in a polite and respectful manner, because He understands what and where that person is at and coming from. I don't think G-d will fault a person for not knowing His actual Name, nor fault a person for calling on a corrupted Name they believe fervently to be His. Likewise considering the Intercessor most Christians know as Jesus, even if that might not actually be His real name.

If one is willing to preach "unforgiving exactitude," then one better be prepared to be met with unforgiving judgment when the time comes. If one can be a bit more flexible, and allow that others might see things just a tad differently, then with what judgment we mete so shall we be judged...in other words we might have a bit of wiggle room on those things we might be just a tad off from "exactitude." We can be forgiven those things we didn't quite fully grasp, such as translational error.

There was one more point worth developing, I think it was JosephM who raised it, about appealing to the Most High as "Father." If the purpose of calling G-d by His Name is to draw oneself closer to the Divine, how can one get any closer (as Jesus showed by example) then to "draw near to the Father?" If one approaches G-d with the respect due to a loved and cherished parent, how can one possibly go wrong? That is about as intimate with the Divine as one can hope for in this existence.

[mee]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Mee, this is interesting however since you don't give credit for your cut and paste we can't check out the source. I have always read and heard me the Isrealites never pronounced the name, that that would be sacrilege and demeaning...hence why the writers never wrote the name either...they referred to it, but never wrote it completely....I believe adonai was the word used to substitute...

yes you are quite right to say that many stopped using Gods name . that was not a good thing to do

[wil]

Ok we are Christians right?

Here in the Christian forum...so we only believe in one G!d right?


So if we are talking about G!d's name...what would it be??

Chidanandaroopa? Rudra Brahman? Nataraja? Shiva? Yah? El?

Only one G!d, now if we were Arabic we'd say Allah for the one G!d.

But here we are discussing Jehova, Yahweh, Elohem, Iehova...

For the life of me I don't think G!d cares what we say...

But if we only believe in one G!d and those Egyptian prophets or Hindu Priests, or Taoist monks or Shinto...or whatever common folk wherever had a connection with the divine...there being only one divine....what would be the oldest name??

[Faithfulservant]

I didnt know that JW's believed we have spirits??? How can one become a spiritual Jew? And where is "spiritual Jew" found in the bible?

God did not replace His people. That is saying that Gods covenants are not everlasting... you are calling Him a LIAR by believing this.

Gen 7-8:17 7 And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8 Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God."

Covenant means promise..

Everlasting means FOREVER.

All the land of Canaan... GODS Land given to the Jews. Everlasting possession means its THIERS..forever.

God doesnt stutter... God doesnt make mistakes and He does not lose what belongs to Him. No matter what.

[mee]

The Divine Name Through the Ages - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site
There is also evidence from sources outside the Bible of the extensive use of the divine name in ancient times.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

I didnt know that JW's believed we have spirits??? How can one become a spiritual Jew? And where is "spiritual Jew" found in the bible?

God did not replace His people. That is saying that Gods covenants are not everlasting... you are calling Him a LIAR by believing this.

Gen 7-8:17 7 And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8 Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God."

Covenant means promise..

Everlasting means FOREVER.

All the land of Canaan... GODS Land given to the Jews. Everlasting possession means its THIERS..forever.

God doesnt stutter... God doesnt make mistakes and He does not lose what belongs to Him. No matter what.

Genesis 7;- 8-17
Are there Jews, spiritually speaking?
a Jew in a spiritual sense. As the apostle Paul said: "He is not a Jew who is one on the outside, nor is circumcision that which is on the outside upon the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one on the inside, and his circumcision is that of the heart by spirit, and not by a written code."
Romans 2:28, 29:
Paul was here saying that one who serves Jehovah God from the heart is a real Jew.
Similarly, at Galatians 3:29 he states that all who belong to Christ, who are members of his body, anointed by God’s holy spirit, are in fact Abraham’s seed and therefore also Jews, that is, spiritual Jews.
as recorded at Exodus 19:5, 6. There we read: "And now IF you will strictly obey my voice and will indeed keep my covenant, then you will certainly become my special property out of all other peoples, because the whole earth belongs to me. And you yourselves will become to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."........................ yes as the bible says ...IF.... they listen to his voice .......... but they did not listen to the voice of God did they , they could have become kings and priests with Jesus in the heavenly kingdom but they rejected Jesus . so a new chosen nation will be going to heaven and they are all spiritual Jews at heart . yes some were individual natural Jews from the natural nation of israel, but the 144,000 are from ALL nations . but the nation as a whole did not listen to Jesus . so they lost their chance to be a nation of kings and priests in the heavens.

[mee]

[quote=Faithfulservant;117587]I didnt know that JW's believed we have spirits??? How can one become a spiritual Jew? And where is "spiritual Jew" found in the bible?
quote]

"But you are ‘a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation [a consecrated nation; a dedicated nation], a people for special possession.’"—1 Peter 2:9, New World Translation; The Jerusalem Bible; The New English Bible.............................those who are spiritual Jews are spoken of here . this is the new nation of spiritualJews .......... the litral nation of Jews as a whole rejected Jesus , and the promise was given to the litral Jews with an
.............And now if you will strictly obey my voice .........Attached, but they rejected Gods representative who was Jesus and did not listen to him.

The new nation is the anointed Christian congregation, born at Pentecost 33 C.E. Its first members were Jewish disciples of Jesus who accepted him as their heavenly King. (Acts 2:5, 32-36) However, they were members of God’s new nation, not on the basis of their Jewish descent, but on the basis of faith in Jesus. Thus, this new Israel of God was something unique—a spiritual nation. When the majority of the Jews refused to accept Jesus, the invitation to be part of the new nation was extended to the Samaritans and then to the Gentiles. The new nation was called "the Israel of God."—Galatians 6:16.

[mee]

[quote=wil;117586]Ok we are Christians right?

Here in the Christian forum...so we only believe in one G!d right?


So if we are talking about G!d's name...what would it be??

quote]As christians i would think we would all be looking to our bibles to know the name of the true God
PSALM 83;18

That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,

You alone are the Most High over all the earth.
(Isaiah 42:8) "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images.
(Psalm 68:4) Sing YOU to God, make melody to his name; Raise up [a song] to the One riding through the desert plains As Jah, which is his name; and jubilate before him;
In prayer to his heavenly Father, Jesus said: "I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world. . . . And I have made your name known to them and will make it known." (John 17:6, 26) It was not that his followers did not already know God’s name.
they saw this name both in their Hebrew Bible scrolls and in the Greek Bible translation they used. But as a result of Jesus’ teaching, the name took on added meaning—just as it had done as a result of Jehovah’s acts back in Moses’ day. Jesus marvelously expanded our knowledge and appreciation of Jehovah, of his personality and of his purposes. We know Jehovah’s name in a far grander way through Jesus, who said: "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me." Jesus provided the ransom and the way of approach to the Father. Thus Jesus said: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."—John 7:16; 14:6.

[wil]

[quote=mee;117593][quote=wil;117586]Ok we are Christians right?

Here in the Christian forum...so we only believe in one G!d right?


So if we are talking about G!d's name...what would it be??

As christians i would think we would all be looking to our bibles to know the name of the true God

Originally Posted by mee

There is also evidence from sources outside the Bible of the extensive use of the divine name in ancient times.

I sure wish you'd make up your mind. And from your JW link...

On its walls were Hebrew inscriptions that appear to date from the second half of the eighth century B.C.E. The inscriptions contain statements such as "Jehovah is the God of the whole earth."

Are you serious....I'd love to see that English carved in stone BCE!!

I'm just confused...first you say rather than YHWH or I Am we should use a contemporary English name...but G!d must be too new...so we pick Jehovah and want the world to see as we do...still confuses me as to why when so many JW predictions and statements have come and gone...

I mean I honestly believe your belief is for you...but contemplate as to why you feel the need to constantly witness to us...none of your brethren last this long at my door.

[Pathless]

Originally Posted by wil

So if we are talking about G!d's name...what would it be??

Chidanandaroopa? Rudra Brahman? Nataraja? Shiva? Yah? El?

...

But here we are discussing Jehova, Yahweh, Elohem, Iehova...

For the life of me I don't think G!d cares what we say...

Sometimes I call God Nancy...
just to see if (S)He's paying any attention.

Okay, okay... I'm leaving the Xian forum now...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Pathless

Sometimes I call God Nancy...
just to see if (S)He's paying any attention.

Okay, okay... I'm leaving the Xian forum now...

I just call Him "Sir" when in doubt. If He is a She, I'll be corrected post haste I should think...

v/r

Q