Why Do We Not Use The Name Of God YHVH?

[mmksparbud]

Galilaeans: locals.



Some locals had a different dialect. You ASSUME ONLY what was spoken was a KNOWN language. Actually the first pentecostals at Azusa St. made the same mistake. They went to the far corners of the world HOPING to find the source
of their own tongues.

(Act 2:5) And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

(Act 2:6) Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

It is very clear.

 

[GDunn]

(Act 2:5) And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

(Act 2:6) Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

It is very clear.

Not to me, since "every nation under heaven" probably referred to the diaspora. Jews didn't disperse to ALL nations under heaven, sir. It also may have been exaggerative language and for the sake of drama, and KNOWN to be such.

Sort of like the "name above ALL names," did not include the name of YHWH.

 

[mmksparbud]

Obviously it is not clear to you---my condolences. It can't be explained any clearer. You are free to make any interpretation you want. To me it is clear that they heard the speech of the disciples in the language that they themselves knew, not in some strange babbling that nobody understood.

 

[GDunn]

Obviously it is not clear to you---my condolences. It can't be explained any clearer. You are free to make any interpretation you want. To me it is clear that they heard the speech of the disciples in the language that they themselves knew, not in some strange babbling that nobody understood.

Why were they said to be drunken idiots then?

You cannot see the pentecostal side of the event at pentecost, sir. My condolences to you too. Maybe we can make a mountain of condolences and climb it. Because it is there, sir.

Hey, I thought I was on the TONGUES thread. How we get on this subject anyhow?

 

[mmksparbud]

Because to If I hear someone one talking in Russian, it sounds like babbling, to the Russian it is plain. And I am not a sir-----Miss.
It's a side issue of what name was being used when the Holy Spirit spoke the name God to each of the hearers who heard the message in their own language. They would not have reverted to Hebrew, they spoke in the language of the one they were talking to.

 

[GDunn]

Because to If I hear someone one talking in Russian, it sounds like babbling, to the Russian it is plain. And I am not a sir-----Miss.
It's a side issue of what name was being used when the Holy Spirit spoke the name God to each of the hearers who heard the message in their own language. They would not have reverted to Hebrew, they spoke in the language of the one they were talking to.

No, that don't explain the context, sir. You would KNOW it was Russian and not "babbling."

You don't know the mechanism of glossolalia do you? A drunken babbling is EXACTLY what it sounds like to someone not indwelt.

Em, I guess this has SOMETHING to do with the name of YHWH. But what that is I surely would not know.

 

[Der Alte]

Why were they said to be drunken idiots then?

You cannot see the pentecostal side of the event at pentecost, sir. My condolences to you too. Maybe we can make a mountain of condolences and climb it. Because it is there, sir.

Hey, I thought I was on the TONGUES thread. How we get on this subject anyhow?

Only "devout" [Acts 2:5] believers understood the disciples. To "others" [Act 2:13] i.e. nonbelievers it sounded like drunken babbling.

 

[GDunn]

Only "devout" [Acts 2:5] believers understood the disciples. To "others" [Act 2:13] i.e. nonbelievers it sounded like drunken babbling.

Yes because it was an ecstatic event. Baptists don't know much about it. Primitive Black Baptists have an inkling.

 

[Der Alte]

Yes because it was an ecstatic event. Baptists don't know much about it. Primitive Black Baptists have an inkling.

I quoted scripture to support what I said all you are doing is giving me unsupported opinion which supports your assumptions/presuppositions.

 

[GDunn]

I quoted scripture to support what I said all you are doing is giving me unsupported opinion which supports your assumptions/presuppositions.

And a normal man don't know what is a REBORN man, just as Nicodemus could not at first comprehend. I speculate that when he DID become reborn he too understood what this means which is a SUPERNATURAL event. Baptists and others are SO confused they think God only wants a TESTIMONY BELIEVED that Jesus is the Son of God which technically only has to happen once. THEN OSAS, baby. The oddest and ugliest gospel EVER HEARD by tradition and also considered in many other denoms.

God gives us the PROMISE which is of Spirit. This is known SUPERNATURALLY. And we love God back. Simple and the New Covenant in a nutshell. Belief in Jesus is requisite for the Paraclete to come unto a man. You will say THIS TOO is not the way you SEE scripture. So what? I ain't no BAPTIST either, sir.

 

[Der Alte]

And a normal man don't know what is a REBORN man, just as Nicodemus could not at first comprehend. I speculate that when he DID become reborn he too understood what this means which is a SUPERNATURAL event. Baptists and others are SO confused they think God only wants a TESTIMONY BELIEVED that Jesus is the Son of God which technically only has to happen once. THEN OSAS, baby. The oddest and ugliest gospel EVER HEARD by tradition and also considered in many other denoms.

God gives us the PROMISE which is of Spirit. This is known SUPERNATURALLY. And we love God back. Simple and the New Covenant in a nutshell. Belief in Jesus is requisite for the Paraclete to come unto a man. You will say THIS TOO is not the way you SEE scripture. So what? I ain't no BAPTIST either, sir.

Did you happen to read my signature at the bottom left of my posts? You should not be making judgments about things you know nothing about.

 

[mmksparbud]

No, that don't explain the context, sir. You would KNOW it was Russian and not "babbling."

You don't know the mechanism of glossolalia do you? A drunken babbling is EXACTLY what it sounds like to someone not indwelt.

Em, I guess this has SOMETHING to do with the name of YHWH. But what that is I surely would not know.

Well, Missy, it certainly does explain the context. I wouldn't know Russian from Greek. They heard it in their own language is very clear. You can interpret it any which way you want, and read into it whatever you want, that doesn't change the clear meaning. It says plainly--"other languages"--it does not say "one mystical, only spiritually discerned language possibly understood by Primitive Black Baptists." And I am opting out of this. Ya'll have fun now, ya, hear!!

 

[Jaxxi]

Why use 'God' or 'Lord' when those aren't names?

Because this is the actual proper name of our maker who is so far out of our league that we don't dare utter that name in fear of using it wrong. Look at how loosely people say Owe my Gawd. (that's the only way I could write it without censor)Even when they are having sex...No it's better we not say His proper name. That way we avoid blasphemy. You understand..it's nothing personal.

 

[HebrewVaquero]

Why use 'God' or 'Lord' when those aren't names?

In a nut shell:
"The Traditions of Man"

 

[FredVB]

It's not like I say anyone is condemned in anyway involving this, or with insisting on how the name should be pronounced, see what I actually say. I shouldn't need to keep answering straw-man arguments, which I find to be common in these forums. Of course we who are believers can call the heavenly Father our Father, as Jesus showed, I am not saying anywhere otherwise. Contrary to the currently growing teaching, "Abba" didn't mean "Daddy", it was just used for Father. But this isn't a name, and it wouldn't be the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And I should speak to this error that our term in English, "God", is the version in our language for God's name, it is not. It is English for "Elohim". It is a mistaken argument with saying we who speak of Yahweh are speaking Hebrew, it's a false argument. Again, nothing I say of this is about salvation, get past that, please. I don't say things for using Hebrew words. I posted what Yahweh said, quoting what was originally there with how it is written in English, in Exodus 3:15. This name is not a Hebrew term, the argument for that doesn't properly apply, though it was linked to a Hebrew expression, and it is the name that is to be remembered in all generations, for God who is real, and the name is not merely "God". And certainly there are other terms for God that are appropriate, as it is shown in the Bible. But it is shown the revealed name is not to be forgotten. Pronounce it in a different way if you will. But you are mistaken to say "God" is the pronunciation right for that. And early believers in biblical times knew this name as they had in their expression in saying "Halleluyah".

A translation of the term is not the same as the conceptualization of the term.
Some people decide their name is only accurate in their own language. HEBREW is the mother tongue of the People of the Promise. But when the New Covenant came GENTILES were allowed in with their own language. HOWEVER the conceptualization of the translation is now the main...thing...to...God. For no command was extant that these Gentiles had to learn Hebrew. It remains however the SOURCE language from which CONCEPTUALIZATION informs.

The argument contrary to what I said should truly get past arguing against using Hebrew words or expressions. I don't argue with those preferring use of Hebrew names, or even terms, though I don't prefer them. I made clear what I speak for is not a Hebrew term. The name that was said we are to remember in all generations, that used most of all in scriptures as originally written, is not a Hebrew term. It is the name, which is to be remembered in all generations, and though I am fine with saying "God" and speaking of the "Father" and willing to say "the Almighty", these terms are not the name, which was revealed from Yahweh for it to be remembered in all generations. It is such for that, and it would not be a Hebrew term, for that.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Why use 'God' or 'Lord' when those aren't names?

I can't speak for anybody else. But me, I've always had a pretty high view of God. Sober-minded reverence. He's the sovereign God Almighty. His counsel will stand and He will do all His pleasure.

What I call Him comes from respect. It won't permit me to call God my "best buddy, my "homie" and for darn sure not my "daddy in heaven" or any other such ridiculousness. Some practices are dignified; other practices are not dignified.

Heck, I typically won't even use the name of the Savior or His mother. They're "Our Lord" and "Our Lady" as far as I'm concerned. I shouldn't go so far as to say it's "wrong" to use their names. At least not necessarily. For me it's a simple matter of respect. Good taste, even.

I won't sing "Happy Birthday" to Our Lord on Christmas Day. In life there are things which are appropriate. And there are other things which are not appropriate.

I've never understood or related to the strange compulsion people have about wanting to "personalize" God. God is knowable but He's not always comprehensible. His ways are not our ways. Trying to "identify" with Him usually leads back to the inescapable conclusion that though we're made in His image, He's so much more than we could ever dream of.

"God" may not be a perfect title for Him. But it's the best we've got and I'm sticking with it.

 

[Just Ben]

I say His holy name when I adress the Father directly. But those moments are very rare for me. I call Jesus "Yeshua" when I pray for Christians in the middle east (Coptic's and others). I agree that we should never over use His holy name for fear of losing respect. Lord, Father are titles; but for the lost coming to faith, that is what they need to know first. Who is my Father, who is my God. When our faith grows more mature we tend to hold reverence for Gods many personal names. Yahweh himself said " I am called by many names". He is the invisible God. Everything that is right and good is one Gods many personalities. His Holy name is revealed as YHWH. We shouldn't forget that but at the same time we need to show respect and reverence to the most High.

 

[Truthearthdefender]

Why use 'God' or 'Lord' when those aren't names?

This is because in Judaic law it was blasphemous and punishable by death to utter that name... as christianity started out with a following of mostly Jews and gentiles from regions where Judaism was practiced as law, they chose to uphold this custom. That is why you will see it written much, but spoken little. There are many Jews that still believe this firmly... to utter the name of God is blasphemy...

In addition pretty much every name you read, especially in the New Testament is different from the original name in the original text... This is because the names in the Bible almost always had significant meaning and were not just used as a way to identify someone, like they are used in American "cultures" nowadays... in fact in some of the religious texts the names actually translate into inspired holy decrees... you'll have to research that when you have some time

I hope my comment was helpful!

 

[FredVB]

Reverence to Yahweh should always be shown, and it isn't, far and wide, like it should be. Yahweh will deal with that, with not looking at any sin to not deal with it. But we can't expect to have formal dignity with God continuously, nothing could be less realistic. Yahweh loves us as we are, as our Creator, though hating all the sin completely. We must willingly be naked with him and still intimacy with God is to be desired, it is not desirable to step into a shower without God, nor to be without God going anywhere, or doing anything.

Those making reference to God, as is done far too much, without the reverence that involves making truth of God known or actually addressing God, are violating the ten commandments in that, this is just as much true without the name of Yahweh being used, as this is who is God. That issue then is no reason to avoid the name revealed to be remembered always, which avoidance would not be in obedience.

 

[Fireinfolding]

God having sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, by whom (in that adoption) we would cry Abba, Father no?(Romans 8:15 & Gal 4:6) And every tongue confessing that Jesus Christ is Lord is to the very glory of God the Father in the same right? Afterall the LORD before made him to be so for us (Isaiah 55:4 & John 5:37, Psalms 110:1, Mark 12:36, Acts 2:36, John 13:13, Isaiah 8:18 & 2 Cr 5:18 ) and so by the Spirit of Jesus Christ (which is the name given unto men under heaven) we are to call the LORD (His Father) Mat 22:45 Our Father (Luke 11:2) as he instructed us. Even as Jesus said he ascended unto His Father and our Father (John 20:17, Acts 2:34 the fulfilment of Psalm 110:1) Whereas in relation to Jesus Christ (by whom) we come unto the LORD (we now call Father) as His children (Isaiah 8:18) by Jesus Christ (confirmed again in Heb 2:13) Jesus becomes our commander (Isaiah 55:4) Who the Father made Lord (Acts 2:36) the firstbegotton from the dead, being the firstborn among many brethren. Just as he tells Mary, "Go tell my brethren" where he is ascending to, he states, unto my Father and your Father even as it also says in Heb 2:11 For both he that sanctifieth (even Jesus Christ) and they who are sanctified are all of one (even all of one God, even the Father, by the one Spirit) for which cause he is not ashamed to "call them brethren". The same in Mat 25:40, Hebrews 2:12, Ephes 1:5, Ephes 2:18 and elsewhere.