Excellent find.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Why Jews don't say the sacred name of G-d & Maybe nobody should
- Thread starter IshChayil
- Start date
Could you elaborate your question more? What are you comparing it to, to see if it is better/worse/same?
Exodus 3:13-15 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
Here's my interpretation of this...
I expect God is using the correct vowels here when He pronounces His own name, and appears to be telling Moses to use His name when speaking to the children of Israel, and that His name is forever, and to be a memorial to all generations. I wonder if the destruction of His name from our knowledge is related to the defacto destruction of the Hebrew scriptures prior to the Masoretes circa 1000 AD. I wonder what other priceless gems were "destroyed" also.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
It is hard for me to determine with confidence at what point in time this takes place. Notwithstanding, they shall teach no more saying "Know the LORD" (viz, they were speaking His name?), because everyone already knows Him (His name also?)?
1 Kings 8:22-23 And Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands toward heaven: And he said, LORD God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart:
Solomon said "LORD God of Israel". It seems like it would be worse to use the wrong name than no name at all.
Psalm 90(91):14 For he has hoped in me, and I will deliver him: I will protect him, because he has known my name.
The tetragrammaton, lacking vowels, is not what one could reasonably use to say you know His name, thus the vowels must have been known, and lacking a writing system to record the vowels, it must have been spoken frequently enough to be passed down verbally. Perhaps this is prophetic for a time in the future; in which case, then maybe they're using His correct name in the future.
There is also the Aaronic blessing. If blessing someone in God's name, ought not God's name be used, but if not God's name who's or what instead?? On that note, I will close by saying, let it be unto thee as though Moses himself had thus blessed thee (speaking God's true name). Amen.
Here's my interpretation of this...
I expect God is using the correct vowels here when He pronounces His own name, and appears to be telling Moses to use His name when speaking to the children of Israel, and that His name is forever, and to be a memorial to all generations. I wonder if the destruction of His name from our knowledge is related to the defacto destruction of the Hebrew scriptures prior to the Masoretes circa 1000 AD. I wonder what other priceless gems were "destroyed" also.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
It is hard for me to determine with confidence at what point in time this takes place. Notwithstanding, they shall teach no more saying "Know the LORD" (viz, they were speaking His name?), because everyone already knows Him (His name also?)?
1 Kings 8:22-23 And Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands toward heaven: And he said, LORD God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart:
Solomon said "LORD God of Israel". It seems like it would be worse to use the wrong name than no name at all.
Psalm 90(91):14 For he has hoped in me, and I will deliver him: I will protect him, because he has known my name.
The tetragrammaton, lacking vowels, is not what one could reasonably use to say you know His name, thus the vowels must have been known, and lacking a writing system to record the vowels, it must have been spoken frequently enough to be passed down verbally. Perhaps this is prophetic for a time in the future; in which case, then maybe they're using His correct name in the future.
There is also the Aaronic blessing. If blessing someone in God's name, ought not God's name be used, but if not God's name who's or what instead?? On that note, I will close by saying, let it be unto thee as though Moses himself had thus blessed thee (speaking God's true name). Amen.
This may have been the original intent of not saying since there is a death penalty in the bible for saying it. The sanctity of His name causes interesting euphemisms in the Hebrew language. One notable example is Job's wife telling him to "curse G-d and die" only in the Hebrew it says "bless G-d and die"
That is a very good reason which I can't believe I didn't list on my list.
I may add it; it is indeed a good reason.
I can't tell you how many times when I was in highschool and I would help on construction sites and I would hear someone yell out "Jesus CHrist!" or "G.d.!"
if they hurt themself. I was thankful that those gentlemen did not know the L-rd's most sacred name and were not accustomed to using it in normal speech.
The care for making the Name holy is so sacred that one opinion in Talmud claims someone who "pronounces the Name the way it is written (k'tiv form in Hebrew) has no share in the world to come!".
I don't hold that view neither do most Jews it's just interesting to show how taboo it is that one rabbi of old had such an opinion.
This segways in to why we respect the sages/rabbis of old. Most of these guys had huge swaths of scripture memorized by heart.
Men dedicated to constant study. In Jewish culture today there are many who sponser scholars or students who are aspiring to become scholars.
When a scholar (even a young scholar) enters a synagogue we must all stand, we don't have to stand for a 60 year old non-scholar however.
It is for the Torah within the scholar that we stand.
The main issue with the name boils down to making it holy; sanctification. IT's just been such a norm in Jewish culture since before Yeshua's days and Yeshua never reformed that part but instead affirmed it so Messianics see no reason to adopt the Gentile view that it's now OK to say it.
Shalom,
yes the Ruth text is a standard go to in the sacred namers movement.
If only the sages had known about that book... just kidding
There are several answers to this. I'll select one of them and let's see how that goes.
My purpose is not to take the Name away from you if you feel in your heart you should say it in times of worship / prayer.
My hope for this thread is that our overall usage of the name can be in a way to make it holy and maybe some will like the Messianic Jewish approach.
So the issue with thinking that they are saying the name here is that the Hebrew text informs us differently.
In biblical hebrew we have information about the text which usually does not get translated into English (as it's hard to represent such info).
One issue we call "k'tiv" (how it's written) and "qere" (how it's read).
The earlier scribes of the Hebrew bible were relaxed about editing the text and would often "update" the language to more modern colloquialisms for the times. These seems unimaginable to us today but there are several instances known to Hebrew scholars where the text was obviously altered at one point. This should not detract from inspiration to anyone; surely the G-d of the universe can include "inspired" scribes so the message is understandable to the generations. In a way, this is like reading a translation today. It is still the word of G-d, it's just not as accurate as the Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek but in many cases this does not matter.
So what's k'tiv and qere all about?
Later scribal traditions treated the biblical text in such a way that it was forbidden by the sages of old to change a single letter. So whenever we come across odd words or words with impossible endings/etc (feminine ending on masculine nouns, etc) or just garbled consonants, we look to the scroll or Hebrew bible and we see the "qere" form as preserved down from the ages. This is how the scribes corrected scribal errors.
Out of reverence the later scribes would not "update" the text any more.
In the case with Ruth, if you look at the qere form it says exactly as major English bibles (Greek,German, Russian, and others) translate correctly "L-rd".
The scribes are telling us that the text is to be read "L-rd" here, not "the Name". In other places the Name is listed in the qere as "Elohiym" literally "gods" though we render "G-d" for the L-rd. So if you keep in mind that Jews of old would memorize scripture as not everyone had a bible at home; only rich guys. Someone who has memorized the ancient tradition, later becomes a scribe, and he comes across places were the text was updated to say "the Name" where he knows from the way his father taught him that it says "Elohiym" there. So he marks the 'qere' (how it is read) as "Elohiym" (G-d) in that place.
In other places he will mark "Adonai" where his tradition had it memorized this way. There were 3 great houses of scribes who were in sync on this.
This is useful because it also explains why in the bible we see some biblical characters refer to G-d seemingly as Hashem (the Name). When you look at the masorah this is not the case and as Paul comments the Jews are trusted with maintaining the oracles of G-d and so we have.
This phenomenon happens with many many words throughout the bible.
What happens often in the Hebrew roots movement (not picking on you guys, we have much in common) out of zeal and love for the Hebrew language someone will self instruct himself in Hebrew, or learn from another who hasn't learned the Biblical Language and it's oddities fully.
They learn the basics of how to read but not the ktiv qere or worse they have a stripped down software program which obscures the qere or doesn't show it at all. Reading Hebrew is more than sounding out letters. So they come on some instance of "the Name" and they sound it out and viola!
They think they know how to say G-d's name. I've met a guy quite popular here, a foreignor who visits Philippines, who teaches the Name and his pronounciation is so different. I thought to myself how did he get that? He reads Hebrew, many call him a "Hebrew teacher" but it's all relative.
He got this pronounciation by not understanding k'tiv qere system of maintaining the ancient textual tradition.
The other issue with saying the name today verses in days of old is that the shekhinah glory is not upon us today as it was in days of old.
In the old days, Uziah grabbed the ark of the covenant likely out of righteous intent but the shekhinah glory was so intense, not tolerating sin, that he was struck dead! I understand him to be righteous because the text says "vayichar David al Hashem.." "and David was angry with Hashem..." why be angry if David knew Uziah was an evil twerp? He must have been a fairly righteous dude. SO much so that David was scared to have the ark in his own residence even and he sent it away. In the days of the shekhinah glory, if someone spoke lashon hara (evil speech) against someone, they would get a skin disease.
The punishments were harsh and often fast. It is my belief that if one were to come to Hashem in those days and pronounce with pure intent His name in the midst of His glory, it was permitted. Today profanity is everywhere. The very person saying His name likely has a cell phone in their pocket with some sort of evil news about a politician or a celebrity or just Face Book app which promotes evil speech millions of times a day.
With my friends who feel they must say the Name, I usually ask if we can come to an agreement.
How about making it holy by only saying it in praise and in prayer? True Jews won't do this and it's still jarring to us, but in my book it's a win if I can convince someone to stop using it in normal conversation like any other name and exalt the power of His name in praise/prayer. Better yet if just personal prayer because if it's public praise we kind of force all the participants to sing along and who knows what is in someone's heart at that moment so that it's dangerous for them to say his name while they have hate in their heart. At least in personal prayer the person knows their heart, knows their state, and it is a better situation I believe for Keddushah "holiness".
For me, I can't escape how I understand Yeshua's teaching how to pray was "Abba, Father..." not "The Name".
Blessings to you brother and may you have an easy fast this shabbat since it's Yom Kippur.
Ok I'm being playful now.
So are we worried the pantheon will all turn around when we say "Abba"?
That being said I think it is fair to say that you and Andrew are generally the exception to the rule about cultures finding it "normal" to call a parent by their first name right? I think you both realized you are part of the handful of exceptions.
Hey I realize you went another direction with this but I want to address this idea for the thread ok?
Using G-d's name in a curse is cursing with the name, or some interpret cursing the Name not making it common.
a curse is further down than common. Common is like "Hi Bob how are you?"
Holy is any kind of distancing or limiting to usage of something be it time, place, speech, or thing.
So the name Bob is common, as is Methushelach if we say "Hi Methushelach". This is different than cursing those guys or using their name next to a curse word. That's a whole new level of low.
So if we think of 3 basic levels: cursed - common (i.e profane) - holy
The holy has various levels to it which is where we see the Jewish practices of not throwing away a piece of paper with G-d's name on it, and not uttering it ever, etc... trying to make it the max level of holiness.
I know you know most this stuff Veritas I just wanted to piggy back to that statement because I think many people have that similar thought process of profane being similar or the same to cursed.
Oh, it was and still is culturally inappropriate, but I still did it.Ok I'm being playful now.
So are we worried the pantheon will all turn around when we say "Abba"?
That being said I think it is fair to say that you and Andrew are generally the exception to the rule about cultures finding it "normal" to call a parent by their first name right? I think you both realized you are part of the handful of exceptions.
Everyone knew it wasn't out of disrespect, so it wasn't a big deal after a while.
I with MJAA and have to keep my identity hidden...lol!Shalom Elijahsfire (please don't consume me and my men
With which Messianic organization are you associated? UMJC or MJAA?
Thanks and have an easy fast!
Easy fast also...sun is setting.
Yes, saying Yah is much better. Just so people know Jews will often say "Kah" if not in prayer but not when it's part of a compound word like: Hallelu-Yah.
Shalom my friend,
I am on my lunch break but I was able to speed read this, I will read in in depth after everything is taken care of and respond more in depth.
Adonai was the first name I learned of His, then it was his sacred name.. I would love to have a in depth convo on why I say his sacred name,
and maybe one will understand my point of view, I do not disagree with what you said, but I do have some counters to some of those points I think you will be interested in.
I also read your pm, I will respond to later, but I am finding myself closer and closer to your view points..
I gotta run, and talk to you soon!
-Cam
I am on my lunch break but I was able to speed read this, I will read in in depth after everything is taken care of and respond more in depth.
Adonai was the first name I learned of His, then it was his sacred name.. I would love to have a in depth convo on why I say his sacred name,
and maybe one will understand my point of view, I do not disagree with what you said, but I do have some counters to some of those points I think you will be interested in.
I also read your pm, I will respond to later, but I am finding myself closer and closer to your view points..
I gotta run, and talk to you soon!
-Cam
that is very interesting!
Shalom,
yes the Ruth text is a standard go to in the sacred namers movement.
If only the sages had known about that book... just kidding
There are several answers to this. I'll select one of them and let's see how that goes.
My purpose is not to take the Name away from you if you feel in your heart you should say it in times of worship / prayer.
My hope for this thread is that our overall usage of the name can be in a way to make it holy and maybe some will like the Messianic Jewish approach.
So the issue with thinking that they are saying the name here is that the Hebrew text informs us differently.
In biblical hebrew we have information about the text which usually does not get translated into English (as it's hard to represent such info).
One issue we call "k'tiv" (how it's written) and "qere" (how it's read).
The earlier scribes of the Hebrew bible were relaxed about editing the text and would often "update" the language to more modern colloquialisms for the times. These seems unimaginable to us today but there are several instances known to Hebrew scholars where the text was obviously altered at one point. This should not detract from inspiration to anyone; surely the G-d of the universe can include "inspired" scribes so the message is understandable to the generations. In a way, this is like reading a translation today. It is still the word of G-d, it's just not as accurate as the Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek but in many cases this does not matter.
So what's k'tiv and qere all about?
Later scribal traditions treated the biblical text in such a way that it was forbidden by the sages of old to change a single letter. So whenever we come across odd words or words with impossible endings/etc (feminine ending on masculine nouns, etc) or just garbled consonants, we look to the scroll or Hebrew bible and we see the "qere" form as preserved down from the ages. This is how the scribes corrected scribal errors.
Out of reverence the later scribes would not "update" the text any more.
In the case with Ruth, if you look at the qere form it says exactly as major English bibles (Greek,German, Russian, and others) translate correctly "L-rd".
The scribes are telling us that the text is to be read "L-rd" here, not "the Name". In other places the Name is listed in the qere as "Elohiym" literally "gods" though we render "G-d" for the L-rd. So if you keep in mind that Jews of old would memorize scripture as not everyone had a bible at home; only rich guys. Someone who has memorized the ancient tradition, later becomes a scribe, and he comes across places were the text was updated to say "the Name" where he knows from the way his father taught him that it says "Elohiym" there. So he marks the 'qere' (how it is read) as "Elohiym" (G-d) in that place.
In other places he will mark "Adonai" where his tradition had it memorized this way. There were 3 great houses of scribes who were in sync on this.
This is useful because it also explains why in the bible we see some biblical characters refer to G-d seemingly as Hashem (the Name). When you look at the masorah this is not the case and as Paul comments the Jews are trusted with maintaining the oracles of G-d and so we have.
This phenomenon happens with many many words throughout the bible.
What happens often in the Hebrew roots movement (not picking on you guys, we have much in common) out of zeal and love for the Hebrew language someone will self instruct himself in Hebrew, or learn from another who hasn't learned the Biblical Language and it's oddities fully.
They learn the basics of how to read but not the ktiv qere or worse they have a stripped down software program which obscures the qere or doesn't show it at all. Reading Hebrew is more than sounding out letters. So they come on some instance of "the Name" and they sound it out and viola!
They think they know how to say G-d's name. I've met a guy quite popular here, a foreignor who visits Philippines, who teaches the Name and his pronounciation is so different. I thought to myself how did he get that? He reads Hebrew, many call him a "Hebrew teacher" but it's all relative.
He got this pronounciation by not understanding k'tiv qere system of maintaining the ancient textual tradition.
The other issue with saying the name today verses in days of old is that the shekhinah glory is not upon us today as it was in days of old.
In the old days, Uziah grabbed the ark of the covenant likely out of righteous intent but the shekhinah glory was so intense, not tolerating sin, that he was struck dead! I understand him to be righteous because the text says "vayichar David al Hashem.." "and David was angry with Hashem..." why be angry if David knew Uziah was an evil twerp? He must have been a fairly righteous dude. SO much so that David was scared to have the ark in his own residence even and he sent it away. In the days of the shekhinah glory, if someone spoke lashon hara (evil speech) against someone, they would get a skin disease.
The punishments were harsh and often fast. It is my belief that if one were to come to Hashem in those days and pronounce with pure intent His name in the midst of His glory, it was permitted. Today profanity is everywhere. The very person saying His name likely has a cell phone in their pocket with some sort of evil news about a politician or a celebrity or just Face Book app which promotes evil speech millions of times a day.
With my friends who feel they must say the Name, I usually ask if we can come to an agreement.
How about making it holy by only saying it in praise and in prayer? True Jews won't do this and it's still jarring to us, but in my book it's a win if I can convince someone to stop using it in normal conversation like any other name and exalt the power of His name in praise/prayer. Better yet if just personal prayer because if it's public praise we kind of force all the participants to sing along and who knows what is in someone's heart at that moment so that it's dangerous for them to say his name while they have hate in their heart. At least in personal prayer the person knows their heart, knows their state, and it is a better situation I believe for Keddushah "holiness".
For me, I can't escape how I understand Yeshua's teaching how to pray was "Abba, Father..." not "The Name".
Blessings to you brother and may you have an easy fast this shabbat since it's Yom Kippur.
very well said..
So I came across something in Revelations today which is interesting (to me) and another little tidbit relevant.
So in Revelations 4:8b the creatures around the throne say:
⸂1‶ ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος⸃ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ,
‹ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος › ″.
Aland, K., Aland, B., Karavidopoulos, J., Martini, C. M., & Metzger, B. M. (2012). Novum Testamentum Graece (28th Edition, Re 4:8). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
"Holy Holy Holy is the L-rd G-d Almighty, Who was, and who is, and who is to come".
The "pantokrator" has caught my attention in other places but I think it's interesting in this passage.
This is the Greek of the Hebrew אל שדי El-Shaddai (Amy Grant style) traditionally rendered "G-d Almighty"
So here we see the heavenly creatures referring to Hashem with this title.
Just another bit for the fire....
So in Revelations 4:8b the creatures around the throne say:
⸂1‶ ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος⸃ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ,
‹ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος › ″.
Aland, K., Aland, B., Karavidopoulos, J., Martini, C. M., & Metzger, B. M. (2012). Novum Testamentum Graece (28th Edition, Re 4:8). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
"Holy Holy Holy is the L-rd G-d Almighty, Who was, and who is, and who is to come".
The "pantokrator" has caught my attention in other places but I think it's interesting in this passage.
This is the Greek of the Hebrew אל שדי El-Shaddai (Amy Grant style) traditionally rendered "G-d Almighty"
So here we see the heavenly creatures referring to Hashem with this title.
Just another bit for the fire....
Last edited:
So I did the Etymology on the word god. First I want to remind everyone its not His name. Second the big G, little g to separate Elohim from pagan gods is a tradition of man and man alone to justify using it. Third the word god is a corruption of a Germanic word ghutt which is a corruption of a Norse Goth word gup meaning to call or invoke the supreme deity…..wait for it..... Wotan also known in Old Norse as Odin. The Sunday after I learnt this during praise and worship I felt sick to my stomach while singing and when the song "Praise Your Holy Name" I vomited in my mouth. Maybe instead of just focusing on why we should not saying the sacred name of Adonai we should first ask ourselves why were using a word that to claims a false deity Odin the as supreme deity. I believe I remember The Tanahk saying something about not worshiping The Father as pagans worship their deities.
The etymology of the word "God" is speculative, and I don't think anyone has found a link to Odin that is supported by evidence: similar speculation has Goth, Geat, and Gutar, (three related names of tribes), and the word "good" related to it, and even "Gautama" (Buddha). But in no doubt the first Gothic Bible translated the missionary Ulfilas used "Guþ", thus the word could not have been the name of Odin (or exclusively associated with him) even among the heathens at the time. I hope this helps you, as this word has been used to honor God the Creator since that time.
The Hebrew word "El" is also used to refer to God and to false gods and even to high rulers (Elohim is used as the plural of "false gods" as well as to refer to the supreme God). Most languages I would say have a word that applies to any deity, probably no languages have only words that exclusively refer to a specific deity.
It is possible that the word "God" has no etymology: that it is a morphing of one of the original Indo-european words. After all it is the biblical account that assumes fully functional original languages, rather than the evolutionary idea of words branching out from a single grunt. Before "God" meant "God" what word would have meant "God", and should we then use it instead, or try to find out its etymology? Or if English indeed has lost the word that truly means "God", what word should be used instead from a different language?
About pronouncing the Holy Name, the qere was to indicate what was to be said aloud when reading the k'tiv, and followed the tradition of not saying the Name aloud. I believe the Scriptures were preserved in every jot and tittle, as Christ said, and so when it says that the Name was spoken I believe it. The tradition of not speaking it has been used, as others here have greatly shown, to condemn the innocent, so for this reason I do not follow this tradition, as Yeshua' also did not follow the otherwise innocent precautionary tradition of washing one's hands before eating.
The use of "Kuriou" in Greek I think was because it was not word for word quotation, and because that was the general Greek translation of the Name. A principle of reading the Bible is that generally references are not word for word, as we would today put in quotes, but instead were as we would say: "The Bible says God made the world." The statement is true, though those words in that order do not appear in the Bible (whereas it would not be true if the words were placed in quotation marks).
We have good examples of non-word-for-word quotation in the four Gospels in the different wording of what Christ says. For example, "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" are used interchangeably. Similarly the word "Kuriou" may have been used more often in quoting than a transliteration or more literal translation (and perhaps for the same reason this word was chosen to replace the Name in reading the Scriptures aloud).
It also seems that a more literal translation in Greek may not have been grammatically feasible, especially not carrying the reverence which the Name had, and "Kuriou" in Greek was thus used because the reverence it carried in Greek was prioritized over something closer to "The Eternally Existent One". Esperanto uses "Eternulo": "Eternal One": being a constructed language it could place the appropriate degree of reverence on a more literal term.
The vowels in the pronunciation of the Name are of course not those of the qere, but have been preserved in other ways, such as transliteration in other language's writing systems, and in some descriptions of the Name. The common and God-accepted practice of incorporating the Name into common proper names also supports pronouncing the Name aloud, and even seems to encourage us, rather than not saying the Name to keep it holy, to keep our lives holy instead, and to have God in every thought.
The Hebrew word "El" is also used to refer to God and to false gods and even to high rulers (Elohim is used as the plural of "false gods" as well as to refer to the supreme God). Most languages I would say have a word that applies to any deity, probably no languages have only words that exclusively refer to a specific deity.
It is possible that the word "God" has no etymology: that it is a morphing of one of the original Indo-european words. After all it is the biblical account that assumes fully functional original languages, rather than the evolutionary idea of words branching out from a single grunt. Before "God" meant "God" what word would have meant "God", and should we then use it instead, or try to find out its etymology? Or if English indeed has lost the word that truly means "God", what word should be used instead from a different language?
About pronouncing the Holy Name, the qere was to indicate what was to be said aloud when reading the k'tiv, and followed the tradition of not saying the Name aloud. I believe the Scriptures were preserved in every jot and tittle, as Christ said, and so when it says that the Name was spoken I believe it. The tradition of not speaking it has been used, as others here have greatly shown, to condemn the innocent, so for this reason I do not follow this tradition, as Yeshua' also did not follow the otherwise innocent precautionary tradition of washing one's hands before eating.
The use of "Kuriou" in Greek I think was because it was not word for word quotation, and because that was the general Greek translation of the Name. A principle of reading the Bible is that generally references are not word for word, as we would today put in quotes, but instead were as we would say: "The Bible says God made the world." The statement is true, though those words in that order do not appear in the Bible (whereas it would not be true if the words were placed in quotation marks).
We have good examples of non-word-for-word quotation in the four Gospels in the different wording of what Christ says. For example, "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" are used interchangeably. Similarly the word "Kuriou" may have been used more often in quoting than a transliteration or more literal translation (and perhaps for the same reason this word was chosen to replace the Name in reading the Scriptures aloud).
It also seems that a more literal translation in Greek may not have been grammatically feasible, especially not carrying the reverence which the Name had, and "Kuriou" in Greek was thus used because the reverence it carried in Greek was prioritized over something closer to "The Eternally Existent One". Esperanto uses "Eternulo": "Eternal One": being a constructed language it could place the appropriate degree of reverence on a more literal term.
The vowels in the pronunciation of the Name are of course not those of the qere, but have been preserved in other ways, such as transliteration in other language's writing systems, and in some descriptions of the Name. The common and God-accepted practice of incorporating the Name into common proper names also supports pronouncing the Name aloud, and even seems to encourage us, rather than not saying the Name to keep it holy, to keep our lives holy instead, and to have God in every thought.
Glad you pointed that out. Old English, High German, and old norse/goth have a generic word that means deity.
The old Norse word for deity is ǫ́ss or plural Æsir the plural is in refrence to the pantheon
Old English it is ōs (plural ēse) denoting a deity
The Old High German for deity is ans, plural ensî.
The Old English term ōs (áss) which means deity was never adopted into Christianity. They opted for a title that was a corrupted form of a word from High German which is a corrupted form of a word used for the supreme deity of all the Æsir.
If you read some of the oldest old Enlish pagan writings when the are taliking about deities it's not the word god they are using but ōs.
kurios/Adonai/lord are titles not words for deity.
Yes when we say them we know who we are speaking about. It's like using the titles such as El Shadai.
Yes in Hebrew El is used for the Generic word deity.
In Latin the generic word for deity is Deus.
In Greek θεότητα (theótita) is the generic word for deity.
Strongs usage is
theotés: deity
Original Word: θεότης, ητος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: theotés
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-ot'-ace)
Definition: deity
Once again I would like to point out the Old English generic word for deity is ōs not god.
To me the word god is just another Christmas tree. You can decorated however you want to. It do sent make it holy or His name.
This is Wikipedia so believe what you will. It has some of the meat I've gotten from actually doing the work and tracing the the etymology down.
Some variant forms of the name Odin such as the Lombardic Godan may point in the direction that the Lombardic form actually comes from Proto-Germanic*ǥuđánaz. Wōdanaz or Wōđinaz is the reconstructed Proto-Germanic name of a god of Germanic paganism, known as Odin in Norse mythology, Wōden in Old English, Wodan or Wotan in Old High German and Godan in the Lombardic language. Godan was shortened to God over time and was adopted/retained by the Germanic peoples of the British isles as the name of their deity, in lieu of the Latin word Deus used by the Latin speaking Christian church, after conversion to Christianity.
During the complex christianization of the Germanic tribes of Europe, there were many linguistic influences upon the Christian missionaries. One example post downfall of the western Roman Empire are the missionaries from Rome led by Augustine of Canterbury. Augustine's mission to the Saxons in southern Britain was conducted at a time when the city of Rome was a part of a Lombardic kingdom. The translated Bibles which they brought on their mission were greatly influenced by the Germanic tribes they were in contact with, chief among them being the Lombards and Franks. The translation for the word deusof the Latin Bible was influenced by the then current usage by the tribes for their highest deity, namely Wodan by Angles, Saxons, and Franks of north-central and western Europe, and Godan by the Lombards of south-central Europe around Rome. There are many instances where the name Godan and Wodan are contracted to God and Wod.[2] One instance is the wild hunt (a.k.a. Wodan's wild hunt) where Wod is used.[3][4]
The earliest uses of the word God in Germanic writing is often cited to be in the Gothic Bible or Wulfila Bible, which is the Christian Bible as translated by Ulfilasinto the Gothic language spoken by the Eastern Germanic, or Gothic, tribes. The oldest parts of the Gothic Bible, contained in the Codex Argenteus, is estimated to be from the fourth century. During the fourth century, the Goths were converted to Christianity, largely through the efforts of Bishop Ulfilas, who translated the Bible into the Gothic language in Nicopolis ad Istrum in today's northern Bulgaria. The words guda and guþ were used for God in the Gothic Bible.
Last edited: