Hagar question ...

[Aseyesee]

It seems you are misreading the text. Hagar was not "the first to name God".

She gave God *a* name that no one had used before, that name being "the God who sees me". That is not saying that no one had yet used any name at all for God.

Do you have a verse where it specifically said some one named God before her?

 

[-V-]

Do you have a verse where it specifically said some one named God before her?

I already gave you one: Genesis 4:26. That says they were "calling on the name of the Lord." If they hadn't named God yet, how would they be calling on His name?

 

[Aseyesee]

I already gave you one: Genesis 4:26. That says they were "calling on the name of the Lord." If they hadn't named God yet, how would they be calling on His name?

Doesn't say they named him, whereas for Hagar it does.

 

[-V-]

Doesn't say they named him, whereas for Hagar it does.

You didn't answer the question - how do you call on the name of God without using a name for God?

 

[Aseyesee]

You didn't answer the question - how do you call on the name of God without using a name for God?

It doesn't say where they got the name from (which is my point) ... I guess Moses would be a good guess, since he supposedly wrote Genesis ... or God has no name until man named him, which "I am" seems to be an indication of this concerning Moses, even though it never records him telling them "I am" sent me.

Hagar depicts something, just like saying she named God depicts something, that lends its self to the collective truth the bible reveals.

 

[-V-]

It doesn't say where they got the name from (which is my point) ...

It doesn't have to say where the name came from in order for a name to exist. We have a statement in Genesis long before Hagar's time where men are "calling on the name of God". They can't "call on God's name" without using a name. Therefore, God had a name before Hagar used "the God who sees me". The point of this thread - was Hagar the first to name God? - doesn't require us to know specifically *what* name was used, only that *a* name was used, and the statement of Genesis 4:26 logically requires *a* name for God to exist.

 

[Aseyesee]

It doesn't have to say where the name came from in order for a name to exist. We have a statement in Genesis long before Hagar's time where men are "calling on the name of God". They can't "call on God's name" without using a name. Therefore, God had a name before Hagar used "the God who sees me". The point of this thread - was Hagar the first to name God? - doesn't require us to know specifically *what* name was used, only that *a* name was used, and the statement of Genesis 4:26 logically requires *a* name for God to exist.

Why is what my question started out with, so maybe I should rephrase the question, Why does it say Hagar named God, yet no other woman (or man for that matter) in the bible is said to have named God?

 

[-V-]

Why is what my question started out with, so maybe I should rephrase the question, Why does it say Hagar named God, yet no other woman (or man for that matter) in the bible is said to have named God?

It may not specifically state, "so-and-so gave such-and-such name to God," but the Bible is pretty straightforward that others before Hagar named God.

As to why it bothers to mention this instance, it could be for several reasons, all of which would just be speculation. Genesis 16 mentions this took place by a specific (and presumably well known at the time of the writing of Genesis) well, and at the end of the chapter, we see that it is explaining how the well got its name - it is named after this exchange between God & Hagar. So, it could just be pointing out historical context.

It could also be a simple lesson about God caring about everyone, not just Israel. He may have been "the God of Israel," or "the God of Abraham," and Israel may have been God's "chosen people," but here God is pointing out that He is also the God of everyone, that He's not above showing love & mercy to those other than "the chosen people".

It could also be attempting to show that Hagar wasn't a bad person, she was more just a victim of circumstance. I think people tend to look at Hagar & Ismael as "the bad guys", and this is pointing out that it wasn't really the case. Hagar experienced a closeness with God that most Jews & Christians don't ever experience in their lives.

It could be one of those, it could be all, it could be none.

 

[Aseyesee]

It may not specifically state, "so-and-so gave such-and-such name to God," but the Bible is pretty straightforward that others before Hagar named God.

As to why it bothers to mention this instance, it could be for several reasons, all of which would just be speculation. Genesis 16 mentions this took place by a specific (and presumably well known at the time of the writing of Genesis) well, and at the end of the chapter, we see that it is explaining how the well got its name - it is named after this exchange between God & Hagar. So, it could just be pointing out historical context.

It could also be a simple lesson about God caring about everyone, not just Israel. He may have been "the God of Israel," or "the God of Abraham," and Israel may have been God's "chosen people," but here God is pointing out that He is also the God of everyone, that He's not above showing love & mercy to those other than "the chosen people".

It could also be attempting to show that Hagar wasn't a bad person, she was more just a victim of circumstance. I think people tend to look at Hagar & Ismael as "the bad guys", and this is pointing out that it wasn't really the case. Hagar experienced a closeness with God that most Jews & Christians don't ever experience in their lives.

It could be one of those, it could be all, it could be none.

... and it could be more.

I know there is more in what is not said then in what is said, which is a truth relational to perception; so then in your opinion, where did they get the name of God from, God or from themself? which for me, ties into the question why (among other things), and even to what end I had asked the question.

 

[Aseyesee]

Hagar in one picture is the labor of our soul, in relationship to the son we are, another form of Adam's wife.

Theres not much difference between saying Hagar named god, and don't eat of that tree ...

 

[mozo41]

"Theres not much difference between saying Hagar named god, and don't eat of that tree ..."

and truth be told ( scripturally speaking ) this truth revealed to me when answering your question ... love it

 

[1watchman]

This seems a useless debate. Sarai called God "LORD" in Genesis 16:5 and so did Moses (verse 7 (KJV). He is not just a lord, but THE LORD. That's what He is, not a name, which is Jehovah.

 

[Aseyesee]

This seems a useless debate. Sarai called God "LORD" in Genesis 16:5 and so did Moses (verse 7 (KJV). He is not just a lord, but THE LORD. That's what He is, not a name, which is Jehovah.

You can view "why" as useless, just as you can regard or not regard a day.

To me, evey word of the Bible is useful, and put in it's place on purpose.

 

[mozo41]

"To me, evey word of the Bible is useful, and put in it's place on purpose"

no doubt of this for me having seen ... and what I see tells me this but a scraping of the surface ... a one liner comes to mind

 

[1watchman]

You can view "why" as useless, just as you can regard or not regard a day.

To me, every word of the Bible is useful, and put in it's place on purpose.

That's true, and Hagar called Him "Lord", which He is; and I call Him Lord for He not only is, but my Lord. She did NOT name Him!

 

[Aseyesee]

That's true, and Hagar called Him "Lord", which He is; and I call Him Lord for He not only is, but my Lord. She did NOT name Him!

Genesis 16:13 Hebrew Text Analysis

 

[1watchman]

You might also note (in addition to what I have already shared) that Exodus 3:14 --"I am", can give you help to your dilemma, Aseyesee. The name recorded for God as "Jehovah" (ever self existing one), is the answer to "I am" (saying always was), and note also what Jesus said: John 8:58. Jesus was equal with His Father ---"I am". You are just having trouble with the wording and are concluding that Hagar named God, which is NOT so. Study the Scripture, friend!

 

[Aseyesee]

You might also note (in addition to what I have already shared) that Exodus 3:14 --"I am", can give you help to your dilemma, Aseyesee. The name recorded for God as "Jehovah" (ever self existing one), is the answer to "I am" (saying always was), and note also what Jesus said: John 8:58. Jesus was equal with His Father ---"I am". You are just having trouble with the wording and are concluding that Hagar named God, which is NOT so. Study the Scripture, friend!

I'll leave it at your "some render" which is just another way of saying "reason it out" as to how you came to your conclusion, which reflects my point in relationship to consciousness, as a mirror does a face.

 

[Aseyesee]

Best assumption of who named God would be Moses (who supposedly wrote Genesis), which is the same as saying Hagar named God, as relative to the mountain she was to Israel.

Did man name God, or did God give man his name; or is there a difference ...

 

[mozo41]

well man did name the animals ... and for reason of communication ( no different than what is happening here ) he chose to start with the head of an ox ....