What's the True Name of God?

[sari83]

Quote Vic:
You say you want to basically call Almighty God by His name. Let me ask you, would you address a king or queen of a country by their first name? Would you call your father or grandfather by their name? Isn't it customary to use a title to address such, to show due honor--even according to the Scriptures?
End quote:

Sari83:
Yes, I would like to call God by the name He gave to mankind. If it wasn't appropriate, it is my point of view that He would not have given it.

Quote Vic:
It also according to the Scriptures that Jesus, when He taught the disciples to pray that He said, Our FATHER....

Now let me ask you, if addressing God in a way other than Father [and what we see as the myriad of titles of attributes throughout Scripture, and what was done in that instance; and Jesus referred to Him as Father in other passages; why do suppose Jesus did not say to pray starting with, Our Jehovah, or Our YHWH,[surely Jesus knew how to pronounce it] or Our Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh or Our I AM WHO I AM or pray saying Our I AM? Wouldn't that be Scriptural, according to what we know about the Name God Himself has given record of in the Scriptures?

Why did Jesus instead teach the disciples to pray saying, Our Father? Could it be perhaps to convey the relationship we have as believers in Jesus....
End quote--

Sari83:
Good points, Vic. Yes, Christ was teaching that we should humble ourselves and become like children before Him.

---

Mary:
What really scares me about your post is the short trip to witchcraft. This may sound extreme, and many will think I'm OTT, but what is at the bottom line of witchcraft but invoking a special word or name?

Sari83:
The name of God is witchcraft? A name that is found in the scriptures 6,800+ times, and in old times was used openly and as commonly as we say God bless you.

And when we pray in Jesus name, that is not witchcraft or invoking a special word, is it? Is it not written, the demons will flee in His name?

[Vic]

Sarah when you use the phrase the 'tetragrammaton' you are going beyond the name of God in the Scriptures, which was written as Adonai for the people who believed it too sacred to speak. People reverenced and feared God, especially after they were allowed to feel His presence.

Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. [/b]

They didn't just flippantly say His name or use it as a 'normal' word. It is believed by those who use the term tetragrammaton within Judaism's kabbalah, that knowing the 'true' name of God also means having power, those who 'knew' the name were holy and more spiritual than others.

Quoting again from one of my articles> http://www.seekgod.ca/practicalkab.htm

Quote:Much of the interpretation and mystical practices of the oral Torah are related to the Name of God. The Tetragrammaton or Schem Hamphorasch refers to what Kabbalists and many Orthodox Jews call the Ineffable Name. The four-lettered name of God, in Hebrew is, "yod, he, vau, he", or in English capitals YHVH, although some occult sources say it's IHVH. Others also state that the YHVH is "yood, hey, vood, hey." According to various writings, the true ancient pronunciation is now unknown since it has been believed that the Name was too sacred to be written or pronounced by the profane. In reading the sacred writings, the term 'Adonai' was substituted for that reason. That teaching is also why Hebrew Roots and Messianic adherents write God as "G-d."

We read in Exodus 33:19 and then 34:5-6

"And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth."

And in the New Testament: Philippians 2:10 -11

"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

Quoting various sources, Nesta Webster states that the 'real' Name of God was hidden from the people for the reasons stated above.

"…The Tetragrammaton might only be uttered once a year on the Day of Atonement by the High Priest in the Holy of Holies amid the sound of trumpets and cymbals, which prevented the people from hearing it. It is said that in consequence of the people thus refraining from its utterance, the true pronunciation of the name was at last lost. The Jews further believed that the Tetragrammaton was possessed by unbounded powers. "He who pronounces it shakes heaven and earth and inspires the very angels with astonishment and terror."2. "The Ineffable Name thus conferred miraculous gifts; it was engraved on the rod of Moses and enabled him to perform wonders, just as, according to the Toledut Yeshu, it conferred the same powers on Christ…" 27.

From other information, we know that the sages, who promoted this belief, were mystics, many of whom also believed the entire Torah was the Name of God. Through gematria permutations and other practices, "72 names of God" could also be discovered. The Divine or Ineffable Name is believed to be known only by those adepts that qualify for that secret initiation and knowledge and these are believed to become endowed with "magical powers" by uttering or writing it.

Cathy Burns again quotes Albert Mackey, who refers to the male/female aspect of God as represented by the Tetragrammaton:

"[The Tetragrammaton]...is supposed to denote the hermaphroditic essence of Jehovah as containing within himself the male and female principle." 29.

From articles such as, Kabbalah and Jewish Mysticism, we learn of legends in the Talmud and Zohar about rabbis who uttered or wrote the Tetragrammaton and thereby "created an artificial man." There are also Talmudic and Kabbalist stories of rabbis creating animals for food and other such legends by use of the "Name".

"The Talmud and other sources ascribe supernatural activities to many great rabbis. Some rabbis pronounced a name of G-d and ascended into heaven to consult with the G-d and the angels on issues of great public concern. One scholar is said to have created an artificial man [Golem] by reciting various names of G-d. Much later stories tell of a rabbi who created a man out of clay and brought it to life by putting in its mouth a piece of paper with a name of G-d on it. However, this area of Kabbalah is known by very few, and practiced by even fewer." 30.

Many sources claim that these "golem" did not have a real soul, because that would be unacceptable—to create what only God is able to do. These acts were considered permissible and are not considered to be the same as those involved in Black magic, although no explanation is given as to the difference. Some suggest it simply showed the adept's ability to be close to God's wisdom and creative ability. These sages are considered to be Holy men and above reproach. Others state that these 'creations' were a form of initiation and proved the adepts knowledge of the Name and other issues.

....According to the Toledot Yeshu and similar writings, the miracles of Christ are a reflection of His possession of this same "mastery" over the Name, no different than any other "adept."

....Historical records reveal many Jewish adepts who made an impact on their peers by their magical abilities, although many orthodox Jews rejected their feats as charlatanism. However, their magical abilities were also the impetus for various movements which divided the Jews over whether the particular adept was indeed the long awaited Messiah.

These adepts were called Masters of the Name or Baal Shems. The term, "Baal Shem means that the person was regarded as expert in the 'practical kabbalah' or magic. 'Baal Shem means literally one who is master of the name of God, who knows how to employ it." 31.

You see Sarah, many of your posts permeate gnostic concepts or under Christian doctrine, heresy. You seem to be tossed to and fro by the things you post and go after every wind of doctrine, either with or without understanding why it is incorrect based on the Scriptures.

The pursuit of the tetragrammaton can only be put into the perspective of those who call it that and also desire the same knowledge, and the beliefs surrounding it. Yehovah or Jehovah are recognised as the closest and most accurate pronunciation in english from the OT, as shown in Exodus 6:2,3. God was the translated word for Elohiym, etc. Hebrew or aramaic into English in the OT. But in the NT and under the New Covenant, God gave Jesus as the way to know Him, and said at the name of Jesus--in English rather than Koine Greek---that every knee will bow.

Sarah you never seem to be satisfied with the Truth as found in the Scriptures. You always appear to want that extra bit of info that comes from outside the Scriptures and then apply it and try to make the Scriptures fit that doctrine. That's called being gnostic. What Mary is saying is accurate, based on your posts and what we know based on the Scriptures and information on the tetragrammaton historically and factually. You really need to sort through your beliefs and start hearing what is being said to you Scripturally and factually.

You appear to feel you are here to teach everyone what you have learned in '9' or 2 or 3 yrs depending which post we refer back to, as sheep had pointed out to you. The contradictions, as noted by Mary and Rose, are throughout all the threads you post to. But Sarah, while every person who believes Jesus Christ can edify and encourage one another, you don't even seem to know who Jesus Christ is and deny His divinity and so on.

The Scriptures say, aside from your off base doctrinal issues that are so apparent to other Christians, that as older Christians--and I can claim that having been a believer for over 35 years, and still have so much to learn-- as you have presented your beliefs on so many issues in such a way as to appear to teach us the 'truth', but Sarah, maturity in Christ comes over time, and discernment between truth and error comes from spending time studying the Word and applying it to discern between truth and error, good and evil by full use of the Scriptures as the litmus test.

Heb 5:13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
Heb 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

That is why time and again you have posted error, and it has been refuted; you have sourced heretical writings and doctrine and posted them, and they have been refuted, and so on, but it does not seem to make an impact on you at all. You just move forward on to the next item on your 'list'. I just get the feeling that you are so set in your beliefs which you developed somewhat on your own and also in the forums like Followers of Yah, and nazarite.net, that you have this mission to convey all the heresies from there and never hear anything we might say to show it all for what it is. False doctrine. I don't want to offend you Sarah, but I want to be honest with you and say what I think is important for you to hear. I hope you can receive it.

[YYZ Skinhead]

I said this earlier in the thread: the only context in which I've seen the term "Tetragrammaton" used is in the occult. It's on the Wheel of Fortune and Temperance tarot cards in the Rider-Waite-Smith based decks. Witches, New Agers, practicioners of "black" and "white" Magick (different names, same demonic powers) all use it. Satanic Ritual Magician/artist Eliphas Levi used it. Would anyone who considers themselves a Christian want to use the same terminology as the guy who drew this thing?

[sari83]

(04-15-2011 12:21 PM)YYZ Skinhead Wrote:  I said this earlier in the thread: the only context in which I've seen the term "Tetragrammaton" used is in the occult. It's on the Wheel of Fortune and Temperance tarot cards in the Rider-Waite-Smith based decks. Witches, New Agers, practicioners of "black" and "white" Magick (different names, same demonic powers) all use it. Satanic Ritual Magician/artist Eliphas Levi used it. Would anyone who considers themselves a Christian want to use the same terminology as the guy who drew this thing?

Oh, I thought Tetragrammaton, was the Greek word used to describe the four letters of God's name, YHWH.

[YYZ Skinhead]

(04-15-2011 03:13 PM)sari83 Wrote:  Oh, I thought Tetragrammaton, was the Greek word used to describe the four letters of God's name, YHWH.

Literally translated, "tetragrammaton" merely means "a word with four letters". Kabbalists and people in other occult religions use the capitalized term "Tetragrammaton" to refer specifically to יהוה‎ which they use (blasphemously) as a Magickal name.

[sari83]

(04-15-2011 04:12 PM)YYZ Skinhead Wrote:  

(04-15-2011 03:13 PM)sari83 Wrote:  Oh, I thought Tetragrammaton, was the Greek word used to describe the four letters of God's name, YHWH.

Literally translated, "tetragrammaton" merely means "a word with four letters". Kabbalists and people in other occult religions use the capitalized term "Tetragrammaton" to refer specifically to יהוה‎ which they use (blasphemously) as a Magickal name.

Oh, ok. I'm sure that's not how God intended His name to be used.

---

Vic:
You see Sarah, many of your posts permeate gnostic concepts or under Christian doctrine, heresy. You seem to be tossed to and fro by the things you post and go after every wind of doctrine, either with or without understanding why it is incorrect based on the Scriptures.

Sari83:
Can you give me some specific examples of unscriptural gnostic concepts? I would genuinely like to know.

Vic:
Sarah you never seem to be satisfied with the Truth as found in the Scriptures. You always appear to want that extra bit of info that comes from outside the Scriptures and then apply it and try to make the Scriptures fit that doctrine.

Sari83:
In some of your articles you reference sources outside the scriptures, i.e. talmud, zohar....
Is it not ok to reference current and/or historical documents? I read creation science articles that affirm Noah's flood, young earth, etc. I didn't need those factual confirmations because I already believed, but truth is truth. If there is a witness to truth that exists, it's because God has allowed it to exist.

Vic:
You appear to feel you are here to teach everyone what you have learned in '9' or 2 or 3 yrs depending which post we refer back to, as sheep had pointed out to you. The contradictions, as noted by Mary and Rose, are throughout all the threads you post to.
End quote-

Sari83:
From my point of view, Mary and Rose were nit-picking at my words because they must not have liked what I expressed in a particular post. When I'm reading someone's post I don't look for miniscule errors to try and discredit the bigger picture of what the person was saying. I am here on this forum because I would like to hear the perspectives of other believers, and some of the topics are controversial. I would like to learn all sides of the spectrum. We have to admit that each person is an individual who see's and understands things based on there own life experiences.

Vic:
That is why time and again you have posted error, and it has been refuted; you have sourced heretical writings and doctrine and posted them, and they have been refuted, and so on, but it does not seem to make an impact on you at all. You just move forward on to the next item on your 'list'. I just get the feeling that you are so set in your beliefs which you developed somewhat on your own and also in the forums like Followers of Yah, and nazarite.net, that you have this mission to convey all the heresies from there and never hear anything we might say to show it all for what it is. False doctrine. I don't want to offend you Sarah, but I want to be honest with you and say what I think is important for you to hear. I hope you can receive it.

Sari83:
How is commenting on topics that are open for discussion on this forum, conveying heresies? Why even open up some of these topics of discussion? Is it so that people can be reemed for not welcoming the not-so-gentle criticism of those advanced members on this forum?

[Rose of Shushan]

Hey Sari
it's kind of lame that you feel that responding to your posts is nit -picking since this is a discussion forum and after all your posts are nit-pickin our Scriptures and Christian practices.
If you truly feel I am nit picking you then I am sorry it is not my intention.My intention is dialogue since I used to be into hebrew roots stuff and I identify a lot with the things we are talking about.

[YYZ Skinhead]

Sari83, I wasn't trying to criticise you. All I was saying was that the term "Tetragrammaton" capitalized and used the way occultists (and apparently Hebrew Roots people?) use it is Magickal and that using the name that way is blasphemous.

[Vic]

(04-15-2011 04:21 PM)sari83 Wrote:  Oh, ok. I'm sure that's not how God intended His name to be used.

Agreed. The point is Sarah, if you look at how God is presented in the Hebrew and how it becomes translated into English, you are getting to know Him by the attributes and titles which is how God intended it. El shaddai > God Almighty; El Elyon > The Most High God; El Olam > The Everlasting God....

Every attribute, righteousness, mercy, holy, justice, etc can all be prefaced with the Lord our or of... that's how we know who He is. He was referred to as Father in the OT also, btw. We can never even begin to know everything about who God is. He is omnipotent and infinite. Our finite minds can't even begin to comprehend what that means.

Job 11:7 Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?
Job 11:8 It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?
Job 11:9 The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.

Job 26:1 But Job answered and said,
Job 26:2 How hast thou helped him that is without power? how savest thou the arm that hath no strength?
Job 26:3 How hast thou counselled him that hath no wisdom? and how hast thou plentifully declared the thing as it is?
Job 26:4 To whom hast thou uttered words? and whose spirit came from thee?
Job 26:5 Dead things are formed from under the waters, and the inhabitants thereof.
Job 26:6 Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering.
Job 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
Job 26:8 He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them.
Job 26:9 He holdeth back the face of his throne, and spreadeth his cloud upon it.
Job 26:10 He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
Job 26:11 The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof.
Job 26:12 He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud.
Job 26:13 By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent.
Job 26:14 Lo, these are parts of his ways: but how little a portion is heard of him? but the thunder of his power who can understand?

Psa 145:3 Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; and his greatness is unsearchable.

Isa 40:28 Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.

---

Vic:
You see Sarah, many of your posts permeate gnostic concepts or under Christian doctrine, heresy. You seem to be tossed to and fro by the things you post and go after every wind of doctrine, either with or without understanding why it is incorrect based on the Scriptures.

Sari83:
Can you give me some specific examples of unscriptural gnostic concepts? I would genuinely like to know.

>>>>> I think if you took the time to really go back over the dialogues you will see what we are concerned with Sarah. But one reference would be in the thread here > http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/showthread.p...ght=yahuah

We aren't trying to be hard on you or be critical or whatever. We are testing what you say to the Scripture and facts, and Sarah, whether you realise it or not, you do contradict your own statements. We are required to do that testing and proving all things. Much of what you present we have dealt with many times before so we recognise and are able to discern problem issues in what you say.

Vic:
Sarah you never seem to be satisfied with the Truth as found in the Scriptures. You always appear to want that extra bit of info that comes from outside the Scriptures and then apply it and try to make the Scriptures fit that doctrine.

Sari83:
In some of your articles you reference sources outside the scriptures, i.e. talmud, zohar....
Is it not ok to reference current and/or historical documents? I read creation science articles that affirm Noah's flood, young earth, etc. I didn't need those factual confirmations because I already believed, but truth is truth. If there is a witness to truth that exists, it's because God has allowed it to exist.

>>>>.It is absolutely alright to reference other information but you need to discern whether it is sound doctrinally. That is a huge issue. When I researched the articles about HR, I researched the Talmud and Zohar etc because they were being promoted as a source of doctrine for Christians, or their doctrine was permeating the writings of HR leadership without being stated that's what it was at times. It needed to be proven and tested and many writers I have sourced in pursuit of that information are not Christian. Because those writings are from Judaism, which denies Christ, not Christianity. Therefore, we gain understanding why it isn't a source of doctrine for Christians.

Everything we do, we must use the standard of the Word of God first, and then also prove things factually. Just because something has been flagged as Christian does not mean it is, even if the presumption is that the person was or is some wonderful Christian. It always, always must be able to be proven sound. People can sometimes make mistakes in information, but, if the foundation is sound on which they stand, it will be shown as that, not a false doctrine. If that makes sense.

Vic:
You appear to feel you are here to teach everyone what you have learned in '9' or 2 or 3 yrs depending which post we refer back to, as sheep had pointed out to you. The contradictions, as noted by Mary and Rose, are throughout all the threads you post to.
End quote-

Sari83:
From my point of view, Mary and Rose were nit-picking at my words because they must not have liked what I expressed in a particular post. When I'm reading someone's post I don't look for miniscule errors to try and discredit the bigger picture of what the person was saying. I am here on this forum because I would like to hear the perspectives of other believers, and some of the topics are controversial. I would like to learn all sides of the spectrum. We have to admit that each person is an individual who see's and understands things based on there own life experiences.

>>>>>No one is nit-picking. What you need to consider is that if other believers are consistently challenging you on what you are presenting there must be a reason----and yes, everyone can be wrong. But I am suggesting to you Sarah, that you have absorbed wrong doctrine, because of not knowing the Word of God well enough to discern the error. That's what Mary, YYZ, Rose, Sheep, myself and others are seeing. It has nothing to do with being upset over your statements. It has everything to do with recognizing sound doctrine or not. I've been on the net and dealing with these things for about 13 years now. I have learned much and still have soo very much to learn. Majority isn't always right Sarah, but, in some instances, when dealing with doctrine on this forum, we do recognise areas of concern---because of dealing with them time and again and by reason of use of the Scriptures, can recognise issues.

So when you are being questioned or the dialogue is suggesting you need to change your thinking you really need to think about it. There isn't a time where someone brings in something I am unfamiliar with that I don't consider it and check it to the Scriptures and factually as necessary. But if I don't know all the pertaining Scriptures or facts I am not going to make a solid judgment. That's when prayer and more digging is required and considering what others are saying, and weighing that to the Scriptures. We aren't islands unto ourselves. The body of Christ is there to support, admonish, reprove, correct and encourage one another. All based first and foremost on the Word of God.

Vic:
That is why time and again you have posted error, and it has been refuted; you have sourced heretical writings and doctrine and posted them, and they have been refuted, and so on, but it does not seem to make an impact on you at all. You just move forward on to the next item on your 'list'. I just get the feeling that you are so set in your beliefs which you developed somewhat on your own and also in the forums like Followers of Yah, and nazarite.net, that you have this mission to convey all the heresies from there and never hear anything we might say to show it all for what it is. False doctrine. I don't want to offend you Sarah, but I want to be honest with you and say what I think is important for you to hear. I hope you can receive it.

Sari83:
How is commenting on topics that are open for discussion on this forum, conveying heresies? Why even open up some of these topics of discussion? Is it so that people can be reemed for not welcoming the not-so-gentle criticism of those advanced members on this forum?

>>>>>>If you claim to be a Christian --which you actually haven't since your childhood, and rather appear to have spent time with HR and never deny that continued assocation, and you made the distinction between youself and the Christians you have a study with---if you post comments that are contrary to Scriptural truth and convey them as truth and sound doctrine, and it is error, or contrary to particularly the NT, truth of Jesus Christ and so on, it's a heresy. And if you don't acknowledge the error when shown for what it is, it suggests you continue to hold those beliefs.

That means to me at least that you are not willing to consider what is presented to you, either factually or Scripturally. It's about Truth Sarah. Discussion forums are meant to discuss all manner of beliefs, and we do that, but, we also have to keep in mind that readers who may not believe or who are immature in the faith may not discern the error. So, if someone's posts are answered carefully, and error or contradictions questioned, then are you suggesting they shouldn't be? Aren't we called to prove all things? To make sure that what we say and convey is right Scripturally and as accurate as possible? And the Scriptures used are presented in context and not just window dressing or misused etc?

No one is reeming you out Sarah. We do want to see you grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But you need to really understand who He is first. And you need to know that God's Word can be trusted, that it hasn't been messed with. And you need to understand that Christians aren't pagans or practicing paganism--at least the Christians I know. You need to understand that if someone, anyone, posts things that are contrary to what we know and understand to be sound doctrine it will be proven one way or the other or challenged.

[sari83]

(04-15-2011 06:02 PM)Rose of Shushan Wrote:  Hey Sari
it's kind of lame that you feel that responding to your posts is nit -picking since this is a discussion forum and after all your posts are nit-pickin our Scriptures and Christian practices.
If you truly feel I am nit picking you then I am sorry it is not my intention.My intention is dialogue since I used to be into hebrew roots stuff and I identify a lot with the things we are talking about.

I didn't mean simply responding to my posts is nit-picking. I was referring to the times when you were accusing me of contradictions over minor errors that didn't effect my statement in it's entirety. So, I may not always express myself with the complete clarity I intended to, but I would appreciate the benefit of the doubt sometimes. From one human being to another.