The so-called queen of heaven goes by many names, but all related. The one in Rev scripture "get out of her" is talking about Jezebel, however she/idol is called Liberty today. (False visions, false peace, and fornication) Many have gave their lives for her, and still do.

Brother Yohanan

I live in Canada, my children attend public schools in which our national anthem is played. They do not sing the national anthem nor stand for it, and that is a shame. It is not for any reasons against national anthems as it is for some who refrain from acknowledging it. No, it is for the simple reason that the lyrics ambiguously say "God keep our land". In the beginning this "God" was the Christian trinity, a god I do not acknowledge. But even in these latter days the Federal Ministry of Heritage says that this "God" is undefined. I think they should probably change it to "gods" because of their multicultural agenda and sensitivities. Until they acknowledge this God as the God of Abraham, Yitzak, and Yacob only, then my family won't acknowledge it. And we would like to acknowledge the national anthem.

Now would this situation be any different if the lyrics were "Elohim, Alaha, or the Almighty keep our land"? It wouldn't do anything to establish the proper identity and worship on its own. This is why as Jews we have the shema.

People can believe what they want about the God on the U.S. Dollar bill. Today it is rather ambiguous. Originally it was the trinitarian Christian God. However it is clearly part of a Masonic emblem, and not just because they use the term "God". Freemason's also acknowledge and use the Name of YHWH. Does this somehow make them legitimate? Of course not. Does the use of God make a belief illegitimate? I don't believe so. You have to look at the whole contents of the picture, not just the title. If the Freemason's put "In YHWH we trust" on the bill would you feel any better? You shouldn't. It doesn't contradict their belief to do so, and it would entrap more people. At the time they created the motto, no one would be enticed by a term they didn't know like Elohim, but rather they used "God". If there is enough protest, maybe YHWH will appear on the bill, but it won't be much better than the YHWH on the Canaanite coin. In fact it would only make matters worse.

p.s. I see that Larry has been busy covering his tracks again lol. Just as well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yahwehwitnesses:
Blessings Lavi,
You might want to correct what you wrote
[b]You must serve them, and you must not bow down to them???
Brother Yohanan [/B]

---

..........OY VAVOY! Thank You..I have edited my previous post !

" Therefore be very strong to carefully obey and do all that is written in the Book of the Law given through Mosheh , without turning aside to right or to the left. By not mingling with these nations that are left with you : by not pronouncing the names of their gods , nor causing anyone to administer a vow in their names. You must not serve them , and you must not bow down to them. " Yahshua 23:6-7 ( Yahshua ben Nun )

May Yahwehs tender mercies be a constant visitor within your gates !

Shama - Mishmereth - Abodah
Lavi Chagyah

I have just read all the pages of this thread, except for Larry Acheson's, which for some mysterious reason have had all their text deleted. I'm disappointed, because i'm familiar with Larry, and would have liked to read his insights on this topic.

Regarding why i don't believe that "G_d" should be used in reference to our Father YHWH: I'm not a researcher, other than picking up a few things from various sources. This posting represents my reasoning and conclusion, so don't expect a scholarly defense -- take it for what value you may derive from it. In answering this question, about 4 years after accepting the Name of YHWH, i found the key sufficient to convince me not to call Him "G_d".

I came across Isa.65:11, and discovered that the KJV translators had covered up the proper name "G_d", and that this was a deity that our ancestors were worshipping, along with the goddess "Meni", shortly before their captivity by Assyria.

I then asked myself where our English word "god" came from. I found that it came from the name of a "teutonic deity", and that the Scandinavians, Germans, and English had similar terms for deity, like "God", "Gud", and "Gott".

What could be the connection? Since all those nations are at least in part descended from the House of Israel, it became almost obvious to me that as our ancestors migrated from the area of their captivity through the Caucasus Mountains (hence the term "Caucasians"), and spread to their new national homelands, they simply carried the name of the deity "G_d" with them, changing the spelling & pronunciation slightly as they went to their new countries. It not only became a common noun for any deity, but also the proper name by which they came to call the Creator.

It's somewhat like the proper name "Kleenex" evolved into a common noun for "facial tissue", while still retaining its original use as a brand name.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckbaldwin:
I have just read all the pages of this thread, except for Larry Acheson's ... and would have liked to read his insights on this topic.

---

Shalom, Chuck ... and my own thoughts are essentially the same. Even though it actually seems to me that neither "side" can completely prove one thing or another about the word "God", I believe the various and related claims and/or allegations should be heard.

In my own case, I first heard the case against the word "God" from a man who eventually wrote this to me:

"If you continue [questioning my work], then I now ask Yahovah in the Name of our Yahshua Messiah to thus bring down upon you all of the 'curses' that are written in the last part of Revelation, and to turn you over to Satan as written, and also a few personal curses that were written sometime ago by Apostle Paul!"

Nevertheless, I still learned much from that man even after that!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mountain Jew:
... my children ... do not sing the national anthem nor stand for it ... for the simple reason that the lyrics ambiguously say "God keep our land" ... a god I do not acknowledge.

---

At the expense of anything else I might say, first please know I pray your children continue being enabled to withstand any and all ridicule they might thus receive. My wife and I stopped going to auto races a few years ago, and I was simultaneously relieved that I would no longer have to run the risk of someone giving me grief over my not singing this land's anthem ... and with your children's situation considered, I now feel ashamed about the fact I had nevertheless been standing allegedly "out of respect" (to actually avoid getting shoved from the bleachers) and that I had already known we did not even belong there in the first place.

quote:

---

... the Federal Ministry of Heritage says that this "God" [mentioned in the national anthem] is undefined. I think they should probably change it to "gods" because of their multicultural agenda and sensitivities.

---

We certainly agree there, as pluralism is today’s global standard.

Since early this morning, I have been pondering whether and/or how to either help to keep this discussion going or to simply "let it be" for now ...

Shall we continue?! Personally, I am enjoying this greatly.

By now I believe you well understand that when I dissect someone's words, I am only dissecting those words and not the individual who wrote/spoke them ... and of course, I much appreciate your own similar practices.

In relation to the Federal Ministry of Heritage, you have written:

quote:

---

Until they acknowledge this God [mentioned in the national anthem] ...
(... the Christian trinity ...)
(... in these latter days ... undefined.)
... as the God of Abraham, Yitzak, and Yacob only, then my family won't acknowledge it. And we would like to acknowledge the national anthem.

---

Literally, I see an impossibility there – apples and oranges – but my actual point here is to again claim to show the simple fact of the existence of no good use for the word “God”. Even if that word is actually completely “neutral” or whatever, there is nevertheless no more chance of this world ever using it in even that particular way than there is in its use of “God” to acknowledge the very One who is sovereign over all.

quote:

---

Now would this situation be any different if the lyrics were "Elohim, Alaha, or the Almighty keep our land"? It wouldn't do anything to establish the proper identity and worship on its own.

---

Agreed. Hence, we need some way to identify YHWH exclusively.

quote:

---

This is why as Jews we have the shema.

---

Honest question: What is "the shema", and how does it here relate?

Blessings to you ...

I trust you know that there are two sides to every story. I will not list all of my reasons for exiting this discussion (there are several), but please be assured that "flaw in my exegesis" is not one of them. As I trust you can discern from the above postings, this thread has degenerated into what I believe is a tactless discussion, and I really do not care to be a part of it. The fact is, I really do believe that those who refer to YHWH as "God" dishonor Him. No matter how nicely I try to put this, or even how often I state that I condemn no one for believing differently than me, those who disagree sometimes do not react very kindly.

I do believe that you are correct in your findings, Chuck. I, like Mountain Jew, have saved my postings for future reference, so if you wish we can arrange to mutually share what we have found in our research.

Here are a couple of the questions/points that have aroused the ire of the opposing camp:

* Mountain Jew has plainly stated that, in his opinion, Torah endorses the use of "heathen" epithets to YHWH. By his own rule, he must therefore believe that YHWH gives His blessing to being called "our Zeus" or "our Satan." This "rule" opens a virtual "Pandora's Box" of acceptable "epithets" for our Heavenly Father. In fact, with that rule we could even refer to YHWH as "our Pandora." It becomes a virtual "anything goes." It's however one chooses to linguistically and culturally redefine any word or name.

* Try asking the opposition where the ancient Irish idol named "Baal-tin-glas" came from. Is it even remotely possible that the term Baal was carried into Ireland by descendants of Israel? I don't believe any reasonable student of the Word would deny the obvious connection. But what about the Irish idol named Gad-El-glas? That is where the spiritual feathers get ruffled and charges of scholastic incompetence enter in.

You might wish to ask Mountain Jew which language/culture he thinks the Baal in Baal-tin-glas traces to. I don't believe he has ever addressed that one.

And while we're at it, where did the word "El" come from?

Mountain Jew has made it clear that (in his expert opinion) there cannot be a connection between Gad-El-glas and the Canaanite idol Gad, so you don't need to ask him that question. In fact, he believes J.G.R. Forlong was "messed up" when he came up with such a name, even though Mr. Forlong plainly stated in the preface of his book Rivers of Life that he approached the pronunciations of names with great care. Moreover, in another portion of Forlong's book, when he addressed the name of the Creator, instead of referring to Him as "Jehovah," as many scholars of his day did (back in 1883), he employed the form Yahuê. Does this sound to you like a bumbling wannabe scholar who was "messed up" and didn't really know what he was doing?

Of course, when an Irish professor confirmed that the Irish Gad is pronounced "Gahd," more charges of scholastic incompetence are forthcoming.

The translation that Forlong listed for the name Gad-El-glas, by the way, is "Green god snake." The word "glas" (pronounced "gloss") means "green." The word "El," of course, is commonly translated "god" (or "deity"). I'll give you one guess as to the translation of the word "Gad."

Further research shows that the word pronounced "God" in the Russian language means "reptile." This, according to Mountain Jew, would most likely represent more shoddy research from an "overzealous Sacred Namer." The word "God" in Russian is also a curse word that I cannot repeat in this forum. I don't think I have mentioned that part in this forum until now.

What I find very intriguing is the fact that a Russian word containing the word "GAD" means "fortune-teller." Does anyone recall the name for the Canaanite idol of fortune? But, please, don't even think of trying to establish a connection between the Russian word Gad (pronounced "God") and the Hebrew "Gad," also pronounced "God." You do so at the risk of being labeled an "overzealous Sacred Namer."

The fact is, Russian, Irish and German are all known as Indo-European languages, which means many words share common roots. To find connections, one has to research. I hereby invite any degreed etymologist to e-mail me at seekutruth@aol.com to discuss the possibilities of the connections I have just pointed out. I am so confident of the connections that I am willing to stake my name and reputation on it. Can Mountain Jew say the same about his conclusion?

Ultimately, this all boils down to how badly one wishes to refer to Yahweh as their "God." As I quoted from a gentleman in my posting last night, I agree with him that YAHWEH and GOD are two separate entities. My guess is that those who cannot make a distinction between the two, thus seeing YAHWEH and GOD as the same being, would be open to the inclusion of the name YAHWEH GOD. As he also stated, "My opinion is, you can take the name out of the evil ... but you can't take the evil out of the name! A rose by any other name ... OR Satan ... remains what it is, regardless of what you think or say it is! Or can we worship the angel of light because the Father also uses the term? And if Satan uses the name GOD, how do you really know which one is being addressed ... by attaching the Creator's name to the demon, or attaching the demon to the Creator's name?"

There is lots more that could be said, but suffice it to say that this discussion has degenerated into too many innuendoes and unproductive dialogue for me to remain interested in continuing. With all due respect to those who choose to refer to the Almighty as "God," I believe they dishonor Him in so doing. There are so many other choices for titles out there that I simply cannot fathom why there is any desire to settle for anything less than the best. If "God" is the best you can do, I don't think you're trying very hard. Choosing a word that matches the pronunciation of the name of an idol whose worship is and was specifically condemned by YHWH is not my personal idea of "going for the best." To each his or her own, though.

For those who are interested in the information I shared in my previous postings, you are welcome to e-mail me. Rather than participate in such an emotional issue as this (and I am admittedly emotional about this issue), I have chosen to go a more private route in the future.

In the meantime, please understand that, contrary to Mountain Jew's unkind comments, I am not "covering my tracks," nor do I admit the discovery of any flaws in my research or exegesis. Seems to me the imagination of someone else is working overtime to discredit me, just as he tried to do to J.G.R. Forlong. It really isn't very nice, but the tactic did work well enough to prompt me to exit the discussion. Nice work in that regard, Mountain Jew.

Yours in Messiah,

Larry

[This message has been edited by Acheson (edited 12-30-2004).]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I typed etymology of G-d in my yahoo seach engine and came up with:

http://wahiduddin.net/words/name_god.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608x.htm

http://www.logon.org/english/S/p220.html

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=god&searchmode=none

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

Some interesting information there, enough to compel me to continue not using the word G-d in my life with YHWH.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:
...
As I trust you can discern from the above postings, this thread has degenerated into what I believe is a tactless discussion, and I really do not care to be a part of it.

---

If that is so, Larry, then why are you posting to it?

If you look very closely and with yourself aside, you will see that it is here slowly being made quite clear that the word "God" has no good use ...

Be patient, my fellow, watch quietly and learn some tact and see where we actually end up, eh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mountain Jew:
The only problem with that theory is that it has never been substantiated.

---

Since you reject the various ideas of where the name "God" came from, i would like to know where you think it came from. Most etomologies i have read go back as far as a Teutonic deity (even though you deny that), so i'm sure we would all be interested in seeing your etomology.

quote:

---

There is no God named "God" anywhere in the world at any time.

---

quote:

---

There was a god named "Gad" (a Hebrew term) at one time and this has absolutely no connection to the English term god. There is no Teutonic god named "God" either.

---

You see the real problem is that I can't deal with someone who has double standards. No matter how excellent the evidence is to the contrary you have it covered either way. If an idol was called "God" then it should be prohibited, if it was never the name of an idol, it should be prohibited. So either way, you want to see it prohibited without any apparent logical reason. So why should I bother to continue?

Here's something from an etymologist: Word Origins and Their Romantic Stories, Wilfred Funk, Litt. D., 1950, Grosset & Dunlap, New York, page 279:

quote:

---

The central word of all faiths is God, and the history of the title God is a tangle of guesses. The word God itself is related to similar words in Danish, Saxon, Old High German, Scandinavian, and other languages, and may even be related to an ancient Lithuanian word that referred to someone who practiced magic.

---

This etymologist's findings do nothing to cause me to want to refer to YHWH as my "God."

Other etymologists admit that they really don't know where "God" even came from:

From The New Dictionary of Theology, Joseph A. Komonchak, Mary Collins and Dermot A. Lane, editors, 1988, published by Michael Glazier, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, article “God,” page 423:

quote:

---

The etymology of the English word ‘God,’ as well as of the equivalent words in Latin, Greek and Hebrew, is much disputed.

---

The Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition, Volume VI, prepared by J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989, item “god,” page 639, validates the information above, saying, “The ulterior etymology [of 'god'] is disputed.”

A Cyclopædia of Religions, Volume II, by Major-General J. G. R. Forlong, originally published in 1906 by Bernard Quaritch, London, republished in 1997 by co-publishers Ganesh Publishing, Ltd., Bristol, United Kingdom and Edition Synapse, Tokyo, Japan, p. 155, notes, “It is remarkable that philologists are unable to decide the origin of this familiar Teutonic word.”

It appears that if one is to agree with the etymologists, one must agree that one doesn't have a clue as to where this word came from. I could cite others, but I believe the above is sufficient to underscore the fact that the etymologists, far from expressing certainty as to the origin of the word "God," express uncertainty.

As Chuck mentioned above, "For myself, i don't see the need to prove the obvious, but until i see it disproved, or a better theory offered, i'll stick with it."

I agree with your reasoning, Chuck. And now ... I will try to leave the discussion for good ... I apologize for intruding.

May YHWH bless,

Larry

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:
And now ... I will try to leave the discussion for good ... I apologize for intruding.

May YHWH bless,

Larry

---

Larry –

You should know that you are not "intruding", but have just been trying to post helpful information, so why say that? Please don't get offended if everyone in this forum (such as M.J.) doesn't agree with your conclusions. Personally, I think everyone in this forum has given interesting input (M.J. and others), whether we all agree on the issues presented or not. I don’t believe the goal of this forum is about “taking sides” or critically judging one another’s intentions or beliefs. Neither should our “personality differences” interfere with sharing the truth and our brotherly love for each other. None of us "know it all" and I believe all of us will find ourselves humbled when Yah'shua returns and we no longer see through a glass darkly. All we can do is present the truth the best we know how. Only YHWH through the Ruach HaKodesh can truly “convince” anyone of what the truth is. Have patience, thanks for your postings, and please never feel like you’re intruding...I’ve seen many (did this word come from “meni” by the way or is this just a phonetic coincidence?) get offended from those who didn’t agree with them and leave this forum who were posting helpful information.

If we took every word out of our vocabulary that had some connection or a possible etymological connection to a pagan deity, I think we would all have to cease speaking English or using words to communicate. Furthermore, we could spend our whole lives studying only the possible etymologies and word origins, but if that is all we did in our lives, where would we be? If we only concentrate on paganism and its roots, then we lose sight on concentrating on meditating on YHWH and focusing on the "holy" and set-apart life we are supposed to be living. We are to prove all things. If we can't prove it, then we shouldn't adamantly teach it as if the issue is totally cut and dry. However, I totally agree with you that we need to honor Yahweh and Yah’shua to the best of our ability. However, we don’t want to become like the Pharisees, who would exchange love, justice, mercy and truth for the traditions of men and place unbalanced emphasis on the minute details of the law, over the intent and greater objective of the torah to teach us how to love and forgive one another. I believe that balance is the key. Remember that we need to be merciful and forgiving, just as YHWH is merciful and has shown loving-kindness to many thousands (144,000 +) who love him and keep his commandments. Additionally, there will be a great multitude “that no man can number” who have washed their robes in the blood of the lamb coming out of all tribes, languages, nations and tongues. What a day to look forward to! Shalom aleichem.

By the way and just as a side note, on the hyper-technical side of things, there are many who believe that the word "good" came from "god". If this is true (and I'm not sure that it can be proven that this is really true), then in your previous post, in their eyes if they go strictly by word origins and not by the intended meanings behind the words, you would be saying that you "will try to leave the discussion for god" instead saying that you will try to leave the discussion for "good". Therefore, context has also got to be considered and not just the basis of etymological roots or the presence of homonyms or similar sounding words. Personally, I don’t prefer to use the term “God” for YHWH or especially for Yah’shua who is the "Son" of Yahweh, but I don't condemn or judge those such as M.J. who may feel that it is an acceptable title. If “meni” was the name of a god/deity/idol/demon, does that mean I can’t use the term, “many” or “men” or “money” or “mani”-pulative etc. because these words sound the same or similar? If this is so, such as what Koster presented in his book that LuvYah quoted from previously, then the list basically becomes endless and we will end up with a lot of strife from brethren judging each other over which words they use or don't use.