Does God need a name?

[marco]

God told Moses He was best described by the verb to be but did not dwell on the phonetics of the tetragrammaton. Before Moses rushed off to tell people he'd been talking to YooHWhoo, or whatever vowels should be divinely inserted, he had just a tiny fear folk would say he was lying. So God allowed his rod to turn into a snake, which is apparently the standard proof of a divine appearance.

Why does God NEED a name?

Is the transforming rod convincing, thousands of years on?

Can the tale be redeemed by finding a figurative meaning in it?

[Elijah John]

Why does God need a name? He doesn't, the revelation of the Name is for our benefit.

To distinguish the Living God from the pagan deities and idols. And, as explained on another thread, the Name has intrinsic significance, signifying the state of pure being.

Also, the Name is a link to the Divine, a one word invocation to the Living God.

The Name reminds us that YHVH is a personal God, and not just a "force" of the Universe.

If one reads the Hebrew Bible in a translation that honors the name of God instead of disguising it under the euphemism "Adonai" or "LORD"*, one can see the utility of the Name. Especially in the Psalms, where the Name is repeatedly used as a focus of prayer.

To use Roman Catholic terminology, the Name is sacramental, though the RCC doesn't recognize it as such nor does it give the Name the honor it deserves, instead, the RCC seems to put "Christ" and the Eucharist above all.

----

(* Even Baal worshipers called their God "Lord", as do modern day pagans with their "Lord and Lady".)

[bluethread]

Vowel markings were added to the Hebrew text by the Masoretes some time around the middle of the first millennium CE. Around then the vowel markings from Adonai were added to YHWH to make Yahowah. It is generally not pronounced anyway and the word Adonai is used. The point of name in ancient times is that it refers a respected relative, a significant event, or a character treat. That is why they asked Zechariah why he named his son Yochannan, since he had no relatives by that name. With that in mind, "I am that I am." could be said to address all of those, in a negative fashion. Since there is no one more significant, there is no other name that is greater. Second, no word could summarize Adonai's character, so all one need know of His character is what is revealed. Third, there is no significant event that should define who Adonai is, so the current event is what is significant. Also, psychologically, knowing a person's name gives one power over that person. Therefore, it is not appropriate to know the actual name of Adonai.

Regarding the snake. In ancient near eastern mythology the Serpent is the most powerful of deities, because it is that which keeps the various forces in the universe in check. Therefore, he who controls the serpent, controls the universe. This is not to say that Moshe' is claiming to control the universe, but that he is acting on behalf of the one who controls the universe.

[Elijah John]

Also, psychologically, knowing a person's name gives one power over that person. Therefore, it is not appropriate to know the actual name of Adonai.

Not sure of the exact reference (from Isaiah), but what of the verse: "I am YHVH, that is my name" and other's like it?

There is also a passage in Psalms which indicates that God will protect those who know his name.

Seems that before the Rabbis put the Name off limits, God did indeed want us to know Him by name.

Notice how King David and the other Psalmists focused their praises and prayers on the name of YHVH. (on YHVH via His name) They were praying, not attempting to control YHVH God.

Seems the Psalmists and the Prophets wrote before the Rabbinic prohibition. Seems the Rabbinic ruling went against prophetic practice, custom and usage.

So which is it, YHVH will protect those who know His name? Or those who pronounce the Name will "have no portion in the world to come"?

(Rhetorical question addressed primarily to the Rabbis)

[bluethread]

Also, psychologically, knowing a person's name gives one power over that person. Therefore, it is not appropriate to know the actual name of Adonai.

Not sure of the exact reference (from Isaiah), but what of the verse: "I am YHVH, that is my name" and other's like it?

There is also a passage in Psalms which indicates that God will protect those who know his name.

Seems that before the Rabbis put the Name off limits, God did indeed want us to know Him by name.

Notice how King David and the other Psalmists focused their praises and prayers on the name of YHVH. (on YHVH via His name) They were praying, not attempting to control YHVH God.

Seems the Psalmists and the Prophets wrote before the Rabbinic prohibition. Seems the Rabbinic ruling went against prophetic practice, custom and usage.

So which is it, YHVH will protect those who know His name? Or those who pronounce the Name will "have no portion in the world to come"?

(Rhetorical question addressed primarily to the Rabbis)

I am not throwing stones and am not a holy names person. What the rabbis say is doctrine, not Scipture. I don not agree that those who pronounce the Name will "have no portion in the world to come". However, I do not think that pronouncing YHWH adds any blessing, either. I do think that one needs to be consious of the psychological effects of naming something and act accordingly. I also think that the references to acknowledging Adonai's name in the Scriptures usually refers to acknowledge Adonai's presense and/or character related to a specific idea or issue. It could be argued that "I am, that I am" is the best discription of His character related to most events and/or issues. However, the fact that other names are used, indicates that does not really encapsulate Adonai's character.

[Elijah John]

Also, psychologically, knowing a person's name gives one power over that person. Therefore, it is not appropriate to know the actual name of Adonai.

Not sure of the exact reference (from Isaiah), but what of the verse: "I am YHVH, that is my name" and other's like it?

There is also a passage in Psalms which indicates that God will protect those who know his name.

Seems that before the Rabbis put the Name off limits, God did indeed want us to know Him by name.

Notice how King David and the other Psalmists focused their praises and prayers on the name of YHVH. (on YHVH via His name) They were praying, not attempting to control YHVH God.

Seems the Psalmists and the Prophets wrote before the Rabbinic prohibition. Seems the Rabbinic ruling went against prophetic practice, custom and usage.

So which is it, YHVH will protect those who know His name? Or those who pronounce the Name will "have no portion in the world to come"?

(Rhetorical question addressed primarily to the Rabbis)

I am not throwing stones and am not a holy names person. What the rabbis say is doctrine, not Scipture. I don not agree that those who pronounce the Name will "have no portion in the world to come". However, I do not think that pronouncing YHWH adds any blessing, either. I do think that one needs to be consious of the psychological effects of naming something and act accordingly. I also think that the references to acknowledging Adonai's name in the Scriptures usually refers to acknowledge Adonai's presense and/or character related to a specific idea or issue. It could be argued that "I am, that I am" is the best discription of His character related to most events and/or issues. However, the fact that other names are used, indicates that does not really encapsulate Adonai's character.

Agreed that no name can capture the essence of God, in His entirety. And yes, there are other names ascribed to the Almighty. Those other names often refer to specific aspects of his Being or his actions. {El Elyon, God Most High, for example). But there is one name use far more often than any of the others, and that is the name "YHVH" (LORD, Adonai).

It should be noted (if Scripture is to believed) that it was not we humans who named God, but God Himself who revealed His Name. He revealed His singular, covenential name. And the repeated references to His name are singular, not plural. References by the Psalmists, the Prophets and God Himself in the third Commandment. YHVH said that we are not to take His name (singular) in vain. He did not prohibit the prononciation, nor did he speak of plural nomeclature.

You indicate there is no special blessing attached to pronouncing the Name, but the Psalmist indicates there is the blessing of protection to those who know the name.

Close enough, wouldn't you say?

[bluethread]

You indicate there is no special blessing attached to pronouncing the Name, but the Psalmist indicates there is the blessing of protection to those who know the name.

Close enough, wouldn't you say?

Well, I think that when the Scriptures speak about a name, they are not talking about a specfic sequence of characters or sounds, but character. If this when site was debating Judaism & Religion, I might use YHWH on occasion, but, apart from one poster, there nis not much confusion when I use the term Adonai. Also, that one poster does the same thing with YHWH. I do avoid making references that do foster misuanderstanding, like Jesus and God, because whatever meaning they might have is not exclusive to and inherent in the term.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 36 by bluethread]

Ha!
One poster and one jealous god.
Let me ask you, what if you called YHWH Heracles, do you think he'd be in a forgiving mood?

But calling him Adonai, like the Greek God, you think he's all over it?

[JehovahsWitness]

Is there a reason why those particular vowels were inserted into the word and in that, one would suppose the word is not the word anymore but a different word.

Yahweh is different from YHWH as is Jehovah from JHVH.

With different vowels using the same principle we can have words like;

Yehweh
Yihweh
Yohweh
Yuhweh

If we are restricted to five vowel sounds then we can give YHWH 25 different names. After all, Tom is not Tim. God playfully says this will be his name for ever - but doesn't say which one.

QUESTION: Do the numerious variations on how the Tetragrammaton can be rendered represent numerous different names?

It has been suggested that Yawheh and Yehowah, Yaveh, etc must be different names because any variety of sound within the restricted parimeters of a given number of consonant must reprsent a new name. To support this scenario we are presented with the example of the English diminutives "Tim" and "Tom"; The arguement being since "Tim" and "Tom" are different names so must "Yahveh" and "Yahweh".

• ANSWER: We judge a name to be different not based on the similarity of consonants but on root meaning of the name. So "Yahveh" and "Yahweh" look similar and sound (just as Tim and Tom look and sound similar) but "Yahveh" and "Yahweh" can be considered the SAME NAME because they have the same meaning and are derived from the same root word; while Tim and Tom do not fit this criteria* so they are considered different names. In short we cannot extrapolate the fact that Tim and Tom are different names to conclude that Yahweh and Yahowah must ALSO be different names.

CONCLUSION: The consonants and sounds of name are not the determinating factor to establish whether names are considered the same (or different), the determinating factor is what does the name mean not what does the word sound like. Thus all the varieties of pronunciations of YHWH cannot be considered "different names" they are all in fact various ways of pronouncing the same name.


[*]

Tim > the diminutive for TIMOTHY which derives from the Greek name Τιμοθεος (Timotheos) meaning "honouring God" while Tom > the diminutive for THOMAS which derives from Greek form of the Aramaic name תָּ�וֹמָ� (Ta'oma') which meant "twin".

RELATED POSTS

How is the Divine Name pronounced in various languages?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 014#907014