Is it disrespectful to call GOD by his name JEHOVAH? (page 3)

WTWizard

True, it may not be respectful to call Him "Jehovah". However, I tend to respect God about as much as He respects me (which is none)--hence, I call Him "Baghead" and "Almighty Lowlife Scumbag". Not very respectful--but, the way He consistently treats me, that isn't disrespectful enough.

slimboyfat

designs I think you are right that early Christians used the divine name, probably both in written and verbal forms, however getting people to acknowledge this is not easy for various reasons: neither Evangelicals nor ex-Witnesses are eager to concede JWs got it right on this issue. Having said that I also think Narkissos is right if he is saying that the basis for positing a historical Jesus resembling the Jesus character in the gospels is very flimsy. I am largely persuaded by the argument of Earl Doherty in The Jesus Puzzle that Jesus of the gospels was a later Christian invention. Paul and other first century Christians apparently didn't know anything about this Jesus. Having said that if someone it is meaningful to call Jesus in relation to the gospel texts did exist then I think the chances are he would have used some form of the divine name.

wobble

That is your opinion Slimboy,and I respect your right to hold it,but for me the evidence weighs much too much the other way, (see related threads) that Jesus did not use it, what is your evidence for his use of it, apart from gut-feeling ?

Love

Wobble

VoidEater

1) I think God, should it exist, might be a little above being offended by what name you use.

2) I don't think there's any evidence that "Jehovah" is a name (YHWH is a description, not a name, and Jehovah is a loose interpretation of that description).

Satanus

Using a name for god is a vestigial practice for differentiating him from other gods, henotheism. If people believe that there is only one god, there is no need for a name.

S

quietlyleaving

hya slim. Hope you had a good holiday

slimboyfat

That is your opinion Slimboy,and I respect your right to hold it,but for me the evidence weighs much too much the other way, (see related threads) that Jesus did not use it, what is your evidence for his use of it, apart from gut-feeling ?

If Jesus existed he was a regular Jew. In the first century Jews used sacred texts in Hebrew and Greek that contained the divine name so it is reasonable to assume they vocalised it when reading the text. The idea that Jews at that time did not use the divine name was based on the assumption that the Septuagint had already replaced the name centuries earlier with kyrios, and on later Jewish traditions surrounding the use of the divine name at the temple that suggested the name had fallen out of everyday use. Those assumptions no longer hold because we now know the Jewish Septuagint did contain the divine name, and there is nothing in the tradition to suggest Jews in general had given up using the divine name as early as the first century. And Frank Shaw has shown that onomatica from that period also show the name was in use. I think the onus is on those who claim Jews in the first century avoided using the divine name to provide evidence.