|
|
|
To Label God With A Name Is To Destroy The Meaning
To label the non discursive, or that which is nonlinear, under a linear meaning, destroys it. If you turn
on the light to see the darkness, what happens? If you wear a straight jacket and try to use your arms, what happens?
The right hemisphere of the brain cannot be explained though the left hemisphere. And what exists outside the human
senses is beyond the comprehension of such limitations. This is why esoteric religions use music, art, architecture,
ritual and other venues to express what cannot be explained, labeled and named. This is why much of the scriptures
were written metaphorically, depending on the particular author. When the mathematician, legalist and policy maker
defines the poet, artist and spiritualist, the work becomes decimated and destroyed.
And so, with religious experience, as when Paul wrote to be caught in a seventh heaven, becomes empty rhetoric
and dangerous at that, when it is defined within the logical left brain and organizational meanings. So it is with
naming God. And this is the reason the ancient Hebrews refused to both write and speak a name for God.
We don't know what God is. We only have fallible words of humans, words that came from earth, not from the
sky. Is It a Goddess? A Void? A Being? A Dimension? Good over Evil? An existential human creation? An Absolute
beyond our relativity? Within the veiled walls of our limited human consciousness there will never be absolute
revelation, and to label such with a Name is nothing short of arrogant ignorance. This is Jehovah and the
lower stages of the human psyche. Until transformation takes place (on it's own) such dualism remains.
"I'm free at last! Great God Almighty!"
|
|
GOD HAS NO NAME
"All the
names which the soul gives to God, it receives from the knowledge of itself. But the ground of the soul is dark.
The ineffable One has no name.The naked God is without a name and is the Denial all ALL names and has NEVER been
given a name and so remains a truly hidden God . . . in darkness, a mystery behind mystery."
MEISTER ECKHART - 14th Century
|
|
"Names have a power,
a strange power of hiding God."
"Who does not know how we satisfy ourselves with the name of some strange bird
or plant or the name of some new law in nature? It is a mystery perplexing us before. We get the name and fancy
we understand something more than we did before: but in truth we are more hopelessly ignorant: for before we felt
there was a something we had not attained, and so we inquired and searched - now, we fancy we possess it, because
we have got the name by which it is known: and the word covers over the abyss of our ignorance. If Jacob had got
a word, that world might have satisfied him. . . God's plan was not to give names and words, but truths of feeling. That night, in that strange scene, He impressed on Jacob's
soul a religious awe, which was hereafter to develop - not a set of formal expressions, which would have satisfied
with husks the craving of the intellect and shut up the soul: Jacob felt the Infinite, who is more truly felt when least named."
F.W. Robertson on "Jacob's Wrestling"
|
|
To Give The Name 'God' To The
Absolute, Renders 'It' Relative
"In this world of relativity each relative thing is related to all else; there
is not an atom in this universe of mine to which I am not related, even though I may not be conscious of the relation.
I have no existence at all as a separate creature, though I may at times imagine myself as such; rather am I part
of an intricate web of relativity in which all things mutually determine one another. The standpoint of each relative
thing in this world of relativity must necessarily always be relative; whatever it sees is seen from that standpoint
which necessarily has a certain relation to all other things. No two standpoints can ever be the same, all standpoints
are different and therefore the outlook from each standpoint is different from all others - all truth is relative
in the wrold of relativity. Only then can we speak of absolute truth in the world or relativity. when we can discount
the element of relativity in each relative outlook, that is to say when, instead of fondly imagining our relative
viewpoint to show absolute truth we can take into account the relativity our our standpoint and deduct that, as
it were, form our outlook, leaving a truth which is no longer relative. Thus we come to this apparently paradoxical
conclusion, that we are only able to approach absolute truth when we can realize our truth as relative truth; only
the theory of relativity makes it possible to formulate scientific law in an absolute and no longer in a relative
way.
There can never be freedom for the relative, since every relative thing is at least partially determined by all
else that is relative. Only the Absolute is free since there is naught beside It. There is no interaction between
the Absolute and the relative; the relative thing can only be related to other relative things. Relation denotes
relativity, and the Absolute has no relation to anything because It is all things. Its only relation to the relative
is that the relative as a whole is the Absolute, but there is never the possibility of a relation between a relative
thing or being and the Absolute.
Since there is no relation between the relative and the Absolute, except in so far as the Absolute is the relative
in its entirety, we are no longer the relative when we realize the Absolute, that is to say we are no longer 'we'
or 'I' when we are That. That is why in Buddhism the realization of the Absolute is called Nirvana,
literally the 'going out' or 'becoming extinct,' since from the standpoint of the
separate self it means the end of all things, though from the standpoint of reality it means the beginning of all
things. Nirvana is the extinction of the craving to be the relative thing and thereby the extinction of the relative
as such in the realization of the Absolute. We are as justified to say that we become
the Absolute, that the dewdrop becomes the shining sea, as we are in saying that
the dewdrop is lost when slipping into the sea, that we are annihilated when realizing
the Absolute. It will ever be impossible to express reality in the language of
our world-image.
Since there is no relation possible between a relative thing and the Absolute there is no such things as a worship
of the Absolute, devotion to the Absolute, or response from the Absolute to a worshipping being; all this is a
philosophical impossibility and the very suggestion implies a lack of understanding. If we desire to give the name
'God' to the Absolute - and it does not really matter what name we give to That - let it be well understood that
it can never be the God to whom we pray, whom we invoke, whom we worship, whom we speak of as loving or kind, whom
we look upon as Creator of the universe. Magnificent as the conception of such a Deity may be, infinitely fertile
as it has been and must ever be in calling forth the noblest emotions and the highest endeavor, we must never for
a moment confuse it with That, compared in which even this Deity is relative
The Name which can be named is not
the unchanging name
"The realization of the Absolute, of living truth, is a supreme reality, which
can never be voiced in the language of the intellect. In that sense it is esoteric
as compared to teaching which can be intellectually explained and which consequently
is exoteric. The term esoteric knowledge of esoteric
teaching is often used for a body of information in the hands of some select group of students who know this teaching
and for some reason or other do not consider it right to make it public. Such teaching is secret, since it is kept
only for the few, but it is not esoteric in the true sense of the word. True esoteric knowledge is not knowledge
which we for some good reason refuse to make public,
but rather knowledge which no one can make public, since it cannot be expressed, since there is no language to
explain it. Thus esoteric knowledge is an experience which must remain for him alone who has had it, since it cannot
be communicated, and exoteric knowledge is that which can be communicated, though we may decide that it is not
desirable to do so. In that last case our exoteric knowledge is at the same time secret of hidden knowledge, and
at some future time we may decide to publish it and make it available for all. But real esoteric knowledge can
never be made exoteric; since it is esoteric by its own nature, it is incapable of being expressed. As Lao Tze
expresses it at the beginning of the Tao Teh King; 'The Tao which can be expressed is not the unchanging Tao; the
Name which can be named is not the unchanging Name.'"
J.J. Van der Leeuw, The Conquest of Illusion,
pp. 72-73, 88
|
When looking for the tetragramaten in the Christian Greek Scriptures, there can be found no real evidence
of it ever being there. The reference bible of the New World Translation page 1561 states:
"Today, apart from a few fragments of the early Greek Septuagint where the sacred name is preserved
in Hebrew, only the Hebrew text has retained this most important name in its original form of four letters, YHWH...."
 It is interesting but
in an estimated 5,000 existing copies in Greek of the Christian Scriptures, only in Revelation are there four mentions
of "Hallelujah" a shortened form of "Yahweh," in English, "Jehovah" (Praise Yahweh).
What is remarkable is that, beyond these four occurrences of that abbreviated form in Revelation, nowhere else
in the Christian Scriptures contained in these ancient copies do we find a single occurrence of this name.
Since there are an estimated 5,000 existing copies in Greek of the Christian Scriptures, the fact that not a
single one of these thousands of copies contains the Tetragramaten is all the more impressive. (1)
The Chester Beatty Papyrus No 2(P461) is possibly from the first century of our common era only decades after Jesus
died. But there is not a single use of the Tetragramaten in any form. This includes the numerous quotations
from the Hebrew
|
|
|
HAL-LE-LU-JAH (hl-ly) interj.
Used to express praise or joy. n.
1. An exclamation of “hallelujah.”
2. Music. A composition
expressing praise and based on the word “hallelujah.”
[Hebrew halllû-yh, praise Yahweh
: halllû, masculine pl. imperative of hilll, to praise; see hll in Semitic Roots + yh,
hallelujah praise ye Jehovah,
frequently rendered "Praise ye the LORD," stands at the beginning of ten of the psalms (106, 111-113,
135, 146-150), hence called "hallelujah psalms." From its frequent occurrence it grew into a formula
of praise. The Greek form of the word (alleluia) is found in Rev. 19:1, 3, 4, 6.
|
scriptures. Even where the accounts of Jesus and the writings of Paul make direct quotes of the Hebrew scripture,
the tetragramaten is conspicuously absent. Why?
Most people call a close friend, by their first formal name, such as George, Harry, and Sue. Yet, if the
relationship is more personal and intimate, such a parent and child, the common practice is to call parents and
other intimate relationships other then by formal first names. Names that are used are much more intimate such
as, papa, abba, father, mamma & etc. When Jesus Christ died and and paid the price for sins of mankind with
his blood, "we became reconciled to God." Mankind would now obtain a much more personal relationship
with the God named Jehovah or Yahweh, then ever before, subsequent the separation of Adam and Eve and their offspring,
all of humanity. For the Jews, this would be a new and strange concept, eliminating their formal relationship with
God with the mosaic law with, the various sacrifices, the priesthood, the using of an imperfect Levite to intercede
as mediator for them, and the requirement to to use God's formal name, Yahweh or Jehovah. Now, all of humanity
would be reconciled, having a much more personal and intimate relationship with God, as Jesus Christ, "pleads
for them", bringing them this personal relationship with God, who would now take on the role as their "father."
Apostle Paul writes,
"For you did not receive a spirit of slavery causing fear again, but you received a spirit of adoption
as SONS, by which spirit we cry out: Abba, father ! "For ALL who who are led by God's
spirit, these are God's SONS."
Now mankind is under the new convenant of the law, the "law of Christ," with the requirement to
go only through name of Jesus Christ, by showing "love of neighbor," which is putting faith in Him with
both reliance, trust and an inner, intimate and conversational relationship, extending grace or undeserved kindness
to others as the primary factor in their lives. (Isa 12:4; Heb 7:11,12; Romans 5:10; Romans 8:14,15; Romans 8:34)
Mankind has become reconciled with God, removing the formal mosaic law requirement to use his name Jehovah
or Yahweh. This has been replaced  this
with the name Jesus, which would now be the highest name and most important among mankind. The very name of Jesus,
which actually means "Jehovah is salvation," would now be "above every other name, including the
name "Jehovah" or "Yahweh," so that only in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those
in heaven, those on earth, and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ
is Lord to the glory of the father." "For no matter how many the promises of God are, they have become
Yes by means of him. Therefore through him is the "Amen" said to God for glory through us. Yes, Jesus
has been the fullfiller of God's promises and has become the "Yes" and the "Amen" to God's
true meaning and purpose, agape love. The name Jesus is now above all others, replacing the name Jehovah or Yahweh.
As Apostle John puts it, "I write you these things that you may know that you have life everlasting, you who
put your faith in the name of the Son of God," a faith that is only supplied by those who are "loving
their brothers." (Phil 2:9-11; 1 Cor 1:20,21; 1 John 5:13)
 It is interesting, in all the prayers
Jesus prayed to God, he never addressed God by his formal name, the tetragramaten, Jehovah. Instead he addressed
God as his "father." When with his disciples the final night before his death, both in talking to them
and in a lengthy prayer, Jesus referred to God's "name" four times. (John 17:6,11,12,26) Yet in that
entire night, filled with counsel and exhortation to his disciples and in prayer, not a single occurrence is
found of his employing the name "Jehovah". Rather he consistently employed the designation "Father,"
doing so some fifty times! When dying the next day, he did not cry out using the name "Jehovah" but said,
"My God, my God," and in his final words said, "Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit."
As Christians, whose example then should we follow? That of a twentieth-century religious
denomination or that of God's son, manifest at such a crucial time? (2)
|
|
What about his request of "hallowed be thy name" (Math 6:10) and "I have made your name known
and will make it known"? Apparently there is much more to knowing God's name then a literal 4 or 7 letter
word. To know God's name, is to know him intimately, his qualities and attributes. The only way to know God intimately
with his qualities and attributes, is to go through the name of his son Jesus. However, this is not about a 5 letter
word either. To know both God and Christ, is to know love, for "everyone that loves, both knows God and is
born from God" and for "anyone who doesn't love his brother who has seen, cannot be loving God who he
has not seen." The only way to know God and Christ is to imitate the "grace" or undeserved kindness
to our fellow man as God has done for us, which is living a life with a continual attempt to show agape love for
all of humanity. As Christ put it: "to the extent you did to the least of one of my brothers (all humanity),
you did it to me"(Christ). (John 17:26; John 4:6-8)
Abraham knew God's literal name and yet God stated that he did not know his name. This is because Abraham
did not know the full meaning of God's name, "I am" the very personification of agape love and the fullfiller
of the promises to be such. To "hallow" or "sanctify" God's name and "make it known",
would not be the telling others of God's literal 7 letter name. Instead, it would be making known and hallowing
the meaning and purpose of his name, agape love, mercy and forgiveness of our fellow man, imitating the
example the Christ, Jesus, following his steps closely, which in turn, would be going through the name of Jesus,
who is the "Yes," the "Amen," the "Savior," the one who fulfilled God's purpose and
promises of restoring mankind in favor and reconciliation with God, "dying for us while we were yet sinners."
The entire meaning of God's name is fulfilled in Jesus, who showed true agape love and forgiveness for mankind,
for "the bearing witness to Jesus is what inspires prophesying", for he is the sole one to pay the ransom
and restore mankind into an intimate relationship with God. For "no one can get to the father unless they
go through Jesus name." And the only way to get to the father through Jesus' name is by the exhibiting of
true agape love and forgiveness to to our fellow man, without being self righteous and judgmental of those who
don't live up to our interpretive standards. To use the tetragramaten or the name "Jehovah" in worship,
is to miss the importance and role given to Jesus Christ "our savior of the world" and the "only
mediator and reconciler between God and men." In addition, to use the name of the Christ, Jesus, without showing
true kindness, empathy, compassion and forgiveness of our fellow man is to completely missing out on the meaning
of his name and is not living a life in imitation of him. (Exodus 6:3; 1 Tim 2:5; 1John 4:14; Romans 5:8; John
14:6, Rev 19:10)
This gives more meaning to Apostle James words at Acts chapter 15 verses 14-17. Here James, quoting from
the book of Amos, speaks of
"God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name;
people who are called by my name, says Jehovah." Acts 15:14-17
There are many religious groups on earth who identify themselves by the tetragramaten, Jehovah or Yahweh.
|
|
|
How Can a 19th Century Bible Prove This Claim?
|
|
"As this 1805 German translation
of the Bible indicates, when Jesus read in the synagogue from the scroll of Isaiah, he pronounced God's name out
loud -Luke 4:18-19"
The Watchtower Society
|
(Witnesses of Jehovah, Congregation of Yahweh, Jehovah's Christian Witnesses & etc.) Yet, this does not
mean they are God's people. Rather, each individual is "recognized by their fruits" of love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness and forgiveness. As Jesus stated:
"Likewise every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit, neither
can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. Every tree not producing fine fruit gets cut down and thrown into the fire.
Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men." Matthew 7:17-20
"By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among
yourselves." John 13:34-35
Being identified by a literal name, the tetragramaten is not the identifying mark of God's people, and is
not what Jesus and the Apostles were conveying. Only by living in agreement with God's name by performing a life
of true agape love for all of humanity can a person be identified as a Christian, for this is the only obligation
of man. By doing this, a person would be going through the name of Jesus. (Galatians 5:21-22; Math 7:17-20; John
13:34-35)
The Watchtower Society arbitrarily inserts the name "Jehovah" into the Christian Scriptures. This
clearly takes away from the role assigned to Jesus. One example is in Romans chapter 10. Here Apostle Paul quotes
from the book of Joel, which originally applied solely to Jehovah but is now being applied solely to Jesus, not
Jehovah. The context clearly shows Paul to be speaking so about the Christ as verse 9 states that one must declare
that "Jesus is Lord". Yet in verse 13 the Watchtower Society arbitrarily inserts the name "Jehovah,"
where it does not belong. If the Christian writers of the bible took the position not to include the tetragramaten,
why should any group assume the right to edit their inspired writings to include it? This is truly disrespect for
God's "name," taking matters into their own hands, and displaying a lack of submission to his sovereign
authority and will. For only in Jesus name is salvation, for "There
is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by
|
|
|
" . . there is not another name under heaven (including Jehovah's)
that has been given among men by which we must get saved " (Acts 4:12)
|
which we must get saved" (Acts 4:12)
|
The Real Meaning of God's Name
Love of Our Fellow Man
"God is Love, and Everyone who knows love, both knows God and is born
from God, for anyone who hates his brother (judges as unspiritual or weak) who he can see, can not be loving God,
who cannot see" 1John 4:7-8, 20
"To the extent you did it to one of the least of my brothers (all of humanity)
you did it to me. Matt 25:40
|
To use the name Jehovah or Yahweh is to completely miss the role assigned to Jesus (Yeshua),
the only "truth, way and life" and the only
name one must use for salvation. To use the name of Jesus without showing true mercy, forgiveness and agape love
for our fellow man is to again miss the role assigned to the Christ. Jehovah, the father, has appointed
his son "Jesus" to the "superior position" as God, along with "all authority," power,
"keys of death and Hades," honor, worship and name. The father has given up his authority to his
son Jesus, including his name, making the name of Jesus (Yeshua) the "only name under heaven
by which we must get saved." Only by living a life of true agape love of all humanity can a person be putting
faith in and living in harmony with the name of the Christ, Jesus. (Phil 2)
|
Dear Webpage Master,
I'm sorry but if you are trying to say that god really doesn't have a name tell that
to everybody who reads the king james version, b/c even in there it has the name JEHOVAH recognized as gods name.
another thought, you seem to make it out like being a jw is all this "work" well, i know ppl in that
religion and they have all kinds of free time. You DON'T HAVE TO READ 60+ PAGES OF NE THING! yeah sure you might
read 10 pages ALL together a week. But come on 60 pages, hours of work...yadadyada. get over the fact that you
don't like their religion and focas on your own deal. Evidently you are not christian b/c as the bible puts it,
a Christian would not SLANDER against another person, hey you missed GOOD STUDY today (see the wt, November 15,2002
page 14) it talks about SLANDER.
Nettie Jo
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Nettie Jo,
It's nice to see I hit a nerve. I can't help but think of Saul of Tarsus who lashed out at a teaching that obviously
hit deep within him, resulting in hostility of a large proportion. These new followers of "the way,"
were apparently SLANDERING his interpretation of what God is. Maybe he should have read your quoted Watchtower
Society article. You don't have to read the 60+ pages that make up 14 letters he wrote either. Paul's words were
far removed from a reality you or he call God. In fact, the fundamentalists accused his words as SLANDER to the
theistic code of his day. Perhaps Paul needed this Watchtower article to read.
Not only do I say that "God" does not have a name, but "it" is not even a person, nor Being.
God is neither existence nor non-existence. Can you fathom such an abstract thought? Can a man who relies on the
comfort of formulated intellect walk outside in intuitive awareness? Can the stereotyped person from the back hills
of no man's land, as the "redneck," in the movie, "Deliverance," make intelligent decisions
based on compassionate balance? And yet a person such as the sheep herder and redneck, Amos, was written to have
a such a heart as this.
However, it's the majority of inexperienced and fear inhibited persons who wish to remain in the interior comfort
with internal illusionary walls of thin veneer covering, which never accept growth. To walk outside of comfort
is to risk, to risk is to fall and to fall is get back up and continue the journey, the forever and eternal expanding,
moving and changing journey that evolves to higher consciousness and realization, unlike the formulated concept
of a male father God in the sky with a name to boot. To remain in this, is denial of modern day science, medicine,
scholarship in a cesspool of stagnation where mold and moss grow. Religious and theological revivals of such to
hide the pain of living and the fear of change are simply the temperate beautification of a dead corpse. The corpse
can remain for quite some time and bring great relief, but it still remains a corpse and in due time the corpse,
that of biblical literalism and the male deity, Jehovah, must go down in mythological antiquity as part of the
developmental stages in human growth.
My witness is "The Empty Sky" . . . a hell of lot more dangerous than the safety net of a "Jehovah,"
but then again, reality is always a place of change, growth and pain, where one must walk directly into fear. Yet
it's much more frightening living in stagnation, that of theism and biblical literalism, with the name of a God
that is only a person in the human mind with strictly rational thinking. My "it," call it "God"
if you wish and define whatever personal definitive conceptual image your mind or that of a religion imposes on
you, is none of this, but rather "she" is an impersonal consciousness, beyond linguistical prison, living
in the essence beyond intellectual thought.
What Watchtower adherent can ever dissolve/loose oneself into the Absolute? This would require the recognition
of relativity from the human filtered perception, phenomenal subjectivity. This would destroy all fundamental doctrines
and mapped out answers from the Governing Body of men. What Watchtower adherent can ever face the pain of evolving
to higher consciousness? This requires greater knowing of the self, increased awareness, bringing joy and inner
peace that lives in a silence far removed from the neurotic comfort zone of being a fundamentalist of any religious
culture and most certainly the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society. This demands the expulsion of all
external learning, outside Gods, separate religious organizations and the teaching of others as objective truth
and entering the silence center of interior consciousness.
Should I read that Watchtower article you have given me? It would be a good idea to read other minds outside the
Watchtower Society removed from only information supported by this organization, within their Mind melt into one-sided
thinking. Perhaps in one moment of realization you could see there is no "Satan," in other viewpoints
that are in sharp disagreement with the Watchtower and biblical literalism, but he only lives in the recesses of
your imaginative security, protective interior walls, which lacks the courage to be, the danger to live and walk
in the immense, vast and vulnerable emptiness of relativity and objective truth that lives in paradox and ambiguity.
Yours truly,
Richard Schwartz
|
|
TAGORE:
Once I asked an English musician to analyze for me
some classical music, and explain to me what elements make for the beauty of the piece.
EINSTEIN: The
difficulty is that the really good music, whether of the East or of the West, cannot be analyzed.
TAGORE:
Yes, and what deeply affects the hearer is beyond
himself.
EINSTEIN: The
same uncertainty will always be there about everything fundamental in our experience, in our reaction to art, whether
in Europe or in Asia. Even the red flower I see before me on your table may not be the same to you and me.
TAGORE:
And yet there is always going on the process of reconciliation
between them, the individual taste conforming to the universal standard.
If the reality of music and a simple flower cannot
be adequately explained beyond human perceptive conscious limitations, surely God, existence, life and spirituality
can never be defined from a book, better yet the language of man. One can understand why the Jewish mystics refused
the idea of God being a person and having a name, therefore departing from such a misuse of objectification and
intellectual rationalization of the numenous, irratonal.
|
|
