quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:

Pronunciation of man's name mentioned in I Chron. 11:34 = ____________________
Pronunciation of Heb. expression that means "the name" = _____________________

May YHWH bless,
Larry

---

Based on the Hebrew Torah Tajjim

Pronunciation of man's name mentioned in I Chron. 11:34 = _Hoshem/Hawshem___________________ (Qometz/Qametz o or aw sounding like cost, cord, or talk depending on dialect)

Pronunciation of Heb. expression that means "the name" = __Hash-shem___________________ (Pathahh a sounding like cat or father, depending on dialect)

As mentioned before the Shin in HaShem has a Dagesh forte, and this type of Dagesh doubles the Shin.

I will have to get back to you on Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem from the Samaritan Hebrew. In Samaritan Hebrew Hey (Pathahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is pronounced Hashim, but I will have to look in the Samaritan Torah I have when I get home. They modernly say Shema Shin (Tzere) - Mem (Pathahh) - Aleph. (their Hebrew has various Aramaic like qualities the aleph at the end is a definate article).
------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:

Well, this is all for now. I should add one thing: I am glad we agree that "HASHEM" should never have been substituted for YHWH's name by those who translated the Chumash.

May YHWH bless,
Larry

---

Let me clarify my belief a bit further on that. I don't believe that any person should rely on the TRANSLATION. This has nothing to do with the translators, especially since most Jewish translations also include the Hebrew right next the translation. Translations are often made from various circumstances, and only the translator can answer for his audiance. In the Jewish community there is no lack of direction of "who" is being spoken of, so it is not an issue for me of what the translators shouldn't have should have done. There are a a number of translations that translate what they believe to be the English meaning of Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey. One could easily have said that instead of translating more stress should have been placed in Hebrew education. The Name of Elohim is really not the only reason I have problems with translation, there are more theological matters that often are problems in such as can be seen in mistranslations of verses known by Jewish and non-Jewish sources to be about Mashi'ahh. Or translations that add theologies that didn't exist in the text. These are issues found in MOST translations regardless of who does them, in one way or the other.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:
If you have read everything I have written, you know I agree that our lives should reflect the character of Messiah Yeshua. Yet, to identify our role model, I believe it is helpful, Scriptural, and appropriate to use a name. The same for our Heavenly Father.

---

When or where did The Messiah ever do that, Larry, and when or where did He ever display any kind of character such as evident in the following:

quote:

---

What I'm mainly interested in (at this moment) is your reaction ...
...
I believe the Creator that you and Rivkah portray is not one of love and mercy ...
... some rigid, stern, cold-hearted Being who burns with anger when those who want to learn His name should happen to mispronounce it.
... although I'm not sure what punishment you believe awaits those of my persuasion.

I believe our Heavenly Father is so much more understanding of our weaknesses than either you or Rivkah seem willing to allow. This is what I have sensed from both of you through the maze of postings in this thread. From your perspective, it seems as though Sacred Namers consist mainly of bumbling idiots who just can't make up their minds how the Creator's name is pronounced ...

... you seem to believe that those of our persuasion "don't really care" what name we apply to the Creator. It's "whatever suits our fancy" type of thing to us ... at least this is how you and Rivkah seem to portray those of my persuasion. I'm sure those who do not share the desire to call upon our Creator with the name He gave to Himself will agree with your perspective. However, for folks like me, it is a simple desire to identify Him by name and to honor Him with it, just as the ancients did.

... Judaism (as a whole) does not proclaim the name YHWH.

... I am still amazed at how certain you are of the pronunciation "HaShem," yet you seem to be very uncertain about the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton.

---

??

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:I reply: The claim about Jews, as I understand it, is that they teach that the Tetragrammaton should not be pronounced. This is where I strongly disagree. I don't remember making any comments about the Jews "hiding the Tetragrammaton," but they do suppress the Name by teaching that it should not be vocalized.

---

Greetings Larry,

On your first point, you don't have to agree with me. The Talmud is clear on the events that took place, and the series of events that caused the current situation. It is also clear about what happened when the Temple was destoryed. The current Halakhah is that Mashi'ahh ben-Dawith will come and re-establish the pronunciation of Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey along with all other questionable issues such as the Beith HaMikdash and the location of the Aron HaEduth.

On your second comment about you never commenting that Jews were "hiding the Tetragrammaton," I don't remember refercing your name in conjunction with that statement (if I did I apologize, but if memory serves your name was not on that comment). If memory serves my last group of comments were open ended because 4 or so people were asking questions one after the other, much of which I already covered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acheson:
Besides, if such a teaching had never developed, would anyone have ever made the claim that the pronunciation has been lost?

All I know is, Judaism (as a whole) does not proclaim the name YHWH.

As I have mentioned before, and I'll mention it again, the first decree to not speak the Creator's name was directed AT the Jews by a heathen nation. And now, many Jews (not all, though) are obeying that decree. Some "rebel Jews" agree that it is wrong to suppress the name YHWH.

One final request. It seems as though you went to a lot of trouble in an attempt to demonstrate that "HaShem" is pronounced differently from the name of the Israelite man, whose name was "Hashem." Of course, this strongly implies that the Hebrew scholars I've consulted, including Strong's, didn't know their Hebrew as well as the scholars that you consulted. What I would like to see, but didn't, was the precise phonetic rendering of both of those Hebrew words. For some reason, unless I missed it ... and I admit I skimmed much of what you wrote ... I didn't see how those scholars believe those two words should be pronounced. I would like to see a comparison of the two, please.

And I am still amazed at how certain you are of the pronunciation "HaShem," yet you seem to be very uncertain about the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton.

Well, this is enough for now. If time allows, I may respond to additional comments later.

May YHWH bless,

Larry[/B]

---

Greetings Larry,

Actually, I never went into anything dealing with people's weaknesses. The intial questions on these issues started concerning what I do and don't do and what I believe i the issue, then it went into what Jews do or don't do do and what we believe on. The reasons and character of people outside of what I just mentioned were never the focus of anything I posted. What I stated is based on what the Hebrew Torah Tajjim and the Samaritan Torah say concerning Shemoth 20:6 and how it is applied for Jews in the current set of post 2nd Temple circumstances. Shemoth 20:6 says what it says in the Hebrew Torah Tajjim and Samaritan Torah. As I menitoned before it is understood from the Te'udah that proclaiming one thing makes it a Neder.

I never made a judgement on what you and others say about how you use Elohim's name, or what you believe to be His name. I have in fact never tried to pass any judgement on you or anyone else, I simply stated that your logic doesn't work for me because of what I do know of the Hebrew language and what I do know of what the Hebrew Torah Tajjim and the Samaritan Torah. That is why I said your theology and mine are not the same, because we are not reading from the texts. As I also stated MANY times before The Hebrew Torah Tajjim states what it states, on that issue not me. I also explained from the Te'udah of both Jews and Samaritans how this and other verses are meant and to whom they are intended in the context.

I am not going around claiming that you and any others will be JUDGED or CONDEMNED for what you do. Someone asked why JEWS don't try to pronounce Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey, which really is better questioned as what circumstances have caused some Jews from about 3rd to 4th cent. CE to the present to not pronounce THE THEORIES of how SOME PEOPLE believe that the Name of Elohim was pronounced. Once again I covered this many times, and the issue of some of the theories possibly having pagan origins complicates the issue even more. Yet, this is only ONE of the many issues as I have covered many times. Raising up one pronunciation that has pagan origins if memory serves goes against even Sacred Name theology (someone correct if I am wrongly interpreting SN theology) and according to some theories on the issue certain pronunciations used within the Sacred Name debate are of pagan origin, even the puplar ones. Yet, in everything I stated I dealt with why we Jews do what and what is upon us, and why most will wait for Mashi'ahh to return all things to their proper place.

In terms of your statement, Larry Stated: "All I know is, Judaism (as a whole) does not proclaim the name YHWH.". This is your opinion and you are entitled to that. As I stated before your interpretation of "proclaiming the name YHWH," is not the same as the understanding from the Hebrew Torah Tajjim nor the Samaritan Torah. As I stated earlier your interpretation of those veres does not match up with the Te'udah of Am Yisrael. Also, as I menitoned before there are Jews like the Karaites who say that their interpretation is of how Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey is pronounced is correct, and no one else's is correct. They are a part of the Yahaduth (Judaism), as even they state they are. Now using the Kariates as an example, they sternly claim that there is no way that, for example, what you believe about Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey is ture. I.e. they all out say that your claim about the Name is completely false. If you are correct, then they are wrong and they have been spreading false information. They would also be promoting false informaiton since they openly claim that what you propose is impossible. If what you propose is possible, then the Karaites are wrong for putting out false statements. That is what I mean by something being false and something be correct, it can't be both ways and Jews who know Hebrew should know better than to that pronunciations with different syllables and meanings are the same thing. The Karaites, by their statements are making a Neder and this is what makes it more than just a claim of, this is what we think. This is not only true of them, but others. Yet, as I mentioned before the Karaite's point is a valid one so they may be correct in their conclusions. Yet, as I menitoned before there are flaws in ALL the theories included theirs, and that is something that Elohim will deal with in His time.

As I also mentioned before IF you believe so strongly that you are correct in how you interpret things and that everyone should do as you do, then why not pray that Elohim will cause people to see things the way you do. Torah observant Jews pray three times a day that YHWH Ehhad, uShmo Ehhad and we believe that Elohim will deliver on this when Mashi'ahh ben-Dawith comes.

As I mentioned before, most Jews in MODERN times do not pronounce the THEORIES about Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey due to the issue of making a false Neder. The issue of uncertainity over the pronunciation of Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey is due to the events that took place in the 3rd cent. BCE to 2nd cent. BCE. After that point uncertainity about the pronunciation began, just as uncertainity about exactly who is Ben-Dawith and Ben-Kohein (since the geneology records in the Temple were destroyed after 70 CE). This is just as uncertain We believe that the Mashi'ahh ben-Dawith will come and restore all that is uncertain including the correct understanding of all aspects of Elohim.

As I mentioned before there has not been any place where either Rivkah or myself, that I know of, have tried to convince to change your stance or do anything differently.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shimson bar-Tzadoq:
... in everything I stated I dealt with why we Jews do what and what is upon us, and why most will wait for Mashi'ahh to return all things to their proper place.

---

Thank you, Shimson, Rivkah, Mountain Jew and all other Jews here participating. In spite of any occasional clashes, you obediently bear witness of a certain foundation and perspective the rest of us would not otherwise have.

This thread's title and opening, rhetorical question:

"Who is 'HaShem'?"

You wrote:

quote:

---

Based on the Hebrew Torah Tajjim

Pronunciation of man's name mentioned in I Chron. 11:34 = _Hoshem/Hawshem___________________ (Qometz/Qametz o or aw sounding like cost, cord, or talk depending on dialect)

Pronunciation of Heb. expression that means "the name" = __Hash-shem___________________ (Pathahh a sounding like cat or father, depending on dialect)

As mentioned before the Shin in HaShem has a Dagesh forte, and this type of Dagesh doubles the Shin.

---

I reply: Of course, the key phrase in the above is "depending on dialect." This phrase applies not only with "Hashem," but with the Tetragrammaton as well, and it underscores the point that I (and others) have made about allowances for dialects. The understanding and loving Heavenly Father I worship makes these kinds of allowances. Man, however, does not seem so willing.

I notice that you yourself make the allowance of how the name of the Israelite man mentioned in I Chron. 11:37 could be pronounced "aw" sounding like "cost" or "talk." And this is the ancient pronunciation, so all you've done is make allowance for the very thing I have claimed from the beginning of this thread: That this name is (or could very well have been) pronounced "Haw-shem" (or as Strong's depicts, "Haw-shame").

And since you agree that the Hebrew expression meaning "the name" could also have been pronounced like "father," and since there is such a minute, almost indiscernible difference between the "a" in "father" and the "ô" in "cost," whatever pronunciation differences there may have been between those two terms is hardly worth arguing about, especially since we seem to agree that we should allow for differences in dialect.

And again, the rabbi plainly remarked that this Israelite's name is pronounced "Haw-shem." Here, once again, is his response:

Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts.

The most accurate pronunciation would be Haw-shem.

I hope this has been helpful. With blessings for success,

Rabbi Shraga Simmons

aish.com (From an e-mail received 3/1/2005)

Since I am really only interested in the first syllable of this word (for this particular issue), and since the rabbi agrees that it is (and was) pronounced "aw," and since you have made allowance for the same possibility, I guess I don't really know what we're arguing about, unless we're arguing just for the sake of arguing!!

Bottom line: You have expressed, in so many words, that anciently "Hashem" could have been pronounced "Haw-shem," just like the rabbi stated, and the sound of this first syllable happens to match that which is found in Strong's, as well as that found in the Septuagint, which was certainly in use during the first century CE.

Thus, we are back to my original question. If someone were to say, "Haw-shem spoke to the prophet," how would one know whether it was a reference to the Almighty speaking to the prophet or a reference to an Israelite man named Hashem who spoke to the prophet?

I don't have to know Hebrew to know that this could have been a very real situation back in the days of the Israelite named Hashem ... IF folks had been commonly referring to the Almighty as "HaShem." Since they did not, we know that the custom or tradition of referring to YHWH as "HaShem" is, at the very best, unscriptural.

You also wrote:

quote:

---

The only way a pronunciation like Hawsheme would be possible is if there were a Tzere or Seghol under the Mem, and this would often mean that there is a Hey (Hebrew) or an Aleph (Aramaic) after Mem. Also, if you are now claiming that Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is pronounced Hawsheme, where several times before you said it was pronounced Hawshem as well as Hashem this doesn't make any sense, since it can't be all of them at the same time.

---

I reply: I believe you misread what I spelled out. I did not spell out the pronunciation "Hawsheme." I spelled out "Haw-shame." This is the pronunciation offered by Strong's, so I guess if you disagree, you would have to take up your argument with the late James Strong. Again, for the purpose of this discussion, I'm not really interested in the second syllable.

Okay, regarding the justification of those who substituted "HASHEM" for YHWH when translating The Chumash, you quoted me as follows:

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Acheson:

Well, this is all for now. I should add one thing: I am glad we agree that "HASHEM" should never have been substituted for YHWH's name by those who translated the Chumash.
May YHWH bless,
Larry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

To which you replied:

quote:

---

Let me clarify my belief a bit further on that. I don't believe that any person should rely on the TRANSLATION. This has nothing to do with the translators, especially since most Jewish translations also include the Hebrew right next the translation. Translations are often made from various circumstances, and only the translator can answer for his audiance. In the Jewish community there is no lack of direction of "who" is being spoken of, so it is not an issue for me of what the translators shouldn't have should have done. There are a a number of translations that translate what they believe to be the English meaning of Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey. One could easily have said that instead of translating more stress should have been placed in Hebrew education. The Name of Elohim is really not the only reason I have problems with translation, there are more theological matters that often are problems in such as can be seen in mistranslations of verses known by Jewish and non-Jewish sources to be about Mashi'ahh. Or translations that add theologies that didn't exist in the text. These are issues found in MOST translations regardless of who does them, in one way or the other.

---

I reply: I'm sure you meant to clarify things with the above commentary, but instead you have confused me all the more. You see, I know already from your many postings how you feel about translations. You believe we should rely on the Hebrew text, and the more ancient the better. And I agree ... if only I could say I'm a Hebrew scholar.

In the meantime, I do the best I can with what I have access to, and I'm afraid that involves referring to translations from the Hebrew. That having been said, before reading the above commentary, I thought you gave a "thumbs down" to the translators substituting "HASHEM" for the Tetragrammaton (instead of transliterating it). Now I'm not so sure.

Could you please tell me (briefly, please) if you believe it was wrong to substitute "HASHEM" for the Tetragrammaton when translating The Chumash?

Okay, moving along, you wrote the following:

quote:

---

I never made a judgement on what you and others say about how you use Elohim's name, or what you believe to be His name. I have in fact never tried to pass any judgement on you or anyone else, I simply stated that your logic doesn't work for me because of what I do know of the Hebrew language and what I do know of what the Hebrew Torah Tajjim and the Samaritan Torah. That is why I said your theology and mine are not the same, because we are not reading from the texts. As I also stated MANY times before The Hebrew Torah Tajjim states what it states, on that issue not me. I also explained from the Te'udah of both Jews and Samaritans how this and other verses are meant and to whom they are intended in the context.

---

I reply: First of all, I apologize if I've made it seem like you've been passing judgment, for I have not detected this from you, and I hope you feel the same way about me. This having been said, however, you have indeed mentioned that there is no forgiveness for "bearing false witness," and you believe that mispronouncing His name would constitute such an offense. Since there is no forgiveness, I simply want to know what destiny awaits those of my persuasion. If you would prefer to not answer, I understand.

From your perspective, as I see it, I believe you consider me to be dishonoring the Almighty whenever I mention His name, as you don't seem to believe it is very likely that I am pronouncing it 100% correctly, which in turn constitutes "bearing false witness."

From my perspective, it is a dishonor to replace the Almighty's name, whether it be in Scripture or in everyday speech. Whether we use the title "Elohim" as a name (when we can easily use it as a clear title in English if we so choose) or the term "HaShem" as a name, this dishonors Him. YHWH called Himself a "Baal" (husband/master), but it wasn't until they forgot His name for Baal ... when it began to be used as a name ... that things went wrong.

I wonder what EliYah (the one in the Bible) would have to say about referring to YHWH as "HaShem."

Our theologies are indeed vastly different, even though I don't believe the texts we read from are as "different" as you seem to be trying to convey. While a working knowledge of Hebrew, along with a Hebrew text, is certainly the preferred way, I have yet to see how the text is unfathomable when expressed in English or any other language.

Okay, this will be all for now.

May YHWH bless,

As mentioned before, if the logic that someone who knew Hebrew would not know the difference between Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem and Hey (Pathahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem (which as I mentioned people do), then your claim should also be that no one would know which one is meant in the following verses.

Waiyiqra (Lev.) 24:11
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0324.htm
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t0324.htm

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t0528.htm
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0528.htm

As I menitoned before they are not the same word, and I personally don't believe that people are so dense that they don't know the difference in what someone is talking about. Espescially, when any Torah observant Jew is more than willing to explain anything to them. I have yet to meet anyone who knew I was a Jew, and didn't know Who I serve (Avodah HaLev). Even in my imperfections, I have yet to meet people who know or see me not know who it is I speak of when I speak. No one here asked me WHO I was talking about when this whole debate started, and it was obvious people knew exactly Who I was talking about. If it is a matter of someone being confused as I mentioned before there are SNamers who use what they believe The Name and utterly confuse people.

In terms of not being interested in the second syllable, it does matter. As I mentioned before if you are now saying that Strong's says Haw-sheme, this is not even close to the same word as Hey (Patahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem. The "e" you have now added at the end as I mentioned before can only come if there is a Tzere or a Seghol under the Mem and most often would have to be followed by a Hey or an Aleph. So your saying that the person's name was Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem (Tzere) - Hey or Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem, which one is it? Yet, as I mentioned before even a three year old knows the difference between a Hey (Pathahh) definate article and a Hey (Qametz) which preceding a Shin is not a definate article. As mentioned before a Qametz sound only comes under a Hey as a definate article when it proceeds a guttaral. Shin is not a guttaral so Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is one entire word with an unknown shoresh. Hey (Patahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is the shoresh (Shin-Mem) with a definate article Hey (Patahh).

If this were not the case, then using your logic in Waiyiqra 24:11 people would think that the Hoshem or as you say Hawsheme is the person being spoken of there. People who read the Torah, even without the Niqqudim, easily know the difference.

In terms of translations, as I said before the translation is not the problem for me, it is PEOPLE's reliance on the translation that is the problem. In terms of what a translation puts in the text, that depends on their method of translation. As I mentioned before some translators translate what they believe Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey means. My problem with translations goes a lot deeper than just this issue. That is the point I was making. I think to keep my point on the level, let me sum it up by saying that it is kept in Hebrew or read with the perspective that it is a translation is not the same as the original text. I never stated this as a judgement call on those who use translations, but someone using a translations, no matter who does it should realize that it is not the same as being able to read the Hebrew text.

In terms of what I mentioned about Shemoth 20:6, once again if you go back to what I mentioned several times before. The entire context of this debate started from asking a question of WHAT Jews do or don't do on this issue and WHY. The answer was given of why most Jews do or don't do a certain thing. It is based on Yeshayahu 8:20 Torah and Te'udah. As I mentioned before for a JEW to raise up a false pronunciation/neder of The Name of Elohim would be a breech of Shemoth 20:6 (especially knowing what we know on the issue). The Te'udah of Am Yisrael is clear on this, and we know that in the Olam Haba (World to Come) the Mashi'ahh ben-Dawith will come and make all unknown things known. Elohim says what He says on that, and only He knows what Him not forgiving results in. I haven't passed any judgement on anyone, including those Jews who commit pesha (direct breach with full knowledge) on this.

In terms of what waits those of your persuasion, once again that depends on the Te'udah you possess. I have never assumed to know exactly what your persuasion is, and I have tried my best to leave out personal remarks about people's persuasion because none of that has anything to do with this discussion. The original question that sparked this was about Jews, and I am a Jew.

Maybe you explaining your persuasion and the Te'udah that was passed on to you by your fathers would help in me understanding your situation. In my opinion, and you will have to correct if I am wrong since I don't know really anything about you, you don't fall into the category I menitoned concerning the focus of how this whole debate started. I hope that is clear, and I hope my choice of words are not offensive.

In terms of what I believe about your actions, that has nothing to do with anything. I have never drawn your actions into the matter, nor criticized you for doing what you.

As I mentioned before for a Jew, one of the many issues is that some of the theories including the more popular ones are said, by some scholars to have been borrowed from Paganism (some say this of the Samaritan beleif on The Name). So that being said, there are a lot of issues for a Jew on this matter based on what the Te'udah (Isaiah 8:20) and the Minhagei Torah (Acts 21:18-24) has shown us. So that is why, as I mentioned before, that we pray three times a day that Mashi'ahh ben-Dawith will come and clear up the unknown and in that day we believe YHWH Ehhad, uShmo Ehhad.

In terms of Eliyahu Ha-navi, he lived in a completely different time when there was no speculation about how The Name of Elohim was pronounced. There was a Beith HaMiqdash and Kohanim. Eliyahu also was a Navi (Prophet), and in order for him to be such his statements about Elohim would be a Neder. According to the Torah, Eliyahu in order to be a Navi would have to speak the words of Elohim with 100% accuracy, because Elohim spoke directly to the Nevi'im panim v'panim. As mentioned before it was not a matter of people figuring out or speculating on this matter during his time, the speculation began after the destruction of the second Temple.

In terms of what is different between us, it is the texts. As I mentioned before I read from both the Torah Tajjim from Yemen and the Samaritan Torah. The Samaritan Torah differs in over 6,000 places with the Masorite text. Some minor, but some major. The Yemenite Tajjim only differs in 9 places. The Torah Tajjim reflect the Torah and Te'udah of what was left of Yehudah. The Samaritans are said to be from the tribes of Yosef (Northern Israel). The Te'udah is what makes it different, I didn't say anything about it being unfathomable in English. Also, the understanding one gets when not knowing Hebrew is real pashat, reading it in Hebrew is different. I once didn't know any Hebrew, and saw that when I began learning there was a definate different difference between trying to understanding it in English and trying to understanding it in Hebrew. That is why you can have 20 different translations say 20 different things.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

Originally posted by leejosepho:
I make a motion that we all stop talking to Larry in this particular thread.

Is there a second to be heard from anyone?

---

Hello Lee,

Maybe instead of putting it that way, we can all just agree to disagree on this issue on the grounds that we are all from different paths, and let Elohim do what He will with it. Besides, how much time can one devote to such a thing without it taking time out of family and business life.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

Acheson wrote:
Bottom line: You have expressed, in so many words, that anciently "Hashem" could have been pronounced "Haw-shem," just like the rabbi stated, and the sound of this first syllable happens to match that which is found in Strong's, as well as that found in the Septuagint, which was certainly in use during the first century CE.

---

Actually, I NEVER expressed in any way that anciently "Hashem" could have been pronounced "Haw-shem." What I have stated is that Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem and Hey (Pathahh) Shin-Dagesh (Tzere) - Mem are not the same words, they are not pronounced the same, and they don't even come from the same Shoresh i.e. they don't have the same meaning. I stated that any child who knows Hebrew would EASILY know the difference.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Somehow almost everytime that i glance at this message thread i think to myself "say shibboleth" - i hope i can pronounce things correctly so that nobody desires to slay me. Jdg 12:6 then they would say to him, “Please say, ‘Shibboleth’!” And he would say, “Sibboleth,” for he was unable to pronounce it right. Then they seized him and slew him at the fords of the Yardĕn. And at that time there fell forty-two thousand Ephrayimites.

Just a thought here ... if they could not say "s and h" in combination then how could they say Yahushua and if they cannot say that correctly to our ears then are people with those inabilities on an unrighteous path because they couldn't pronounce our Saviour's name as is pleasing to us? Then are we saying that YHWH excludes us because of our weaknesses and our inabilities or does He look at our hearts? What am i trying to say? ... isn't YHWH more than able to bring Salvation to His people and He looks at their hearts and He sees their intent in their wording and pronounciations.

We had called YHWH another name than what He preferred unknowingly and what we thought was what He was to be called for years. We didn't know any better at that time. We desired to please Him though and He saw this and spoke to us and loved us i felt then as well as He does all His people who can "speak correctly". He answered our prayers when we called Him incorrectly vocally, He taught us still even despite our appearance of spiritual poverty. Then in 2002, He kindly mentioned to my husband that what we were calling Him wasn't His preference. My husband spoke to me on this, asking for confirmation if i heard the same statements from YHWH as he did concerning this matter. i sought His face on this and He showed us both this was so and that He preferred to be called other than what we had been calling Him. We were thankful that He looks at the heart of the people and not the appearance; for if He had been like men there is no way that He would have caused us to come closer to Him. But He isn't like men and He looks at the heart. That is the month that He led us to this forum and showed us what EliYah had studied. Since then He showed us some things are His preference, and some things are just approved by Him, and some things are necessary, and some things are not pleasing to Him at all; and how to ask that correctly of Him is only by His grace. Perhaps we should though, for asking the middle man sometimes seems to get us nowhere closer to the Truth. May He help His people to hear His voice this day. If Yeshua cared to replace the servant's ear that Kepha cut off so that man's flesh could hear; how much more would He be willing to help us to hear spiritual things if we desired Him in this?

no doubt poorly stated to some, sorry for my inadequacies, still desiring the Truth, sonja

I think you expressed yourself very nicely. We all have our own unique perspectives to share, if YHWH so leads us to do so, and I appreciate the angle from which you approached this matter. I believe you share my desire to honor the Father by referring to Him with the name He gave to Himself. I cannot think of a better one to use than the one He gave to Himself! Thank you for contributing to the discussion.

Hi, Shimson:

I hope you don't mind my sharing some additional comments in response to your latest postings.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Actually, I NEVER expressed in any way that anciently "Hashem" could have been pronounced "Haw-shem."

---

I reply: Well, it sure looked like you did to me. Here's that quote again:

You had written:

quote:

---

Based on the Hebrew Torah Tajjim
Pronunciation of man's name mentioned in I Chron. 11:34 = _Hoshem/Hawshem ___________________ (Qometz/Qametz o or aw sounding like cost, cord, or talk depending on dialect)

---

I underlined the pertinent words indicating that you make allowance for the "aw" sound for that name.

Since "Hawshem" and "HaShem" are pronounced the same (or certainly could have been), the one word/expression could certainly be mistaken for the other. Context is so important. There is no question that the expression "ha-shem," as found in Scripture, is simply a reference to "the name," as in "the name [of YHWH]."

However, if during the days of the Israelite named Hashem it had been common practice to refer to YHWH as "HaShem" and someone made the comment, "Haw-shem spoke to the prophet," without any other reference to aid the listener, there would have been some confusion as to whether or not the speaker was referring to YHWH speaking to the prophet or the man named Hashem speaking to the prophet.

I'm not sure, based upon your response, as to whether or not you understand how the context (or lack thereof) is so vital to the point that I made. As I have expressed so often in this thread, I simply could never refer to the Almighty with a name pronounced the same as the name of a man.

You provide lots of technical attempts at expressing that there is a difference in the pronunciations of those two words/expressions, but the bottom line is, I have testimony from a rabbi, as well as info from Strong's and the Septuagint, that the two are pronounced the same. The fact that they are two different words has no bearing on the matter to me. The fact that they are pronounced the same and have apparently always been pronounced the same is sufficient to give me even more reason for me to not want to refer to YHWH as "HaShem."

I noticed that you once again misspelled the phonetic rendering as found in Strong's. I am puzzled as to why you choose to spell that phonetic rendering "Hawsheme," whereas Strong's spells it "Haw-shame."

Even the word for "name" (shem) is phonetically pronounced "shame" according to Strong's. I presume you have access to Strong's without my having to reproduce the actual listing here, but if you do not, please let me know.

Since Bible translators, such as those who translated the version known as The Chumash replaced YHWH with "HASHEM," this makes "HaShem" all the worse, in my opinion. Please allow me to use the example of the English substitute "the LORD" to illustrate what I mean by this. From what I can tell, there is really nothing intrinsically wrong or "heathen" with the word "LORD," but I personally do not use it in reference to YHWH, mainly because this is the word the KJV translators chose to substitute for the Tetragrammaton. I have a personal boycott against using that word as a title in reference to YHWH because of this grievous error in judgment.

It is the same with HASHEM. Use it if you wish, but I believe I have made my feelings very clear ... feelings that you obviously do not share. It is used as a substitute for YHWH's name. Please understand, before I did any research on "Hashem," my "feelings" were completely neutral. Now that I have studied this topic, I am no longer neutral.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Maybe you explaining your persuasion and the Te'udah that was passed on to you by your fathers would help in me understanding your situation. In my opinion, and you will have to correct if I am wrong since I don't know really anything about you, you don't fall into the category I menitoned concerning the focus of how this whole debate started. I hope that is clear, and I hope my choice of words are not offensive.

---

I reply: Yes, perhaps one day we can discuss my background and the "Te'udah" that I received from my parents ... of course, I'm sure you know I have rejected many of the traditions I was raised to believe. This created a lot of spiritual pain and strife between myself and my family, although I know my parents are very kind and sincere people.

As far as your choice of words not being offensive, the answer is no, you are fine. Clearly, this is a subject that I consider very important, and I have mentioned that I believe this topic involves whether or not we honor YHWH. In a discussion such as this, when the disagreement is so great, one party might perceive the other party as being "offensive." I have tried to make certain you know that I believe you are a nice person who does his best to serve the Almighty the way that he believes is best. If I haven't made that clear yet, then hopefully I've done so now. I don't believe your integrity is on the line here. Other issues come to bear, but not your integrity, just so you know how I feel.

Well, this will be all for now. May YHWH grant you a peaceful and restful Sabbath.

Yours in Messiah,
Larry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shimson bar-Tzadoq:
Hello Lee,

Maybe instead of putting it that way, we can all just agree to disagree on this issue on the grounds that we are all from different paths, and let Elohim do what He will with it. Besides, how much time can one devote to such a thing without it taking time out of family and business life.

---

Greetings, Shimson.

Personally, I never agree to disagree even though I can disagree agreeably if that is agreeable for however long as it takes to come into agreement. But since I am aware of no disagreement between you and me anyway, I say we just continue to agree to remain agreeably agreeable in our present agreement!

How much time should we spend on any given matter? We might agree on this general guideline:

"A truth should be held up in all lights and at all angles ... until even the dullest of minds [willing to do so] can understand it" (Byron J. Rees, 1899).

So then, and unless there are any lights or angles yet to be employed at the moment, maybe we can all just take a break until next time around!

B’shalom,
Rivkah

………………………

Originally posted by Acheson:
One thing for sure: It is used as a substitute for the Creator's name, as plainly expressed by one website:

HaShem
~vh
(hash-SHEM) n. HaShem. The Name (of God). Substitute name for YHVH. See the Names of God.
The above definition can be accessed at the following URL:
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Glossary/Hebrew_Glossary_-_H/hebrew_glossa ry_-_h.html

BS"D
Your reference is not a Judaic site from Torah Jews, but is a Christian site.

Your concept of our not mentioning specifically The Name of El-him but instead referring to It with the Hebrew HaShem (The Name) as a replacement is flawed. The below Torah passage also does not specifically mention The Name but instead refers to It with the Hebrew HaShem only:

Vayikra 24:11 vayikov ben-haisha hayisreelit et-HASHEM vayekalel vayaviu oto el-moshe veshem imo shelomit bat-divri lemate-dan
And the Yisreelit woman's son blasphemed The Name, and cursed. And they brought him to Moshe; and his mother's name was Shelomit, the daughter of Divri, of the tribe of Dan.

HaShem is Hebrew for The Name and is only a reference to The Name of El-him by Jews in English translations.

The Torah in the above mentioned passage, on the other hand, uses it to refer to The Name of El-him even in the Hebrew!

If using HaShem to refer to the Name of El-him would be considered confusing (as Larry seeks to insinuate) then the Torah would not have used it. We Jews know Who we are referring to when we use the Hebrew HaShem - to The Divine Name of our Creator. And any non-Jew who may not understand only has to ask as they would with any other Hebrew word usage if they did not know Hebrew.

We see this same concept when the Scriptures use the Hebrew “Ad-nai” 134 times without the Y-H-V-H beside it, indicating again another Hebrew REFERENCE to the Name of our Creator which does not need a qualifier in order for us to understand WHO is being referred to.

The word “vayikov” translated as blasphemed in many translations literally translates as “and he bored [pierced] a hole.” (This word is only used in two places in the Scriptures Vayikra 24:11 (see above quote)and in 2Melachim 12:10) Therefore the passage actually reads as, “And the Yisreelit woman’s son bored/pierced a hole in The Name, and cursed.”

To blaspheme The Name is to profane It, bring It to ruin by not having the proper reverence for It - “blaspheme - to speak of or address without irreverence; abuse; the lack of reverence for El-him; irreverence towards something considered sacred or inviolable” (Webster’s) - to take the holy and place it among that which is not holy – the mundane, is “piercing” It, defacing It, using It unnecessarily. Mankind has become base and therefore the Holy Name of our Creator should not be tossed around among baseness but kept Holy by keeping It within the context of the Holy.

Y-H-V-H translated = English does not contain a word or term which accurately describes the meaning of The Name, but defined etymologically It would be translated as “being; active being; being in action.”

Y-H-V-H transliterated = Mashiach will restore this knowledge to us when he comes.

The fearing, glorifying, loving, praising & knowing of El-him does not depend on a pronunciation, but on realization of the existence of El-him, that He is One, that He is incorporeal, and that He only created and guides the world, and that He only is worthy of being worshiped.

Baruch Hu.
Rivkah