Why Jews don't say the sacred name of G-d & Maybe nobody should

[rockfox]

observe one cultural sensitivity they fly off the handle

If your behavior reliably causes people to fly off the handle you might want to think about that harder.

You keep plying this poor me innocence pose but I'm not buying it. It was an attempt to change/control the culture here in this forum. You get reactions like that because we in the west are getting quite fed up with guests in our places expecting us to modify our culture to suit their tastes. There is no end to that.

made up stories fill its pages, just like our savior often made up stories in true Rabbinical fashion to prove a point.

Now that's a horse of a different color. Christ didn't make up stories about named people in scripture.

 

[IshChayil]

If your behavior reliably causes people to fly off the handle you might want to think about that harder.
...You get reactions like that because we in the west are getting quite fed up with guests in our places expecting us to modify our culture to suit their tastes. There is no end to that.

Tell it to the prophets.
Or even better, take a look at the responses to your posts historically... time to work on that eye-beam, work it...regarding who is a guest where. You are a guest here in this Messianic/Hebrew Roots forum rock. You're the guest, not I. So how about practicing a bit of what you're preaching.

You keep plying this poor me innocence pose but I'm not buying it. It was an attempt to change/control the culture here in this forum. You get reactions like that because we in the west are getting quite fed up with guests in our places expecting us to modify our culture to suit their tastes. There is no end to that.

Now that's a horse of a different color. Christ didn't make up stories about named people in scripture.

So @Kevin (since you liked Rockfox's comment) it is your belief that all of "Christs stories" are meant to be interpreted as actually having happened?

 

[Nikud]

The Samaritan pronunciation Jabe of the Divine name. Inserting the vowels of Jabe into the original Hebrew consonant text, we obtain the form Yah-weh, which has been generally accepted by some modern scholars as the true pronunciation of the Divine name.

"The tendency to retract the tone from the final syllable is even stronger after wāw consec. than in the jussive."
Gesenius, F. W. (1910). Gesenius’ Hebrew grammar. (E. Kautzsch & S. A. E. Cowley, Eds.) (2d English ed., p. 133). Oxford: Clarendon Press

Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm Gesenius is credited, among other things, with the reconstructed pronunciation of Yah-weh. He used a reference from a Cathloic Preist that this is what the Samaritans call God. He then went on to point out that the word is a derivited of Jove (Jupiter) and that the Latins and Hebrews got the name from an Eygptian deity. So acording to the man who reconstructed the name Yah-weh it means Jupiter.

There is no mention of Torah observance to enter the New Jerusalem. All who believe will be in the world

I did not say that. Please don't twist what I say. I was speaking of being a preist in The Kingdom, provided scripture, if you would have read it you would have known. You then would not have had to try and correct me or would have had to come up with another a reason to correct me.

So @Kevin (since you liked Rockfox's comment) it is your belief that all of "Christs stories" are meant to be interpreted as actually having happened?

The certain rich man was Caiaphas The High Preist dressed on fine purple linen who had recently died. Who had 5 brothers, was well versed in Moses and the Prophets and like other Pharasse ignored what they wrote.

Do I beleive the others were based off real events and people? Yes. The truth is more effective than invented stories. The difference between scripture and mythology.

 

[Cap]

Interesting thing to me is that God's Spirit is said to be as the wind, or breath.

If you breath in and breath out and think the name Yah weh as you breath, it appears we say God's name every time we breath and for as long as we breath. No wonder we can't say it, it's in the breath we make.

 

[Mojo]

You get reactions like that because we in the west are getting quite fed up with guests in our places expecting us to modify our culture to suit their tastes.

I'm not taking a side here, but let's remember that this is not a generic page in the forum. This conversation is specifically in Hebrew Roots/Messianics. The conversations are intended for those of that persuasion to not get into heated debates over their beliefs with others who don't worship in that way and vice versa. It's why this section exists. They should be able to debate amongst themselves all they want regarding issues specifically to Messianics/Hebrew Roots.

 

[IshChayil]

... I did not at all originally realize that you were referring to my much-earlier use of the name of G-d that starts with the letter 'Y.' I had no clue. ...

Sorry I didn't see this post until now because I had clicked "ignore" on your posts but a friend pointed out to me that you are older than I am. I hadn't realized this so now you are unblocked and
I whole-heartedly forgive you (as I would have also done had I realized you had apologized in a Private messages). Perhaps they were sent after I had clicked "ignore"? Our previous PMs didnt have any apology from one another.
I thought in our PM back and forth I had made it clear what we were talking about (the proper name of God). I've seen this pattern before in ministry. The enemy will use his favorite weapon, confusion.
There's a lot of evidence that was present in those discussions. Even the Admin originally thought everything was the opposite of what it was until I pointed out he should reread. So was a moderator.
Since then I have adjusted my use of "God" on these forums to be sure that there is no confusion.
At any rate, all is forgiven; you are a big man for apologizing publicly in such a humble way and I solute you for it. Also, I am sorry for disrespecting you as my elder. I truly thought we were the same age.

Also, I think I had inadvertently annoyed you by labeling the translation of "angled appendage" for traditional "rib" of Adam, you were using "absurd" or something like that.
I did not consider how attacking a translation someone liked might make that person feel (especially if it's a favored translation or something) but I should have because a year ago I hurt someone's feelings by bashing the King James version. I really mean it when I complain about the medium. If you'd heard the tone in spoken speech the way I intended when I made my request to not say the name of God, you never would have felt publicly shamed.
Additionally, my state of mind was not good when you responded regarding the shame and others piled on me (there are some I have noticed who just wait and if there's a conflict pile on).
I probably responded in the flesh in a harsher manner than I would have liked as a result of the dog-pile.
So I apologize for making you feel shame in the first place; ironically and hypocritically this is a big no-no in my culture to embarrass another person.
Then when we started arguing about it I suggested maybe it was the Holy Spirit making you feel the shame for the manner of your response. Surely that compounded your embarrassment.
I'm sorry. Maybe I can share how I am habitually embarrassed by my atrocious spelling errors in English. Also, my attack on the translation you used was not ever meant to be an attack on you personally; just on the translation! God bless you for reaching out.
Also, thank you for writing "Y." just now, just the letter. That was very considerate. Blessed are the peace makers!

 

[rockfox]

I'm not taking a side here, but let's remember that this is not a generic page in the forum. This conversation is specifically in Hebrew Roots/Messianics. The conversations are intended for those of that persuasion to not get into heated debates over their beliefs with others who don't worship in that way and vice versa. It's why this section exists. They should be able to debate amongst themselves all they want regarding issues specifically to Messianics/Hebrew Roots.

I know, but I'm not criticizing his worship or even his choice not to say some name. Is it not on topic in this thread to discuss the hows and whys of why people react as they do, in direct response to Ish's statement, when they are told " Maybe nobody should"? That would seem to be pertenant to the subject at hand.

Or is this a safe space where Torah keepers shall not be criticized or contradicted about anything whatsoever no matter how they assail others? Is 'I keep Torah and you don't' insulate one from critique of ones actions or ideas no matter how unrelated to Torah keeping?

If so, I'd ask why this is even a public forum and not an invite-online private area.

So @Kevin (since you liked Rockfox's comment) it is your belief that all of "Christs stories" are meant to be interpreted as actually having happened?

That's not actually what I was saying. What I was trying to convey is it's one thing to make up a generic story about a woman looking for a coin she dropped, that's akin to telling folk tales about foxes trying to get grapes. It's another to make up a story about Abraham that you know didn't happen.

 

[Nikud]

Or is this a safe space where Torah keepers shall not be criticized or contradicted about anything whatsoever no matter how they assail others?

It was originally supose to be a part of the form for those who want to learn about and follow Torah to be able to ask questions without those who despise and depicted His laws as bondage and slavery from interrupting them from learning from other Torah Observers. It was ment to bridge the gaps between those of us who observe Torah. Many TO tried not to post anything about the Law or things contradictory to Greco-Roman faithful on the other parts of the Forum because the GR said that they should not have to be offended by TO. So it was kind of created to give the GR as safe place forum from the TO, segration to a different part of the forum to avoid offending GR faithful. That didnt last long as The GR folks came to this part, a part they knew they were in disagreement with for one purpose, picking a fight. So the purpose of this part of the forum failed. Like the rest of the Forum it's far from its original purpose.

On a side note I may disagree with the applications of Torah in the lives of believers from @IshChayil and others here, aswell as the use of traditions as a way for TO believers express their faith but respect his choice to apply them in his life. My problem is when others are told they should be applying them to their lives or that they confer rightouesness. The traditions of the Sages such as which shoe your supose to put on first Or that you are forbidden to pray uncovered have no place in a persons life who is trying to solely live by the word of God. Traditions that are presented as God's instructions or that go against the written word of God should not be followed.
Tradition should never be mistaken for Torah.

 

[Mojo]

You are a guest here in this Messianic/Hebrew Roots forum rock. You're the guest, not I. So how about practicing a bit of what you're preaching.

Since I am new to this moderator position, I will confer with the other mods as to how to bring resolution to this matter, but, for now, all need to understand that this section of the forum is OPEN to all and is not a closed section of the forum. All are welcome to contribute.

However, the main intent of this section, as @Kevin has explained, is to allow free flow of Messianics and Torah Keepers to discuss their specific flavor of the Faith without fear of criticism for that perspective. It also allows them a place to display their views and let others learn from those exchanges.

In addition, to my recollection, this section was also set up to prevent some of the more zealous Torah keepers from interjecting and hurling superiority claims to the non Torah keepers in the rest of the forum.

It's a gentlemens agreement to keep these areas open to all while being respectful of our differences. That applies to all.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Tell it to the prophets.
Or even better, take a look at the responses to your posts historically... time to work on that eye-beam, work it...regarding who is a guest where. You are a guest here in this Messianic/Hebrew Roots forum rock. You're the guest, not I. So how about practicing a bit of what you're preaching.


So @Kevin (since you liked Rockfox's comment) it is your belief that all of "Christs stories" are meant to be interpreted as actually having happened?

As I'm generally in sympathy with your over all point in the latter portions of this thread (how's that for a qualification that leaves multiple avenues of escape), I want to say thag I do believe that the parables Jesus told were realized in the physical world. He is the Word. When He speaks creation happens. If they hadn't of.l happened when He spoke them then His Words would have called them in to existence. The voice that uttered "Let there be light" is the voice that dictates reality. His Words define and sustain it. If Jesus spoke it then I believe it was true on every level. ObvioeI can't back this up directly from scripture, just like I can't show that Paul was the rich young ruler, but I believe it none the less.

 

[Mojo]

As I'm generally in sympathy with your over all point in the latter portions of this thread (how's that for a qualification that leaves multiple avenues of escape), I want to say thag I do believe that the parables Jesus told were realized in the physical world. He is the Word. When He speaks creation happens. If they hadn't of.l happened when He spoke them then His Words would have called them in to existence. The voice that uttered "Let there be light" is the voice that dictates reality. His Words define and sustain it. If Jesus spoke it then I believe it was true on every level. ObvioeI can't back this up directly from scripture, just like I can't show that Paul was the rich young ruler, but I believe it none the less.

Seems a bit mystical from such a literalist. Are you going through a midlife crisis?

 

[Cap]

Seems a bit mystical from such a literalist. Are you going through a midlife crisis?

Shhhh! The potion is working.

(I'm blocked so he can't see this.)

 

[IshChayil]

It was originally supose to be a part of the form for those who want to learn about and follow Torah to be able to ask questions without those who despise and depicted His laws as bondage and slavery from interrupting them from learning from other Torah Observers. It was ment to bridge the gaps between those of us who observe Torah. Many TO tried not to post anything about the Law or things contradictory to Greco-Roman faithful on the other parts of the Forum because the GR said that they should not have to be offended by TO. So it was kind of created to give the GR as safe place forum from the TO, segration to a different part of the forum to avoid offending GR faithful. That didnt last long as The GR folks came to this part, a part they knew they were in disagreement with for one purpose, picking a fight. So the purpose of this part of the forum failed. Like the rest of the Forum it's far from its original purpose.

Well put, you read my mind. I wanted to explain to rockfox that it was the rest of the site that was being protected by the creation of this area; that was the "safe-space" so it's a bit rich to see it projected on to us though the agreement was in return we torah-keepers could have our Torah focus over here without having to read stuff like "but the law was crucified on the cross" [eyes rolling].

...On a side note I may disagree with the applications of Torah in the lives of believers from @IshChayil and others here, aswell as the use of traditions as a way for TO believers express their faith but respect his choice to apply them in his life. My problem is when others are told they should be applying them to their lives or that they confer rightouesness. The traditions of the Sages such as which shoe your supose to put on first Or that you are forbidden to pray uncovered have no place in a persons life who is trying to solely live by the word of God. Traditions that are presented as God's instructions or that go against the written word of God should not be followed.
Tradition should never be mistaken for Torah.

The which foot goes first in the shoe is a favorite anti-Jewish topic to bring up (as is the washing of hands). The thing is Kevin, none of those traditions are imposed on non-Jews, while respect for the name Y. is; so why bring up the absurd unrelated traditions?

The one you mention specifically doesn't even get applied to all Jews. Brother you are seemingly picking out the most absurd of our teachings and throwing them out there for public consumption as if they represent the teachings on weighty matters. [they are also not new criticisms, it seems like they are coming from the textbook criticism of our traditions as this same handful of criticisms I've heard brought up number of times through the years.]. Do you see what I mean? Discussing what it means to "make His name Holy (set apart etc)" while combining the recorded practice of Yeshua the Messiah having never said it that we know of, is a far cry from "you have to put this foot in the shoe first". Elaborating a mitzvah in how to apply it is on a different plane than a low level tachanah.
I also agree with you about the which foot first silliness by the way. I hope you can see how it seems you are perhaps accidentally, unfairly representing Jewish teachings when you pick out little things like which shoe comes first when we say the modeh-ani vs weighty issues like "how to write the name of God in a torah scroll", etc?
If you do want to have a further discussion about your new opinions regarding Jewish culture, the midrash, the talmud, etc. maybe you can make a separate thread here about that and we can discuss over there.
I feel the Sacred Name of God thread is very important and many have adjusted there behavior regarding God's sacred name Y. as a result of the deep thought and effort put into this thread and many contributions by others .
I don't want to water it down any more with bickering about unrelated issues.
Not saying the name of God has been church Gentile tradition and Jewish tradition for centuries and centuries (perhaps incorrectly). But if you look at my original list of reasons, I did not lean much on Jewish tradition at all but on things like "it's nowhere in the entire New Testament, Yeshua taught us how to pray and he said we should say "abba"... etc."
I think my strongest arguments about not using the sacred name in daily/mundane speech (outside of prayer and praise specifically) had nothing to do with tradition so chopping away at Jewish traditions won't really deal with the force of my argument.

Thanks

 

[IshChayil]

...It's another to make up a story about Abraham that you know didn't happen.

Well Rock, folks did that in ancient cultures (and some of them may not be "made up").
It was common to "story-tell". Some of the stories about the heads of the various tribes have them defeating entire armies and such, really far-fetched stuff but it's not so fair for 21st century rationalists to criticize the culture for doing what all cultures do; story tell. I'm rather glad that the midrash did not make it into the Hebrew bible in the same way that the possible midrash of the adulterous woman did eventually make it into the Greek bible; at least according to the accepted opinion among bible scholars and the UBS.
Heck, Americans today tell their kids there's a guy Santa Claus and he has magic, and there's a bunny who lays colored eggs to celebrate the (Pagan) holiday of Ishtar aka "Easter".
I'm not so sure it's terrible to pass on stories about Abraham and the others which teach a lesson to kids and may at times be true. At the very least they show us what the ancients were concerned about (great midrashes about the nephalim and Noah, etc). Sometimes extra-biblical texts can tell us volumes about what New Testament writers were thinking about/had on their minds. I know you're not a fan of Jewish culture but attacking story-telling which is considered by the culture to be that; isn't gonna help much in this discussion about the sacred name of God.

As long as we separate midrash from bible, as is the norm, I don't see the harm of continuing the tradition of parable usage as our savior used it quite masterfully. (I'm just agreeing to disagree with Kev and Zec regarding all of Yeshua's parables being actual events; I don't think my position is far off to assume they weren't real events as that's the general evangelical, Pentecostal, and orthodox position. I could be wrong of course just saying it's not some zany position to have...)

 

[steve]

As I'm generally in sympathy with your over all point in the latter portions of this thread (how's that for a qualification that leaves multiple avenues of escape), I want to say thag I do believe that the parables Jesus told were realized in the physical world. He is the Word. When He speaks creation happens. If they hadn't of.l happened when He spoke them then His Words would have called them in to existence. The voice that uttered "Let there be light" is the voice that dictates reality. His Words define and sustain it. If Jesus spoke it then I believe it was true on every level. ObvioeI can't back this up directly from scripture, just like I can't show that Paul was the rich young ruler, but I believe it none the less.

I’m kind of with you, totally with you on the stories not being fables.
I come from the idea that he didn’t tell untruths. If he said “A certain man......’, then he was telling that man’s story. A story that had actually occurred.
To me it’s that simple.

 

[steve]

As long as we separate midrash from bible, as is the norm, I don't see the harm of continuing the tradition of parable usage as our savior used it quite masterfully.

It’s not a major sticking point with me if he was using made up situations, I might be holding him to a position that he doesn’t want in my belief about untrue vs true stories.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Seems a bit mystical from such a literalist. Are you going through a midlife crisis?

You can't be a literalist and not admit the all encompassing majesty of God. And that can look pretty mystical.

 

[Keith Martin]

You can't be a literalist and not admit the all encompassing majesty of God. And that can look pretty mystical.

Amen, my friend.

 

[Nikud]

The which foot goes first in the shoe is a favorite anti-Jewish topic to bring up (as is the washing of hands). The thing is Kevin, none of those traditions are imposed on non-Jews, while respect for the name Y. is; so why bring up the absurd unrelated traditions?

Not an anti Jewish topic I know many who oppose such traditions being imposed on them. I was showing that it's the traditions such as these that I'm in opposition to.

 

[IshChayil]

I’m kind of with you, totally with you on the stories not being fables.
I come from the idea that he didn’t tell untruths. If he said “A certain man......’, then he was telling that man’s story. A story that had actually occurred.
To me it’s that simple.

Well this is new to me so that's good. I hadn't run across folks who thought his parables were intended to be actual events.
I had always assumed the virgins waiting for the bridegroom and such were general allegory; that's not the same as an untruth especially in a culture where parable-telling to make lessons memorable in an age without easy access to books was a very useful didactic method.
So while I'm opening up to the idea that Yeshua's various parables which always seemed to me just to be standard rabbinical fashion as was the norm in his day (since none of the crowd say "what is this weird teaching form you are using") may at times have been specific, it's a little too far I think to imply if that's not the case then it's a lie.
I guess the innovation you, Zek, and Kev are proposing was that Yeshua, while telling parables in the same fashion as the rabbis of his day did to teach, added the extra element of them being actual true events right?
Let's just be careful not to box ourselves in considering if there's a parable which didn't map to an actual event, making that out to be a lie or something.
I'm curious how flexible we can be with this. So when he says "a certain man" I can see where we may want to nail that down; not all of his parables come down to us this way though.
Some seem very generalized like the virgins waiting for the bridegroom (some will say that's the church, etc. interpretations abound). There are many "the kingdom of heaven is like" parables.