how about "abba" which means daddy/father or how about YaHWeH which is more right or God of abraham, Isa.,etc
gods name
by lurk 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
XQsThaiPoes
I have a question. Did acient people ever do crazy things with words like we do today?
I mean maybe words change so fast and mutate so much because of advertising and media. Everyday products come half way around the world often at cheaper prices than domestics. So maybe you have to be more conservative when interpeting acient words. I mean look at the word "gay" now it is a household word for homosexual something not too popular 50 years ago back then you were a "sissy". Being sissy today has almost lost its homosexual conotation. Look at the word semaphore. It has almost gone out of everyday use but 50 years ago they still used them for traffic signals and flag signaling was popular.
-
Pole
I have a question. Did acient people ever do crazy things with words like we do today?
I mean maybe words change so fast and mutate so much because of advertising and media. Everyday products come half way around the world often at cheaper prices than domestics. So maybe you have to be more conservative when interpeting acient words. I mean look at the word "gay" now it is a household word for homosexual something not too popular 50 years ago back then you were a "sissy". Being sissy today has almost lost its homosexual conotation. Look at the word semaphore. It has almost gone out of everyday use but 50 years ago they still used them for traffic signals and flag signaling was popular.
Actually there is overwhelming evidence that the advent of the media and communication technology had mainly a consolidating and standardizing effect on language and languages.
"Crazy things" have always happened with language. Perhaps more in the past than now - because of the separation of cultures. If you go to Nigeria, it's not uncommon to have two villages within 5 kms where two totally different languages are spoken, because of a natural barrier such as a river separating them. And if you live in a city in a block of flats you never know if your neighbour will understand you if you ask him to lend you a kettle. One way to make things less crazy, and more predictable was to accept the colonial language of English as a standard of communication.
-
Terry
Abba is like our own Poppa. It is what a child calls his father in an intimate and personal reference.
The emotion of a word is contextual. A language might contain many synonyms and the choice of which one is used has to do with the emotional messege being conveyed.
When Jesus was teaching prayer as a model or form he began with "our father". In Greek this is Pater Hemon (if memory serves) which means "father of us". But, speaking directly to his heavenly father he would use "Abba" like a child asking his daddy for help.
What is particularly obvious to me is that on NO occasion would it ever be okay to address the Supreme Being and creator of the universe by his own personal name! Incredible rudeness and hubris would be demonstrated. Would you walk up to A judge in a courtroom and say, "Billy, I need an ajournment"?
OF COURSE NOT. Yet, everyday JW's talk to god like that. They just barge in the front door and start calling him by (what they think is his personal) name.
How we address God is largely a matter of what reality that concept holds for us in our mind. Are we equal to the god we worship? Then, by all means, call him by name.
Are we in awe of the god we worship? Then, maybe we should prostrate ourselves and beg for audience with a more formal plea?
I am no longer a religious person who talks to invisible people; but, I think I detect in others when they pray to their god exactly who they think they are in relation to that god by the manner they use to address him.
-
confusedjw
V15 the Lord = "The Lord," <H<!>H>AVg; B, "Jesus."
Well there you have it. It is Jesus H. Christ after all.
-
Narkissos
Some sobering data on 'abba:
<<_Abba_. A form of the Aramaic word for "father" found in Gal 4:6; Rom
8:15; and Mark 14:36 alongside the Greek _ho pater_ as an address to God.
The presence of ho _pater_ in every case (instead of the vocative pater)
shows that the NT writers saw _abba_ as a determinative form: _'abba'_,
"the father"; cf. Matt 11:16; Luke 10:21. Such forms are frequently used in
Aramaic and Hebrew when a vocative is required: another example is
_talitha_ (Aram. _talyeta'_ [...]), rendered to _korasion_ in Mark 5:41.
Accordingly the explanation of _abba_ as the determinative form of _ab_
("father") is almost certainly correct.
<<Alternatively the form has been explained as a rare vocative (in which
case it could just as well be Hebrew as Aramaic) or as derived from
children?s baby talk (cf. "Papa," "Daddy"). If the last explanation were
right, then the use of "abba" as an address to God in Mark 14:36 might be
thought to imply a special, indeed a unique, intimacy. This view was held
at one time by J. Jeremias, but he later came to regard it as "a piece of
inadmissible naivety" (1967: 63). Wrong as it is, it deserves mention not
only because of its extensive dissemination beyond the walls of academia
but also because its influence can be detected even in the work of
respected scholars such as J. G. D. Dunn (1975: 21?26; 1980: 22?23) and is
explicit in the most recent writing of M. J. Borg (1987: 45). Apart from
the intrinsic unlikelihood of the idea that Jesus ever addressed God as
"Daddy," the suggestion is ruled out of court by one important fact:
wherever _abba_ is found with the meaning "father" or "my father" (in
Mishnaic Hebrew or Targumic Aramaic), it is equally employed of the fathers
of grown-up sons. One instance cited by G. Vermes (1983: 42) is Judah?s
threat to his unrecognized brother, Joseph, in the Tg. Neof. version of Gen
44:18: "I swear by the life of the head of abba, as you swear by the life
of the head of Pharaoh your master. . . .? And as J. Barr (1988)
emphasizes, inferences concerning the meaning of words must be based upon
function, not upon origin or derivation.>> (John Ashton, "Abba", in
Freedman, David Noel, ed., _The Anchor Bible Dictionary_, (New York:
Doubleday) 1997, 1992. -
Terry
Ahhh, the last piece of JW "scholarship" debunked!
Withdraw the Poppa.
NOT the Poppa!
-
lurk
i wrote a a flaming long reply and the flipping thing just got trashed by the server GRRRRRR
i cant be botherd to write it again.
What is particularly obvious to me is that on NO occasion would it ever be okay to address the Supreme Being and creator of the universe by his own personal name! Incredible rudeness and hubris would be demonstrated. Would you walk up to A judge in a courtroom and say, "Billy, I need an ajournment"?
i dont get that...YHWH/jehovah leaves his name but no where does he say dont use my name
the first and last name business only counts if you have got a last name .reminds me very much of the
my parents attitude to name use .where it used to be rude to call anyone even someone your own age by there first name.its still considered rude if your not invited to use a first name
dont you think all this last name first name buisness is more a result of modern attitudes as in victorian
attitudes..i mean people didnt even have last names at one time.
jesus did not get cross with people for calling him jesus and he's a bit higher up then my dad or the queen of england.
as for court judges ..i mean come on this is thousands of years later ...you cant compare modern manors to ancient isreal
Well there you have it. It is Jesus H. Christ after all.
lol confused , i never knew what the H stood for
lurk
-
Narkissos
Earlier in this thread I referred to Philo as an example of how (embarrassed) many monotheistic Jews felt about the idea of a personal name for the one and only God -- an idea which was actually an odd vestige of their polytheistic past, when Yhwh was the name of one god amongst others.
It may be worth quoting him again (De mutatione nominum = "On the change of names"):
(11) It was, therefore, quite consistent with reason that no proper name could with propriety be assigned to him who is in truth the living God. Do you not see that to the prophet who is really desirous of making an honest inquiry after the truth, and who asks what answer he is to give to those who question him as to the name of him who has sent him, he says, "I am that I Am,"{6}{#ex 3:14.} which is equivalent to saying, "It is my nature to be, not to be described by name:" (12) but in order that the human race may not be wholly destitute of any appellation which they may give to the most excellent of beings, I allow you to use the word Lord as a name; the Lord God of three natures--of instruction, and of holiness, and of the practice of virtue; of which Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob are recorded as the symbols. For this, says he, is the everlasting name, as if it has been investigated and discerned in time as it exists in reference to us, and not in that time which was before all time; and it is also a memorial not placed beyond recollection or intelligence, and again it is addressed to persons who have been born, not to uncreated natures. (13) For these men have need of the complete use of the divine name who come to a created or mortal generation, in order that, if they cannot attain to the best thing, they may at least arrive at the best possible name, and arrange themselves in accordance with that; and the sacred oracle which is delivered as from the mouth of the Ruler of the universe, speaks of the proper name of God never having been revealed to any one, when God is represented as saying, "For I have not shown them my Name;"{7}{#ex 6:3.} for by a slight change in the figure of speech here used, the meaning of what is said would be something of this kind: "My proper name I have not revealed to them," but only that which is commonly used, though with some misapplication, because of the reasons abovementioned. (14) And, indeed, the living God is so completely indescribable, that even those powers which minister unto him do not announce his proper name to us. At all events, after the wrestling match in which the practicer of virtue wrestled for the sake of the acquisition of virtue, he says to the invisible Master, "Tell me thy Name;"{8}{#ge 32:29.} but he said, "Why askest thou me my name?" And he does not tell him his peculiar and proper name, for says he, it is sufficient for thee to be taught my ordinary explanations. But as for names which are the symbols of created things, do not seek to find them among immortal natures.