Spirituality
29 Aug 09
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by Proper Knobyes, easily, for the name of God, in the biblical context is based on what is termed the tetragrammaton, the four Hebrew Letters JHVH, (the vowels were not recorded and their pronunciation is not known, for the Ancient Hebrews did not like to pronounce the name of God, lest it be construed that they uttered it in vain). Now to your point, as you can see there is no corresponding S, T making it virtually impossible for the ancient name of God to be considered as Steve. it must be further noted that traces of the pronunciation are evident in name like Elijah, Adonijah etc etc
My name isn't Steve.
But could you prove, without any shred of doubt, that the Lords name isn't Steve?
31 Aug 09
1 edit
Originally posted by karoly aczelperhaps your God has no name Karoly, that the Biblical God does, this is almost certainly true, what is more it is full of rich meaning. It would i think, be quite difficult to form a relationship, with unknown or nameless God. This is in no way a reflection of his limitlessness, nor of your beliefs.
God has no name or title. It even hates being called 'God". God is not subject to any limitations. Oshivanamoashiva!
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes, dear Robbie. I quite agree. for one to devolop a relationship with God one must first get to know "him".
perhaps your God has no name Karoly, that the Biblical God does, this is almost certainly true, what is more it is full of rich meaning. It would i think, be quite difficult to form a relationship, with unknown or nameless God. This is in no way a reflection of his limitlessness.
however I would contend that one will come to a point where a leap of faith will required to progress furthur. in this light all previous names of God will have to be abandoned. Until then I'm sure its perfectly well and good to work with the name(s) of God that we have come to 'know'.
(Allah, Krsna,Amitabha,etc.)
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelhow very interesting, Allah is not a name, it is a title, simply Arabic for God. Muslims are want to say, 'in the name of Allah, which simply means, in the name of God, God itself is not a name, it is a title. i am quite sure that the Hindhu pantheon of Gods and goddesses have names ,as did the ancient Greeks, the ancient Egyptians etc etc. perhaps this abandonment is peculiar to the form of worship you have adopted, i do not know, perhaps it needs explanation, but for us, the divine name, in biblical terms, JHVH, or Jehovah as we say, is something of great significance. but yes consider this Bible verse, which states that we shall never get to know the full depths of God knowledge, which is something one would expect from one so limitless and eternal.
Yes, dear Robbie. I quite agree. for one to devolop a relationship with God one must first get to know "him".
however I would contend that one will come to a point where a leap of faith will required to progress furthur. in this light all previous names of God will have to be abandoned. Until then I'm sure its perfectly well and good to work with the name(s) of God that we have come to 'know'.
(Allah, Krsna,Amitabha,etc.)
(Psalm 139:6) . . .Such knowledge is too wonderful for me. It is so high up that I cannot attain to it. . .
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAh! to try to attain the unattainable. A truly noble undertaking. Even if it does end in failure, what more is one to strive for? for we are all climbing the same mountain and the view I have fron my side is not the same as the view from yours. however, it is still the same mountain. Oshivanamoashiva😉
how very interesting, Allah is not a name, it is a title, simply Arabic for God. Muslims are want to say, 'in the name of Allah, which simply means, in the name of God, God itself is not a name, it is a title. i am quite sure that the Hindhu pantheon of Gods and goddesses have names ,as did the ancient Greeks, the ancient Egyptians etc etc. perha ...[text shortened]... ) . . .Such knowledge is too wonderful for me. It is so high up that I cannot attain to it. . .
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSecond hand postulation at best.
yes, easily, for the name of God, in the biblical context is based on what is termed the tetragrammaton, the four Hebrew Letters JHVH, (the vowels were not recorded and their pronunciation is not known, for the Ancient Hebrews did not like to pronounce the name of God, lest it be construed that they uttered it in vain). Now to your point, as you can ...[text shortened]... further noted that traces of the pronunciation are evident in name like Elijah, Adonijah etc etc
Steve is the Lord.
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by Proper Knobsecond hand postulation, i don't think so Noobster, for i have seen the parchments of the dead sea scrolls of the book of Isaiah, with my own eyes and examined the ancient name of God for myself. you will state on what basis you term it postulation or you shall retract your statement, make a public recantation of your atheistic stance and come and learn the truth of the matter at Robbies and Gavelstones school for the gifted.
Second hand postulation at best.
Steve is the Lord.
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieJust because the scrolls are old and you have seen them with your own eyes doesn't really mean they are accurate. They are second hand as they are not written by God himself, if they were they would be first hand, but they aren't so second hand we shall call them. As God has never revealed his name to anyone in person, he has as much chance of being called Steve as any other name.
second hand postulation, i don't think so Noobster, for i have seen the parchments of the dead sea scrolls of the book of Isaiah, with my own eyes and examined the ancient name of God for myself. you will state on what basis you term it postulation or you shall retract your statement, make a public recantation of your atheistic stance and come and learn the truth of the matter at Robbies and Gavelstones school for the gifted.
I could think of many descriptive terms to label you and Galveston, 'gifted' wouldn't be on my list.
31 Aug 09
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobwhether or not my dear noobster, they were written by God or not, i don't think is particularly relevant, for the name exists regardless and actually the scriptures indicate that god has revealed his name, in person, perhaps you are unaware of this, although it proves nothing in itself, for you no doubt in your scepticism may dispute its integrity, but there it is.
Just because the scrolls are old and you have seen them with your own eyes doesn't really mean they are accurate. They are second hand as they are not written by God himself, if they were they would be first hand, but they aren't so second hand we shall call them. As God has never revealed his name to anyone in person, he has as much chance of being call ...[text shortened]... hink of many descriptive terms to label you and Galveston, 'gifted' wouldn't be on my list.
(Exodus 3:15) . . .“This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘Jehovah the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name to time indefinite, and this is the memorial of me to generation after generation.
And actually what the dead sea scrolls have provided is that for over 1000 years the book of Isaiah which we have in modern day bibles is unchanged from that which the ancient Hebrews penned all those years ago, in fact, the only discrepancy was to the spelling of the name of a musical instrument. Starling is it not?
actually it is not that we are gifted, but that our students are, so perhaps you are correct 🙂
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOnce again:
Much of what was attributed to the ancients was not righteous as Jesus repeatedly pointed out in the Sermon on the Mount.
this was also addressed, did you perhaps miss the reference to interpretations? in that it is well understood that what Christ was referring to was the misapplication of the Law, or are you unaware that the Jews held the so ...[text shortened]... ow that is interesting, for it led them to an extremely self righteous attitude. coincidence?
From what I can tell, you and others "reconcile" them by distorting the teachings of Jesus.
If you can reconcile them without changing what Jesus explicitly states, then here's your chance to do so.
You continue to evade this point.
The Sermon on the Mount deals with more than 'oral law'. For example Jesus corrects the following:
exodus 21:23-21:27
23If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Also, do you believe that Jesus supported the following?
15 He who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.
17 He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.
Do you?
31 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell if we are to asume that Jehovah is the correct pronunciation, then God's name literally means "eternal" so how is that any different in nature than allah? Eternal is a descriptor, and not a name.
how very interesting, Allah is not a name, it is a title, simply Arabic for God. Muslims are want to say, 'in the name of Allah, which simply means, in the name of God, God itself is not a name, it is a title. i am quite sure that the Hindhu pantheon of Gods and goddesses have names ,as did the ancient Greeks, the ancient Egyptians etc etc. perha ...[text shortened]... ) . . .Such knowledge is too wonderful for me. It is so high up that I cannot attain to it. . .
31 Aug 09
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerwhat are you talking about, eternal, eternal? are we to give serious consideration to this statement? please Deucer, you need a bible study like all get out. Fortunate for you i have a space in my busy schedule since noobster has not proven to be gifted enough , dig this my man,
Well if we are to asume that Jehovah is the correct pronunciation, then God's name literally means "eternal" so how is that any different in nature than allah? Eternal is a descriptor, and not a name.
(Exodus 3:13-15) . . .Nevertheless, Moses said to the true God: “Suppose I am now come to the sons of Israel and I do say to them, ‘The God of your forefathers has sent me to you’ and they do say to me, ‘What is his name?’ What shall I say to them?” At this God said to Moses: “I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE.” And he added: “This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘I SHALL PROVE TO BE has sent me to you.’” Then God said once more to Moses: “This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘Jehovah the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name to time indefinite, and this is the memorial of me to generation after generation.
you will note the significance and the meaning of the divine name.