Why Do We Not Use The Name Of God YHVH?

[FredVB]

I was giving the Bible passage in that previous post from me to which there was that response, if it was just looked at, which it is not apparent that it was, it is seen there in John 17 that Jesus said to the heavenly Father, "I have manifested your name to them". And as was pointed out:

As this said from Yahweh God makes requirement to remember God's name, which just happens with speaking of God with the name, and with any reference to God requiring respect anyway, though it was disobeyed already by Jews under wrong traditions from their leaders by the time Jesus came to be among people, why would you think Jesus did not observe that, especially with Jesus, who was not conforming to traditions of the elders that were contrary to what God said, then saying he made God's name known among them? It was the name of his Father, it is also shared with him and God's Spirit, as it is shown in Matthew 28:19-20, they have the one name together, as one being, as God is one being.

Though it was said earlier that the name of Yahweh is only that of one person, which isn't shown, it is instead rather the name of God from what is shown in all the Bible, and with the name there about 6990 times in the original writings. I don't make any issue of others speaking of Yahweh with using some difference in pronunciation or spelling, those who do use some such difference shouldn't make such issue over the differences either. We are obedient with remembering the name, at least, with using it in proper reference at times, certainly with respect as properly it would be toward Yahweh God always. Others not doing that are not obedient in that, yet, but promoting such speaking with God's name can be done.

(Joh 17:6) I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
Jn_1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us
1Jn_3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
1Jn_3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
1Jn_4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
: to make evident or certain by showing or displaying
— man·i·fest·er noun
show, manifest, evidence, evince, demonstrate mean to reveal outwardly or make apparent. show is the general term but sometimes implies that what is revealed must be gained by inference from acts, looks, or words <careful not to show his true feelings>. manifest implies a plainer, more immediate revelation <manifested musical ability at an early age>. evidence suggests serving as proof of the actuality or existence of something <a commitment evidenced by years of loyal service>. evince implies a showing by outward marks or signs <evinced not the slightest fear>. demonstrate implies showing by action or by display of feeling <demonstrated their approval by loud applause>.
The one verse you posted means that Jesus "showed"----as with the other verses that uses that word. It does not mean that Jesus was speaking the actual name to them. It means He showed them who God is through Himself.

It's not like I never hear what Christ or what God said being explained away, or even for this subject never shown such explanation for it. But what is said is explained away, with only dealing with that one point in my post previous to it, and none of the rest of the post given consideration. God had said "This is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations", Exodus 3:15. Even if Jews had been taught a tradition they observed, contrary to this, by that time, why would Jesus not ever speak the name? How are you sure what Jesus said can't include that he really did speak the name? Are you going to act on being so sure he didn't and so you won't, and not speak it to keep God's name in remembrance, and even argue against it? If you are so willing with this certainty you take a chance of finding out, with not giving consideration of it further, that you were in disobedience in that. If I am somehow wrong in this, as I don't speak of any being saved through this, or anything pertaining to doctrines, and it doesn't teach others any other belief, I would ultimately find out, if not in this life then afterward from God, something like, "Though I said my name was to be remembered always in every generation, and my word, the scriptures that were revealed, show that with the thousands of times my name is shown in them, you weren't needing to really do that." But I really don't think it would be like that.

 

[mmksparbud]

I'm not arguing anyone's right to use whatever name they want. What I am saying is--in English, it is pronounced God----you want to use the Hebrew pronunciation, that is fine for you, To insist that it is the only pronunciation, the only name that can be used by anyone for Him is what I object to, esp when Jesus, when questioned on how to pray, said "In this manner" and instructed His disciples to say "Our Father"---He used the word Abba---which translates to more like the word "Daddy"---To me, that is a little too familiar, I do prefer the Father. Nowhere in the bible does it say we are to use Hebrew in order to be saved. When the disciples were speaking in the language of those around them, through the Holy Spirit, nowhere does it say they reverted to Hebrew when speaking His name. The people understood them in their own language and understood what the name was. Where does it say they used only the Hebrew word for God?? What makes you think they used only that name when they spoke in tongues?? The object of speaking in tongues is be understood by others. They didn't speak Hebrew when they spoke in tongues--they spoke whatever the language of the individual was. The Holy Spirit was the one instructing the disciples in the language of the person hearing. It just is not biblical to insist that only the Hebrew can be used.

 

[Der Alte]

I'm not arguing anyone's right to use whatever name they want. What I am saying is--in English, it is pronounced God----you want to use the Hebrew pronunciation, that is fine for you, To insist that it is the only pronunciation, the only name that can be used by anyone for Him is what I object to, esp when Jesus, when questioned on how to pray, said "In this manner" and instructed His disciples to say "Our Father"---He used the word Abba---which translates to more like the word "Daddy"---To me, that is a little too familiar, I do prefer the Father. Nowhere in the bible does it say we are to use Hebrew in order to be saved. When the disciples were speaking in the language of those around them, through the Holy Spirit, nowhere does it say they reverted to Hebrew when speaking His name. The people understood them in their own language and understood what the name was. Where does it say they used only the Hebrew word for God?? What makes you think they used only that name when they spoke in tongues?? The object of speaking in tongues is be understood by others. They didn't speak Hebrew when they spoke in tongues--they spoke whatever the language of the individual was. The Holy Spirit was the one instructing the disciples in the language of the person hearing. It just is not biblical to insist that only the Hebrew can be used.

That is my position exactly. My wife is oriental, although she has lived in this country for more than 4 decades, she is more comfortable praying and pronouncing God, Jesus, etc. in her native language. In the mid 90s we lived and served in a church in Orange County CA. The pastor's wife passed away after her cancer which had been in remission suddenly recurred and he asked her to pray at his wife's funeral. She objected that she couldn't pray very well in English. He said "You pray the way you want to, God will understand."

 

[mmksparbud]

Originally there was only one language---at the tower of Babel is where God Himself changed the language to many different ones. If He had wanted everyone to call Him by one name only----Every language would have had that one word. There are a lot of words that can sound very similar in different languages. Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and French and even some Latin have words that are similar---YHVH is not one of them---Dios is Spanish--French Dieu--Italian, Dio, or Iddio, Latin Deus, Portuguese is also Deus. Even in Yiddish---it's Got--Check these out--none come close JHVH--but many sound very close to God, or Dios--Even in Zulu--the last language listed--it is God.
Other Languages
Afrikaans word for god
Arabic word for god
Azerbaijani word for god
Basque word for god
Belarusian word for god
Bengali word for god
Bosnian word for god
Bulgarian word for god
Catalan word for god
Cebuano

 

[FredVB]

I'm not arguing anyone's right to use whatever name they want. What I am saying is--in English, it is pronounced God----you want to use the Hebrew pronunciation, that is fine for you, To insist that it is the only pronunciation, the only name that can be used by anyone for Him is what I object to, esp when Jesus, when questioned on how to pray, said "In this manner" and instructed His disciples to say "Our Father"---He used the word Abba---which translates to more like the word "Daddy"---To me, that is a little too familiar, I do prefer the Father. Nowhere in the bible does it say we are to use Hebrew in order to be saved. When the disciples were speaking in the language of those around them, through the Holy Spirit, nowhere does it say they reverted to Hebrew when speaking His name. The people understood them in their own language and understood what the name was. Where does it say they used only the Hebrew word for God?? What makes you think they used only that name when they spoke in tongues?? The object of speaking in tongues is be understood by others. They didn't speak Hebrew when they spoke in tongues--they spoke whatever the language of the individual was. The Holy Spirit was the one instructing the disciples in the language of the person hearing. It just is not biblical to insist that only the Hebrew can be used.

It's also 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".

 

[GDunn]

I'm not arguing anyone's right to use whatever name they want. What I am saying is--in English, it is pronounced God----you want to use the Hebrew pronunciation, that is fine for you, To insist that it is the only pronunciation, the only name that can be used by anyone for Him is what I object to, esp when Jesus, when questioned on how to pray, said "In this manner" and instructed His disciples to say "Our Father"---He used the word Abba---which translates to more like the word "Daddy"---To me, that is a little too familiar, I do prefer the Father. Nowhere in the bible does it say we are to use Hebrew in order to be saved. When the disciples were speaking in the language of those around them, through the Holy Spirit, nowhere does it say they reverted to Hebrew when speaking His name. The people understood them in their own language and understood what the name was. Where does it say they used only the Hebrew word for God?? What makes you think they used only that name when they spoke in tongues?? The object of speaking in tongues is be understood by others. They didn't speak Hebrew when they spoke in tongues--they spoke whatever the language of the individual was. The Holy Spirit was the one instructing the disciples in the language of the person hearing. It just is not biblical to insist that only the Hebrew can be used.

The object of tongues in prayer is to allow the Holy Spirit indwell. Seventh Dayers can't know this since they are not pentecostal. The NAME of God is YHWH and this is the DEFINITIVE name although not spoken out loud, out of REVERENCE.

In fact no one even knows if it is YIWEH, YAWEH, JAHVEH or whatever since the vowel points have been lost.

FATHER is a good masking name and denotes Jesus' own reference to God. Always of the same Person of God. Never the son and never the Holy Spirit.

 

[mmksparbud]

This is not about "speaking in tongues"--that's another thread, so I'll not get into that. As I have said, however, when the disciples spoke in tongues at Pentecost, they spoke so that the other hearers could understand what they were saying in their own language as there were people from all over there--they heard the disciples in their own language. There is no indication that they would revert to Hebrew when they spoke the name God--it was understood by each in their own language. That was the original speaking in tongues.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

This would mean the name for God, YHWH, isn't Jesus then, wouldn't it?

No...this only means that the name of GOD in the New-testament for Messianic Jews is not JESUS(Lantin/English), but YESHUA.(Hebrew)

 

[GDunn]

That is my position exactly. My wife is oriental, although she has lived in this country for more than 4 decades, she is more comfortable praying and pronouncing God, Jesus, etc. in her native language. In the mid 90s we lived and served in a church in Orange County CA. The pastor's wife passed away after her cancer which had been in remission suddenly recurred and he asked her to pray at his wife's funeral. She objected that she couldn't pray very well in English. He said "You pray the way you want to, God will understand."

Not only this, but to God our prayers are like a child's. And we pray the only way we know how.

With the metaphors and terminology of men. For God, this is exactly like a wannabee saint. No matter how eloquent we are.

Your Korean wife (I speculate) knows that in her own country precise language is the consideration for many. But our language no matter HOW precise is to God very imprecise. This is why I harp on you sir, for being as picky about small variables in concept. Nit picken is foolish for man is an IMPRECISE creature.

 

[GDunn]

This is not about "speaking in tongues"--that's another thread, so I'll not get into that. As I have said, however, when the disciples spoke in tongues at Pentecost, they spoke so that the other hearers could understand what they were saying in their own language as there were people from all over there--they heard the disciples in their own language. There is no indication that they would revert to Hebrew when they spoke the name God--it was understood by each in their own language. That was the original speaking in tongues.

If you think you can describe a supernatural event, with your rational discernment then good luck.

However the Baptism in Spirit was what happened at pentecost and it WAS the very thing Jesus told Nicodemus he must have.

So think again about the most rational or "reasonable" interpretation, since Nicodemus also was not able initially to know what Jesus said.

 

[GDunn]

No...this only means that the name of GOD in the New-testament for Messianic Jews is not JESUS(Lantin/English), but YESHUA.(Hebrew)

YHWH is not "Yeshua." Where did you decide it was? YHWH is the DEFINITIVE name for God and Jesus is NOT God.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

YHWH is not "Yeshua." Where did you decide it was? YHWH is the DEFINITIVE name for God and Jesus is NOT God.

~2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
~2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
~2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
~2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
~2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

 

[GDunn]

~2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
~2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
~2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
~2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
~2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Calvinists don't know what the Spirit of the LORD is...what makes you think you do?

Other than that I am not sure what point you are maken. Other than a possible rebuke.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

Calvinists don't know what the Spirit of the LORD is...what makes you think you do?

Other than that I am not sure what point you are maken. Other than a possible rebuke.

oK Greg glorious lol



Blessings...
From Your Friend...
SeraphimsCherub...

 

[GDunn]

It's also 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.

 

[GDunn]

oK Greg glorious lol



Blessings...
From Your Friend...
SeraphimsCherub...

Who Greg? Georgie Porgie is my first name.

 

[Der Alte]

Not only this, but to God our prayers are like a child's. And we pray the only way we know how.

With the metaphors and terminology of men. For God, this is exactly like a wannabee saint. No matter how eloquent we are.

Your Korean wife (I speculate) knows that in her own country precise language is the consideration for many. But our language no matter HOW precise is to God very imprecise. This is why I harp on you sir, for being as picky about small variables in concept. Nit picken is foolish for man is an IMPRECISE creature.

You still don't get it. If someone claims to quote a historical figure, then it is incumbent on them to quote that figure not a 3d-4th hand account which is not exactly like what the historical figure actually said. The proper way to post something like that is "According to one source Arius said "there was a time when he was not."

 

[GDunn]

You still don't get it. If someone claims to quote a historical figure, then it is incumbent on them to quote that figure not a 3d-4th hand account which is not exactly like what the historical figure actually said. The proper way to post something like that is "According to one source Arius said "there was a time when he was not."

According to ONE source, sir? I figure he DID say that and you abbreviated it. NO MATTER it means the same thing. CONCEPTUALIZE and quit maken nit-picky refutes which don't even change the CONCEPT, sir.

 

[mmksparbud]

If you think you can describe a supernatural event, with your rational discernment then good luck.

However the Baptism in Spirit was what happened at pentecost and it WAS the very thing Jesus told Nicodemus he must have.

So think again about the most rational or "reasonable" interpretation, since Nicodemus also was not able initially to know what Jesus said.

What are you talking about??---Rational discernment?--What's there to interpret when the bible cleanly says what happened??--
(Act 2:7) And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

(Act 2:8) And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

 

[GDunn]

What are you talking about??---Rational discernment?--What's there to interpret when the bible cleanly says what happened??--
(Act 2:7) And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

Galilaeans: locals.

(Act 2:8) And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

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.