I know this category is called word studies and names are not words but God is not a name it is a title. Why or how did the original Word (bible) of Yahweh ever get watered down to using His title instead of His name? Some of this confusion has become a problem with those who don't study the Word of Yahweh. When I am speaking to those of the ET persuasion they seem to be confused as to how Yahweh and Yashua can both be God and yet be separate as in Father and Son are two entities who have the same title with one train of thought. When I am confronted with people of the ET persuasion way of thinking I always try to explain that God is not a name it is only a title. There are many gods in this world and we separate their authority by using an upper case letter for Yahweh and a lower case for all of the other gods. My point is that when we speak of our Father Yahweh and His Son Yashua we are speaking of God not god. This generic title of god has many in ET confused which leads them into all sorts of false doctrines. I would prefer to use a translation that uses all of the proper names of Yahweh than using His generic title in place of His name.
With all this said does anyone else see this as one of our hurdles to overcome when speaking with ETers?
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 05, 2013, 11:51:41 PM
I know this category is called word studies and names are not words but God is not a name it is a title. Why or how did the original Word (bible) of Yahweh ever get watered down to using His title instead of His name? Some of this confusion has become a problem with those who don't study the Word of Yahweh. When I am speaking to those of the ET persuasion they seem to be confused as to how Yahweh and Yashua can both be God and yet be separate as in Father and Son are two entities who have the same title with one train of thought. When I am confronted with people of the ET persuasion way of thinking I always try to explain that God is not a name it is only a title. There are many gods in this world and we separate their authority by using an upper case letter for Yahweh and a lower case for all of the other gods. My point is that when we speak of our Father Yahweh and His Son Yashua we are speaking of God not god. This generic title of god has many in ET confused which leads them into all sorts of false doctrines. I would prefer to use a translation that uses all of the proper names of Yahweh than using His generic title in place of His name.
With all this said does anyone else see this as one of our hurdles to overcome when speaking with ETers?
:iagree:
We should use their proper names. I wonder, thought, if it is necessary to use the original pronunciations of their names, or if it is ok to use their modern English equivilents, like "Jesus" or "Jehovah?"
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 05, 2013, 11:51:41 PM
I know this category is called word studies and names are not words but God is not a name it is a title. Why or how did the original Word (bible) of Yahweh ever get watered down to using His title instead of His name? Some of this confusion has become a problem with those who don't study the Word of Yahweh. When I am speaking to those of the ET persuasion they seem to be confused as to how Yahweh and Yashua can both be God and yet be separate as in Father and Son are two entities who have the same title with one train of thought. When I am confronted with people of the ET persuasion way of thinking I always try to explain that God is not a name it is only a title. There are many gods in this world and we separate their authority by using an upper case letter for Yahweh and a lower case for all of the other gods. My point is that when we speak of our Father Yahweh and His Son Yashua we are speaking of God not god. This generic title of god has many in ET confused which leads them into all sorts of false doctrines. I would prefer to use a translation that uses all of the proper names of Yahweh than using His generic title in place of His name.
With all this said does anyone else see this as one of our hurdles to overcome when speaking with ETers?
I think names are words, bro. I study the Concordant Version which uses the Hebrew names in the Hebrew scriptures, but the Greek "theos" is translated "God." That corresponds to the Hebrew "El, Eloah, Elohim." When I first became aware of the Hebrew names and titles, I thought it would be better to use them too, but I use either now. I understand why your "ET" folks get confused. I think the word "God" and the word "Deity" are things folks continuously debate due to the special nature of Christ having a spirit Father and a human mother.
My answer to your question is that I just explain that "god" simply means subjector. That's why "elohim" can also mean human subjectors and false gods.
"Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, that 'I say you are gods'?" (John 10:34
"34 The term "gods" is translated "judges" in Ex.21:6, 22:8-9, where it refers to men. But our Lord does not appeal to this, but to Psalm 82:6 where the context clearly excludes men. The mighty spiritual powers of the past who overrule the affairs of mankind are called sons by God Himself. Even Satan is called a son of God (Job1:6). He is called the god of this eon (2Co.4:4). Now if God said to these subjectors, "Gods are you," notwithstanding the fact that they failed to right the wrongs of earth, how much rather shall He have called Him God Who shall dispossess them? To Him God says (Psa.82:8) :
Rise, O God! Judge the earth,
For Thou shalt be allotted all nations.
He had been undoing the deeds of these sons of God and doing all that was foretold of Him before their very eyes. And yet they thought they were not blind!" (Concordant Commentary on the New Testament page 158)
"For even if so be that there are those being termed gods, whether in heaven or on earth, even as there are many gods and many lords, nevertheless for us there is one God, the Father, out of Whom all is, and we for Him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through Whom all is, and we through Him." (1 Corinthians 8:5,6)
http://concordant.org/expohtml/GodAndChrist/names.html
http://concordant.org/expohtml/GodAndChrist/index.html
[attachment deleted by admin]
Quote from: jbertonbounds on September 06, 2013, 12:57:44 AM
We should use their proper names. I wonder, thought, if it is necessary to use the original pronunciations of their names,
For me the main importance of the original names is that the names have a meaning that's lost in English. I think we are unable to pronounce many Hebrew names.
Quoteor if it is ok to use their modern English equivilents, like "Jesus" or "Jehovah?"
If your neighbor's name is Fred would you call him Henry?
Yehoshua means "Yah saves"
--> Yah is shorthand for Yaweh
--> Be aware the original Hebrew only had consonants; which gives odd 'linking' words.
Yehoshua transliterated in Greek is Iesous
Iesous transliterated into Latin is Jesu
Jesu transliterated into English is Jesus.
The problem is that in each transliteration step some error is added. A bit of the original sound is lost. If you are bilingual try to transliterate some names yourself. Often next to impossible.
So we have Yehoshua, Iesous, Jesu and Jesus which all are
supposed to sound similar in each language. That, imo, means each language needs their own transliteration of the original Hebrew name.
Jesus is transliterated through 3 steps from Yehoshua.
I think the English name Joshua is much closer than Jesus.
On top of all of that I doubt that even the best Hebrew scholar knows how Father's name was pronounced by Adam, Noah and Moses.
My good friend Lomarah has shown me that: Father and Daddy are perhaps the greatest respectful names that we can use to refer to our Loving Spiritual Father.
Perhaps the reason we do not know the correct pronunciation of Fathers proper name is no accident. I don't call my "physical" father by his first name either.
Just a thought.
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
I agree with WW in that if a translation does not go back to the original source more mistakes are made each building on the past mistakes.
Makes me think of the game called post office. First person tells second a story and it is passed in secret all the way to the last person. The more people the more error that occurs and by the time the last person hears the story it usually sounds quite different from the original. King James was a king and therefore he and his accomplices had an agenda which is clear to anyone with discernment that control of the masses was built into their translation. Once the error has been excepted by the people it continues to be perpetrated and built on with even more error.
A clear translation would bring some back from generations of error, that is not to say all. I am confronted daily with "Christians" who would prefer to believe the error over the truth.
Quote from: JulieTang84 on September 06, 2013, 03:01:28 PM
My good friend Lomarah has shown me that: Father and Daddy are perhaps the greatest respectful names that we can use to refer to our Loving Spiritual Father.
All fine and true but that's not what the thread is about. It's my guess nobody on this forum opposes the 'name' Father.
Considering Father's name is part of many Hebrew names I think it can't just be ignored/replaced by Father.
http://tentmaker.org/forum/lounge/what-is-his-name/msg66174/#msg66174
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O0FnHl6hOTE
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/acrostic_bible_code_Adam-Abraham.jpg)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide1-bible_names_small.JPG)
Some, imo, evidence names have importance.
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide2-bible_names_small.JPG)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide3-bible_names_small.JPG)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide4-bible_names_small.JPG)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide5-bible_names_small.JPG)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide6-bible_names_small.JPG)
(http://www.bible-codes.org/images/Slide7-bible_names_small.JPG)
I see men as written epistle's,written of the finger of God. :dsunny:
El Shaddai (Lord God Almighty)
El Elyon (The Most High God)
Adonai (Lord, Master)
Yahweh (Lord, Jehovah)
Jehovah Nissi (The Lord My Banner)
Jehovah-Raah (The Lord My Shepherd)
Jehovah Rapha (The Lord That Heals)
Jehovah Shammah (The Lord Is There)
Jehovah Tsidkenu (The Lord Our Righteousness)
Jehovah Mekoddishkem (The Lord Who Sanctifies You)
El Olam (The Everlasting God)
Elohim (God)
Qanna (Jealous)
Jehovah Jireh (The Lord Will Provide)
Jehovah Shalom (The Lord Is Peace)
Jehovah Sabaoth (The Lord of Hosts)
The Hebrew "olam" seems to correspond to the Greek "aion" literally translated "eon."
[attachment deleted by admin]
Does anyone find it a little interesting that YHWH is never used once in the NT? NONE of the manuscripts that we have have that name used. Jesus says God and Father, Paul, Peter, John all fail to mention that name at all. I know WW believes that the NT was written in Hebrew, and so that may have had YHWH, but we have no early manuscripts to support that. So as it stands, as far as we can see that name was not used at all. :Chinscratch:
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 06, 2013, 05:31:22 PM
I agree with WW in that if a translation does not go back to the original source more mistakes are made each building on the past mistakes.
Makes me think of the game called post office. First person tells second a story and it is passed in secret all the way to the last person. The more people the more error that occurs and by the time the last person hears the story it usually sounds quite different from the original. King James was a king and therefore he and his accomplices had an agenda which is clear to anyone with discernment that control of the masses was built into their translation. Once the error has been excepted by the people it continues to be perpetrated and built on with even more error.
A clear translation would bring some back from generations of error, that is not to say all. I am confronted daily with "Christians" who would prefer to believe the error over the truth.
So if we were to use the Hebrew Roots Bible and insert the name YHWH wouldn't that be a guess, and not even a translation? To go back and add that name in when we have no evidence of its usage in the NT is not even the game of telephone (or post office), thats just plain guessing and interpolation.
What am I getting at here? I believe God is saying something here, by not using the tribal name given to the patriarchs of Israel. Saying I'm not just about the hebrews. I am God of the gentiles also. I believe its a message to the nations. I am not a tribal deity. I am not just Israels god. And its a message to the Jews, I am not yours to horde. I am larger than that. I don't dwell in temples built with human hands, you can't contain me.
Or maybe its all just a conspiracy by the RCC :)
BTW, the name given to Moses at the burning bush is not "I am that I am". It is "I will become what I will become". I believe that is a prophecy to what I just laid out. At that time He was seen as the God of midian, a god amongst other gods. But as the revelation progressed, their understanding of who God really is got bigger and bigger. And finally to encompass all the other gods, that God is, and there is no other. And so He chose to use the generic title theos, and the intimate abba.
Quote from: redhotmagma on September 07, 2013, 03:06:13 AM
Does anyone find it a little interesting that YHWH is never used once in the NT? NONE of the manuscripts that we have have that name used. Jesus says God and Father, Paul, Peter, John all fail to mention that name at all. I know WW believes that the NT was written in Hebrew, and so that may have had YHWH, but we have no early manuscripts to support that. So as it stands, as far as we can see that name was not used at all. :Chinscratch:Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 06, 2013, 05:31:22 PM
I agree with WW in that if a translation does not go back to the original source more mistakes are made each building on the past mistakes.
Makes me think of the game called post office. First person tells second a story and it is passed in secret all the way to the last person. The more people the more error that occurs and by the time the last person hears the story it usually sounds quite different from the original. King James was a king and therefore he and his accomplices had an agenda which is clear to anyone with discernment that control of the masses was built into their translation. Once the error has been excepted by the people it continues to be perpetrated and built on with even more error.
A clear translation would bring some back from generations of error, that is not to say all. I am confronted daily with "Christians" who would prefer to believe the error over the truth.
So if we were to use the Hebrew Roots Bible and insert the name YHWH wouldn't that be a guess, and not even a translation? To go back and add that name in when we have no evidence of its usage in the NT is not even the game of telephone (or post office), thats just plain guessing and interpolation.
What am I getting at here? I believe God is saying something here, by not using the tribal name given to the patriarchs of Israel. Saying I'm not just about the hebrews. I am God of the gentiles also. I believe its a message to the nations. I am not a tribal deity. I am not just Israels god. And its a message to the Jews, I am not yours to horde. I am larger than that. I don't dwell in temples built with human hands, you can't contain me.
Or maybe its all just a conspiracy by the RCC :)
BTW, the name given to Moses at the burning bush is not "I am that I am". It is "I will become what I will become". I believe that is a prophecy to what I just laid out. At that time He was seen as the God of midian, a god amongst other gods. But as the revelation progressed, their understanding of who God really is got bigger and bigger. And finally to encompass all the other gods, that God is, and there is no other. And so He chose to use the generic title theos, and the intimate abba.
I think you're on to something there. We of the nations are one in spirit with the Jewish believers, but we are not part of their culture and don't speak their language. I understand the interest in the culture, but, since the risen Christ appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus, it has been known that we are saved in grace through faith apart from Hebrew law or culture. I know my name is different in different languages. So it figures that most names are including that of the creator of all. I've heard claims about the original New Testament being in Hebrew or Aramaic, but I think we have Greek manuscripts because that was almost a universal language at the time which would be necessary for evangelizing the nations. Despite the fact that there is a lot of guessing about the origin of the word "God," I don't think it's disrespectful to use it because that's the English word and I only speak U.S. English. Of course being an ex-Catholic, I wouldn't put it past Rome for including that in their conspiracy to distort the evangel as you suggested as a possibility maybe humorously, but, even if the "RCC" didn't distort the name, they sure distorted God's reputation with torture forever in fire. I've attached a file showing the English Concordant Version of the name "I Shall Come To Be."
[attachment deleted by admin]
In my defense RHM I would just like to give some examples of proper names being used instead of titles. My foreman at work has the name Rick and his title is foreman so should I just call him foreman or Rick. The CEO of the company I work for has the name Robert should I call him CEO instead of Robert? My best friend is business agent of my union local and his name is Russ so should I begin referring to him as BA. When I have a relationship with someone I usually call them by their name and not there title. Since my relationship with my Father is personal I just feel its more appropriate to call Him by His name as apposed to His title. But that's just me. :2c:
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 07, 2013, 06:02:21 AM
In my defense RHM I would just like to give some examples of proper names being used instead of titles. My foreman at work has the name Rick and his title is foreman so should I just call him foreman or Rick. The CEO of the company I work for has the name Robert should I call him CEO instead of Robert? My best friend is business agent of my union local and his name is Russ so should I begin referring to him as BA. When I have a relationship with someone I usually call them by their name and not there title. Since my relationship with my Father is personal I just feel its more appropriate to call Him by His name as apposed to His title. But that's just me. :2c:
Sorry Mpls, I wasn't really directing my comments at you, even though I quoted what you said, its a very common thought from the Hebrew Roots folks, which I've done some forum browsing with. It was something that had been brewing for a while, one of those conversations I've been having in my head.
I get the reasoning btw, its just one of those things that makes me say hmm...
Quote from: redhotmagma on September 07, 2013, 03:06:13 AM
Does anyone find it a little interesting that YHWH is never used once in the NT? NONE of the manuscripts that we have have that name used.
Pilate used it :LH:
John 19:19-20 (AKJV)
19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.
20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was near to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.
Yeshua
Ha Nasaret
Ve Melek
Ha Yehudim
INRI is an acronym of the Latin inscription 'IESVS·NAZARENVS·REX·IVDÆORVM' (Jesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum), which translates to English as "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews."
This was written as the "crime" that Jesus had committed on the top of the Cross and is mentioned in John 19: 19, although it was not just written in Latin (as the Romans, who spoke Latin, were the executioners), but we are told that it was also written in Hebrew (for the Jewish people to read) and Greek (which was the universal language of the whole Mediterranean area at that time - as there were many foreign visitors in Jerusalem at that time for the Feast of the Passover.
John 19: 19-22: 'Pilate wrote a title also and put it on the torture stake. It was written: "Jesus the Naz·a·rene´ the King of the Jews."
Therefore many of the Jews read this title, because the place where Jesus was impaled was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, in Latin, in Greek. However, the chief priests of the Jews began to say to Pilate: "Do not write 'The King of the Jews,' but that he said, 'I am King of the Jews.'" Pilate answered: "What I have written I have written."
Latin became the Language of the Roman Catholic Church. But, in Latin, they used the "I" for the Letter "J" (both in Jesus and Jews), their word for King was "REX", and they used the "V" for the "U" . So the sign would have been something like this one
IESVS NAZEREVS, REX IUDEA, Or using the first letters of each words: INRI
The final language on the sign was Hebrew which is the Jewish language. Now the first word was Yehoshuah (Jesus). The first letter of that is the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet. It is the little yod, which looks like an apostrophe. (Hebrew is read from right to left.) Yehoshuah and according to the Bible it was "Jesus the Nazarene." The next word was ha Nazarite. The next word would be "and," which is what we call a wha. It is like a little line with a hook on top. The next one would be the king of Jews Hamelech Yudio. What you had on the cross reading from right to left in the first letter, are the four letters of the Tetragrammaton YHWH. YHWH is the covenant name of God in the Old Testament Hebrew which did not have vowels (today we know this as Yahweh). In John 19:19-22 the chief Priests wanted Pilate to take the sign down because the sign recognized Jesus as Yahweh or God.
Quote from: redhotmagma on September 07, 2013, 03:06:13 AM
Does anyone find it a little interesting that YHWH is never used once in the NT? NONE of the manuscripts that we have have that name used. Jesus says God and Father, Paul, Peter, John all fail to mention that name at all. I know WW believes that the NT was written in Hebrew, and so that may have had YHWH, but we have no early manuscripts to support that. So as it stands, as far as we can see that name was not used at all. :Chinscratch:
The question is: How often we find it in the OT....
ALL Jews agree God has a real name and that name was given and written down.
At some point the name was no longer used because they were scared they would use it in vain.
So they started using TheName and similar things.
Check a Jewish forum and you will see the all spell G-d.
That's another trick. Purposely misspell God's name.
My point is that the NT was written by Jews.
If it was written in Hebrew they might have used the above mentioned 'trick' to obscure the name.
If it was later translated to Greek or originally written in Greek the name may be changed during that process.
I spam my post again: http://tentmaker.org/forum/lounge/what-is-his-name/msg66174/#msg66174
Just look at it: How many translations use those names?
If Jeremiah is changed into YirmeYAHU, how hard is it to imagine God's name is changed too/even more.
I think there is an additional reason. We discussed this before in another thread. Very often the OT is about the Son not the Father. Small but incomplete hints that the KJV uses are LORD and Lord. If so and we replace Jesus by Lord in the NT it suddenly looks more like the OT
/EDIT the mentioned thread. http://tentmaker.org/forum/lounge/god-has-a-solid-form/
Quote from: sheila on September 07, 2013, 12:59:37 AM
I see men as written epistle's,written of the finger of God. :dsunny:
I agree with this conclusion because of this:
Revelation 20
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
IMO the books are our personal records which will be weighed against the book of life
Yes,but be ever-mindful...that what is of the adversary is written in the dust[serpent shall eat dust all it's life]
Jer 17;13..Psalms 69;28. The corrupt image is always blotted out...all old man Adam/spirit of disobediance
as sin in flesh Gen 3;17-19.........I will put a new spirit in you and write my laws in your heart and mind[new creature]
as ALL men have bore the image of the corrupt one,so,too all men shall bear the image of the incorruptible one.
some men's works preced them to judgement..some follow.........
the old man of sin's works have preceded him to judgement[sin condemned in flesh of all men] written in the dust
the new man in the image of Christ[free gift of eternal life] works[wrought of God through new spirit dwelling in him and laws in
mind and heart written of God.]...his works follow him as written of the finger f God....sheep follow Him....for it is God[new spirit]
who causes you to will and do His good pleasure.
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 07, 2013, 03:46:10 PMI agree with this conclusion because of this:
Revelation 20
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
IMO the books are our personal records which will be weighed against the book of life
Are they standing in the river of life?
Rev 22:1 And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
I don't know where they are standing while there fate hangs in the balances. I do know that eventually we are all resurrected some to eternal life and others to judgement each in his own order. But where we stand during this process it not something I am certain about. One good guess is that we stand before the throne of Yahweh.
I have dyslexia :sigh:, so I cannot read all the replies to any post, especially the long ones, so I do not know what all has been said in this thread. However, I would like to address the OP with this statement, which is, of course, IMO:
I speak English. If the commonly accepted spelling and pronunciation of the name of the son of the true living god is "Jesus," then that is what I call him, because that is his name in my language. And if our father-god's name is Yahweh in English, then that's the language he has given me in which to speak his holy name. Our father understands our language barriers. He gave them to us. He knows our hearts, out of which we call on his name, whether we call him "God," "Yahweh," or "Yankie-Doodle." He does not hear our pronunciation of his name, he hears those calling out to him who call on whatever they understand his name to be in their language. He hears our heart's intentions. :HeartThrob:
Thank you for listening, brothers and sisters. I just needed to say that.
I am thankful, however, for those who share informative information (like in this thread and many others) with other people, in exchange for the knowledge, wisdom and understanding of others. That is to say, thanks to all of you who share your ideas and knowledge, which helps us corporately develop a better understanding of just who and what our father, Yahweh, is. :dsunny:
Quote from: jbertonbounds on September 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
I have dyslexia :sigh:, so I cannot read all the replies to any post, especially the long ones, so I do not know what all has been said in this thread. However, I would like to address the OP with this statement, which is, of course, IMO:
I speak English. If the commonly accepted spelling and pronunciation of the name of the son of the true living god is "Jesus," then that is what I call him, because that is his name in my language. And if our father-god's name is Yahweh in English, then that's the language he has given me in which to speak his holy name. Our father understands our language barriers. He gave them to us. He knows our hearts, out of which we call on his name, whether we call him "God," "Yahweh," or "Yankie-Doodle." He does not hear our pronunciation of his name, he hears those calling out to him who call on whatever they understand his name to be in their language. He hears our heart's intentions. :HeartThrob:
Thank you for listening, brothers and sisters. I just needed to say that.
I am thankful, however, for those who share informative information (like in this thread and many others) with other people, in exchange for the knowledge, wisdom and understanding of others. That is to say, thanks to all of you who share your ideas and knowledge, which helps us corporately develop a better understanding of just who and what our father, Yahweh, is. :dsunny:
jberton
I don't think anyone on this tread has said anything that apposes what you have just said. My only point was that "God" is only a generic title it is not His name. When you say God I know who you are referring to but Islam calls Allah god also so they may presume we are worshiping the same God or god. If you are speaking with with one who calls on the name of God they may need to be more specific in some instances. Its probably safe to assume at Tentmaker we can call Him by His title but outside of here you may want to be more specific. :2c:
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 05, 2013, 11:51:41 PM
I know this category is called word studies and names are not words but God is not a name it is a title. Why or how did the original Word (bible) of Yahweh ever get watered down to using His title instead of His name? Some of this confusion has become a problem with those who don't study the Word of Yahweh. When I am speaking to those of the ET persuasion they seem to be confused as to how Yahweh and Yashua can both be God and yet be separate as in Father and Son are two entities who have the same title with one train of thought. When I am confronted with people of the ET persuasion way of thinking I always try to explain that God is not a name it is only a title. There are many gods in this world and we separate their authority by using an upper case letter for Yahweh and a lower case for all of the other gods. My point is that when we speak of our Father Yahweh and His Son Yashua we are speaking of God not god. This generic title of god has many in ET confused which leads them into all sorts of false doctrines. I would prefer to use a translation that uses all of the proper names of Yahweh than using His generic title in place of His name.
With all this said does anyone else see this as one of our hurdles to overcome when speaking with ETers?
This is an interesting query. I've discussed God's name with quite a few people. I have a somewhat different take, so if this is not what you mean I am sorry and ask your forgiveness and indulgence.
As a Christian, over the years, I've come to see a few things about relationships. Sometimes when the relationship changes, the labels change. I remember reading when Christ said to his disciples, the He had come to the place where He was now calling them friends. A big step. One of the disciples even said, that Christ was speaking differently to them: He didn't need parables anymore.
I am not a stranger to my Father, neither is He one to me. My relationship with me Father is not a formal one, it is one based on family. Therein, I think, lies the rub. When someone asks who is your god, I have at times answered that I worship the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. That was a formal reply to a formal question. I have also at times answered, I worship the Great I Am (Pharaoh would have liked that one).
I have never said ... come meet my god ... Bill this is Mr. Yahweh, Mr. Yahweh, my friend Bill.
Knowing about God is no longer the important thing. Sometimes I think dealing with minutiae is the thing which brings about the separation. Knowing about God, is not the same as knowing God: the later in my mind being very much the real thing. If I know of God, but know not God, I argue a lot about things I know about Him. If I know God, I speak of my Father ... whose name ... is dad.
my thought too, VB :thumbsup: :Peace2:
Quote from: jbertonbounds on September 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
I speak English. If the commonly accepted spelling and pronunciation of the name of the son of the true living god is "Jesus," then that is what I call him, because that is his name in my language. And if our father-god's name is Yahweh in English, then that's the language he has given me in which to speak his holy name. Our father understands our language barriers. He gave them to us. He knows our hearts, out of which we call on his name, whether we call him "God," "Yahweh," or "Yankie-Doodle." He does not hear our pronunciation of his name, he hears those calling out to him who call on whatever they understand his name to be in their language. He hears our heart's intentions. :HeartThrob:
True.
But consider this...
All on this forum agree on salvation for all. But still they are studying to progress.
In my language hell is eternal. Until I start studying.
In my language hell is literal fire. Until I start studying.
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
All that knowledge changes nothing. But still is fun to figure out for some. Others find it a waste of time. That's likely why not everyone participates in every thread. Such is life.
:2c:
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 08, 2013, 10:30:08 PM
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
Don't leave me hanging here ... until what?
I could be wrong, it happened twice so far this year but aren't we going to be gixen a new pure language when we are in the next age with God?
Quote from: VineBranch on September 08, 2013, 10:32:42 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 08, 2013, 10:30:08 PM
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
Don't leave me hanging here ... until what?
VB I would guess its until all people are willing to surrender themselves to Yahweh.
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 09, 2013, 03:50:25 AM
Quote from: VineBranch on September 08, 2013, 10:32:42 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 08, 2013, 10:30:08 PM
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
Don't leave me hanging here ... until what?
VB I would guess its until all people are willing to surrender themselves to Yahweh.
The son's name is ... until all people are willing to surrender themselves to Yahweh?
I've never heard that before, it's intriguing.
Quote from: VineBranch on September 08, 2013, 10:32:42 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 08, 2013, 10:30:08 PM
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
Don't leave me hanging here ... until what?
Until I start studying.
The whole point of my post was that we all know things for certain because it's all so obvious and everyone says so.
Until.....we start studying. Then quite often the obvious no longer is that obvious.
For many on this forum ET was obvious (for decades). Clearly mentioned in the Bible. Zillions of pastors teaching it. And now all hold a very different opinion.
Yeah, many obvious things like are true but we don't know until:
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on September 08, 2013, 06:06:54 PM
Quote from: jbertonbounds on September 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
I have dyslexia :sigh:, so I cannot read all the replies to any post, especially the long ones, so I do not know what all has been said in this thread. However, I would like to address the OP with this statement, which is, of course, IMO:
I speak English. If the commonly accepted spelling and pronunciation of the name of the son of the true living god is "Jesus," then that is what I call him, because that is his name in my language. And if our father-god's name is Yahweh in English, then that's the language he has given me in which to speak his holy name. Our father understands our language barriers. He gave them to us. He knows our hearts, out of which we call on his name, whether we call him "God," "Yahweh," or "Yankie-Doodle." He does not hear our pronunciation of his name, he hears those calling out to him who call on whatever they understand his name to be in their language. He hears our heart's intentions. :HeartThrob:
Thank you for listening, brothers and sisters. I just needed to say that.
I am thankful, however, for those who share informative information (like in this thread and many others) with other people, in exchange for the knowledge, wisdom and understanding of others. That is to say, thanks to all of you who share your ideas and knowledge, which helps us corporately develop a better understanding of just who and what our father, Yahweh, is. :dsunny:
jberton
I don't think anyone on this tread has said anything that apposes what you have just said. My only point was that "God" is only a generic title it is not His name. When you say God I know who you are referring to but Islam calls Allah god also so they may presume we are worshiping the same God or god. If you are speaking with with one who calls on the name of God they may need to be more specific in some instances. Its probably safe to assume at Tentmaker we can call Him by His title but outside of here you may want to be more specific. :2c:
Absolutely, :iagree: "God" is not his name, only a title. I had never thought of that until I saw it recently on this forum. Yet for some time I have not felt right about calling him something other that by his name Yahweh. I have seen people get into a debate (not sure where I saw it) over how to spell Yahweh, and over whether Jesus name should be Yeshua and so forth. I have come to love the names Jesus and Yahweh. I'm sticking with them for now. :thumbsup:
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 09, 2013, 08:58:57 AM
Quote from: VineBranch on September 08, 2013, 10:32:42 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on September 08, 2013, 10:30:08 PM
In my language the Son's name is Jesus. Until......
Don't leave me hanging here ... until what?
Until I start studying.
The whole point of my post was that we all know things for certain because it's all so obvious and everyone says so.
Until.....we start studying. Then quite often the obvious no longer is that obvious.
For many on this forum ET was obvious (for decades). Clearly mentioned in the Bible. Zillions of pastors teaching it. And now all hold a very different opinion.
Yeah, many obvious things like are true but we don't know until:
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
This reminds me of something I quoted on FB a few days ago - I see it as a profound truth:
Me:
"I have always been a seeker of the truth. This means that I have embraced the need to be adjustable. I know people who are proud that they have held the exact same doctrinal understandings for 20, 30, 40, 50 years. This is not a badge of honor to me. I continue to learn and grow. My beliefs have continued to change drastically over the years." - Clyde L. Pilkingtin, JrA friend who thinks I'm a heretic replied:
"The truth does not change." Me:
"I agree. Our understanding of the truth changes as we submit more and more to Yahweh and the Spirit teaches us. If we ever stop searching for and learning truth, we stop growing in our relationship with Him. If we ever think we have "arrived" at knowing all truth, then we have become the "wise and understanding" of Luke 10:21."No further reply.
Lovin it!
:banana: :winkgrin: :laughing7:
God is unchanging. God is truth. Truth is unchanging. What changes is our perception of the truth and therefore our perception of God. Or perhaps Our changing perception of God gives us a changed perspective of the truth, :Chinscratch:
Quote from: jbertonbounds on September 09, 2013, 08:48:44 PM
Lovin it!
:banana: :winkgrin: :laughing7:
Keep dancin' jb :Egyptdance2:
Quote from: ded2daworld on September 09, 2013, 09:09:02 PM
God is unchanging. God is truth. Truth is unchanging. What changes is our perception of the truth and therefore our perception of God. Our perhaps Our changing perception of God gives us a changed perspective of the truth, :Chinscratch:
Thank you for repeating this statement it really is what jberton just said but that's cool it was worth repeating :declare:
Quote from: ded2daworld on September 09, 2013, 09:09:02 PM
God is unchanging. God is truth. Truth is unchanging. What changes is our perception of the truth and therefore our perception of God. Our perhaps Our changing perception of God gives us a changed perspective of the truth, :Chinscratch:
:thumbsup: