Dumb Question

[newbeliever02072005]

I have seen in different posts something that I've been wondering about for a while.

Why do people post the word God or Lord like this?

G-d
L-ord

Feel kinda stupid in asking this, but as they say...."Curiosity killed the cat"


Thanks,
Newbeliever :wave:

[jenptcfan]

Some people believe that spelling out the word Lord or God is similar to taking the Lord's name in vain, I believe. I've noticed it especially with messianic believers.

Anyway, it's done out of respect.

[ArchangelGabriel]

? i always type out G O D and L O R D when i wish to use either in a comment

[ArchangelGabriel]

Some people believe that spelling out the word Lord or God is similar to taking the Lord's name in vain, I believe. I've noticed it especially with messianic believers.

Anyway, it's done out of respect.
oh. well then is it held as a belief that its in vain because we are not worthy to us His name, if so then dont you think G-d defeates the purpose since God knows what we mean, kinda like saying "God dang it"

[MrJim]

It's a Jewish thing. I've seen stuff in the newspaper-ads or something for synagogues and it'll have G*D written. Respect for the very name of God. I don't go that far but I do have my limits: I won't put His name on a shirt or bumpersticker and cheapen it that way.

People have to decide where to draw the line I guess....

[ArchangelGabriel]

I don't go that far but I do have my limits: I won't put His name on a shirt or bumpersticker and cheapen it that way.


? how would that cheapen it?

[arunma]

This isn't a stupid question at all. I was also wondering about that. I find that the Scriptural support for this practice is lacking among Messianic believers. There's a verse in Deuteronomy where Israel is commanded to destroy the names of the false Canaanite gods, but to not do the same for the Name of the Lord. So, they reason, we should never write out the Name of God, because there's a possibility that it may be erased.

The problem is that this interpretation is based on a Rabbinic explanation of the verse in question. I don't see why Rabbinic opinions on the Bible are any more valid than the opinions of Imans or Pandits. That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with this practice. If Messianic Jews do this in order to satisfy their conscience, then the command of the Apostle Paul is that I should not get in their way.

[dvd_holc]

Writing the Name of God

Jews do not casually write any Name of God. This practice does not come from the commandment not to take the Lord's Name in vain, as many suppose. In Jewish thought, that commandment refers solely to oath-taking, and is a prohibition against swearing by God's Name falsely or frivolously (the word normally translated as "in vain" literally means "for falsehood").

Judaism does not prohibit writing the Name of God per se; it prohibits only erasing or defacing a Name of God. However, observant Jews avoid writing any Name of God casually because of the risk that the written Name might later be defaced, obliterated or destroyed accidentally or by one who does not know better.

The commandment not to erase or deface the name of God comes from Deut. 12:3. In that passage, the people are commanded that when they take over the promised land, they should destroy all things related to the idolatrous religions of that region, and should utterly destroy the names of the local deities. Immediately afterwards, we are commanded not to do the same to our God. From this, the rabbis (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/rabbi.htm) inferred that we are commanded not to destroy any holy thing, and not to erase or deface a Name of God.

It is worth noting that this prohibition against erasing or defacing Names of God applies only to Names that are written in some kind of permanent form, and recent rabbinical (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/rabbi.htm) decisions have held that writing on a computer is not a permanent form, thus it is not a violation to type God's Name into a computer and then backspace over it or cut and paste it, or copy and delete files with God's Name in them. However, once you print the document out, it becomes a permanent form. That is why observant Jews avoid writing a Name of God on web sites like this one or in newsgroup messages: because there is a risk that someone else will print it out and deface it. Normally, we avoid writing the Name by substituting letters or syllables, for example, writing "G-d" instead of "God." In addition, the number 15, which would ordinarily be written in Hebrew as Yod-Heh (10-5), is normally written as Tet-Vav (9-6), because Yod-Heh is a Name. See Hebrew Alphabet (http://www.jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm) for more information about using letters as numerals.

http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

[dvd_holc]

The Significance of Names

In Jewish thought, a name is not merely an arbitrary designation, a random combination of sounds. The name conveys the nature and essence of the thing named. It represents the history and reputation of the being named.

This is not as strange or unfamiliar a concept as it may seem at first glance. In English, we often refer to a person's reputation as his "good name." When a company is sold, one thing that may be sold is the company's "good will," that is, the right to use the company's name. The Hebrew concept of a name is very similar to these ideas.

An example of this usage occurs in Ex. 3:13-22: Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm) asks God what His "name" is. Moses is not asking "what should I call you;" rather, he is asking "who are you; what are you like; what have you done." That is clear from God's response. God replies that He is eternal, that He is the God of our ancestors, that He has seen our affliction and will redeem us from bondage.

Another example of this usage is the concepts of chillul Ha-Shem and kiddush Ha-Shem. An act that causes God or Judaism to come into disrespect or a commandment to be disobeyed is often referred to as "chillul Ha-Shem," profanation of The Name. Clearly, we are not talking about a harm done to a word; we are talking about harm to a reputation. Likewise, any deed that increases the respect accorded to God or Judaism is referred to as "kiddush Ha-Shem," sanctification of The Name. Because a name represents the reputation of the thing named, a name should be treated with the same respect as the thing's reputation. For this reason, God's Names, in all of their forms, are treated with enormous respect and reverence in Judaism.

[£amb]

There's a member on this forum by the name sc4s2cg. In his/her signature it has a web-link explaining the meaning of this.

[£amb]

Actually, I found the web-link...scan down alittle on the thread you are taken to, and it will be explained.

http://www.christianforums.com/t1511768-ask-the-pastor.html&page=4

[arunma]

Dvd_holc, that's all very interesting, but my question remains: why do we care about what Judaism says? Not that I don't like Jews, but their religion is irrelevant to Christianity. So I don't see why the opinions of rabbis should concern us.

[jenptcfan]

Messianic Judiasm is relevant to Christianity because Messianic Jews are Christians. However, I don't think anyone here is saying that one has to type L-rd. Explanations are just being given as to why some people do.

[arunma]

Messianic Judiasm is relevant to Christianity because Messianic Jews are Christians. However, I don't think anyone here is saying that one has to type L-rd. Explanations are just being given as to why some people do.

True, Messianic Jews are Christians. But the Rabbinic opinion comes from a non-Christian source. I certainly don't have any objection if certain people feel the need to write "G-d" and "L-rd." I'm just saying that it doesn't actually have any basis in the Bible, the opinions of the church fathers, or any other Christian source.

[dvd_holc]

Let me say that L-rd, G-d, or He-Shem where signs of humility before God. Also, I am going to say that when copying Torah for a whatever reason the rabbi would perform a ritual bath for the writting of each letter of God's name. As per the Mosaic Law, the Jews were very concerned with cleanliness, fear of God, and humality before God.

Well, I can tell you why I look into Jewish stuff. The bible is rooted in a historical time, place, and culture. When I go into that culture I find more indepth knowledge and ramifications of the bible. We can use the bible for quick reference for certain theologies, but there is fullness if I understand what is going on. I propose that we should read the bible in a way that the full overtones are visible and impact our understanding of our faith because the bible is a inspired word of God that rooted in actual events in the first century Judaih when the Romans ruled. I don't seek to gain rabbinical Judaism, but I want to know Jesus who was a Jew and Christianity was thought of being The Way within Judaism. Now, we can make arguements on the law is fulfilled and their is no law (which I am not saying Jesus did not fulfill the law), but our baptism, communion, and understanding of Christianity rooted in Jewish culture.

[arunma]

Let me say that L-rd, G-d, or He-Shem where signs of humility before God. Also, I am going to through in that when copying Torah for a whatever reason the rabbi would perform a ritual bath for the writting of each letter of God's name. As per the Mosaic Law, the Jews were very concerned with cleanliness and humality before God.

Well, I can tell you why I look into Jewish stuff. The bible is rooted in a historical time, place, and culture. When I go into that culture I find more indepth knowledge and ramifications of the bible. We can use the bible for quick reference for certain theologies, but there is fullness if I understand what is going on. I propose that we should read the bible in a way that the full overtones are visible and impact our understanding of our faith because the bible is a inspired word of God that rooted in actual events in the first century Judaih when the Romans ruled. I don't seek to gain rabbinical Judaism, but I want to know Jesus who was a Jew and Christianity was thought of being The Way within Judaism. Now, we can make arguements on the law is fulfilled and their is no law (which I am not saying Jesus did not fulfill the law), but our baptism, communion, and understanding of Christianity rooted in Jewish culture.

Jewish culture isn't my problem, nor are Jews at issue here. My issue is the religion of Judaism. When you read the Talmud or Rabbinic writings, you may think that you're gaining insight into Christianity. But just remember that every Rabbi who contributed to the Talmud firmly denied that Jesus was the Christ. It says, "Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22).

Does this mean that Jews are especially wicked? No, it does not. After all, the idolatrous Hindus and Buddhists also deny that Jesus is the Christ. But I think that modern Judaism is a very different than the ancient religion of the Israelites, and that the church is the true inheritor of the Israelite religion. So we should always treat modern Judaism no differently than other false religions.

If you want to learn more about Christianity, why not read the early church fathers? Christianity has a rich historical tradition, and one need not be Catholic in order to learn from it.

[dvd_holc]

Jewish culture isn't my problem, nor are Jews at issue here. My issue is the religion of Judaism. When you read the Talmud or Rabbinic writings, you may think that you're gaining insight into Christianity. But just remember that every Rabbi who contributed to the Talmud firmly denied that Jesus was the Christ. It says, "Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22).

Does this mean that Jews are especially wicked? No, it does not. After all, the idolatrous Hindus and Buddhists also deny that Jesus is the Christ. But I think that modern Judaism is a very different than the ancient religion of the Israelites, and that the church is the true inheritor of the Israelite religion. So we should always treat modern Judaism no differently than other false religions.

If you want to learn more about Christianity, why not read the early church fathers? Christianity has a rich historical tradition, and one need not be Catholic in order to learn from it.The Talmud was around before Christ and many rabbis took part in it. And not all of them where against Christ or God. The current understanding of Jesus per the Talmud denies him to which I don't listen to it. I don't hold myself under it's authority or under the current Judaism's. And, yes today's Judaism is different from the 1st century Judaism. Further, they had a huge spectrum of believes in Judaism in the 1st century. My route to know God is different than yours. If you should want to know, I have started under taking the series from N.T. Wright about the Historical Jesus and Christianties' origins. It has been very interesting when I get into their world view and way of thinking. I will keep a open mind to absorb all the knowledge I can of the truth.

[dvd_holc]

Test everything; keep the good.

[newbeliever02072005]

WOW!

Maybe this wasn't such a dumb question. I did'nt realize that this was a thought out topic of discussion.

It all makes sense that some believe it to be showing reverence to the holy name of God. Some convincing evidences and thoughts. But do you honestly think that our salvation is in jeapordy by writing the name of God out?

I'll stick to doing what I was doing. Spelling it all the way out. I don't think God is going to frown on me if I do. He knows my heart. He knows that I respect Him and love Him with all that is humanly possible.

[dvd_holc]

Maybe this wasn't such a dumb question. I did'nt realize that this was a thought out topic of discussion.

It all makes sense that some believe it to be showing reverence to the holy name of God. Some convincing evidences and thoughts. But do you honestly think that our salvation is in jeapordy by writing the name of God out?Yes, it is a very big discussion. Some people want to remove all the Jewishness of it which is redicilous to me. We are not in jeapordy of losing grace because Jesus gave us salvation in one action for everyone as a gift for eternity. God give us grace as a gift so that no man can boast on it. Inherently, if deeds can't give it to us then deeds can't remove us from it. It is a double edge knife. Those who truly believe will do his will. God knows our heart (past, present, and future). God sets us free with full knowledge of who are his people.

[arunma]

The Talmud was around before Christ and many rabbis took part in it.

That depends on what you mean when you talk about the Talmud. It's true that there was an oral law, which the Jews claim they faithfully recorded in the Mishnah. But we have no reason to believe that this is true. As for the oral law itself, remember that Jesus hated the oral law. He accused the Jews of adding the traditions of men to the teachings of God. Even if the Talmud did accurately record oral teachings that were (supposedly) passed on for over 1800 years, is this really something that we should be overly fond of?

It has been very interesting when I get into their world view and way of thinking. I will keep a open mind to absorb all the knowledge I can of the truth.

There's nothing wrong with that. Heck, I've gained spiritual insight even by reading the Qur'an (though I usually gain that insight by believing the opposite of what it says). Just remember that Judaism isn't special simply by virtue of their belief in the Tanakh. Their interpretation of it is so different that Judaism shouldn't be treated differently than any other false religion.

Some people want to remove all the Jewishness of it which is redicilous to me.

This depends on what you mean by "Jewishness." If you simply want us to understand the Jewish culture of the first century, that's fine. For that matter, I wouldn't even mind if you incorporated modern Jewish culture into Christianity, since multiculturalism is always a good thing. But if by Jewishness, you're referring to Rabbinic teaching, then I couldn't disagree more. I wouldn't trust the rabbis anymore than I would trust the Dalai Lama (in fact, I might trust the Dalai Lama a bit more, since he at least doesn't deny that Jesus is the Christ).

[Andyman_1970]

True, Messianic Jews are Christians. But the Rabbinic opinion comes from a non-Christian source. ………… I'm just saying that it doesn't actually have any basis in the Bible, the opinions of the church fathers, or any other Christian source.

See my comments at the end of this post.

My issue is the religion of Judaism.

Since Jesus was a Torah observant Jew as were the authors of the New Testament this statement seems a bit biased to say the least.

When you read the Talmud or Rabbinic writings, you may think that you're gaining insight into Christianity. But just remember that every Rabbi who contributed to the Talmud firmly denied that Jesus was the Christ.

In Romans 2 Paul says that people who don’t even have the Torah sometimes by their nature do what is required by God, sometimes people who don’t know God do and say true things. So they denied Jesus, according to the Bible they have the potential of saying some true things. Why would I want to cut myself off from truth just because it doesn’t have a Christian label on it?

But I think that modern Judaism is a very different than the ancient religion of the Israelites, and that the church is the true inheritor of the Israelite religion.

With all due respect brother this borders on replacement theology…………..which IMHO is disgusting.

If you want to learn more about Christianity, why not read the early church fathers? Christianity has a rich historical tradition, and one need not be Catholic in order to learn from it.

Since many of the early church fathers circa 325 AD did their best to erase the Hebraic roots of Christianity and replace them with practices from pagan roots I personally view many of their teachings as highly suspect and full of both political and theological agendas.

But if by Jewishness, you're referring to Rabbinic teaching, then I couldn't disagree more. I wouldn't trust the rabbis anymore than I would trust the Dalai Lama (in fact, I might trust the Dalai Lama a bit more, since he at least doesn't deny that Jesus is the Christ).

Remember the word Christian in the Bible is a noun not an adjective.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 3 says “all things are yours whether life, death, present or future – all are yours, because you are of Christ, and Christ is of God (and He made everything). Paul in Acts 17 and in Titus 1 quotes pagan poets and prophets and says what they said was true. Paul didn’t quote Christian or Jewish sources, he quotes pagan sources which indicates Paul didn’t just study Jewish material or Christian material. So to have the attitude that “I’ll only read Christian books” or only study Christian sources is not really a Biblical attitude.

One thing to keep in mind Jesus, Paul and John the Baptist as Jewish rabbi’s would have had the entire Jewish Oral Torah memorized, which as Christians we do not consider Christian, or Biblical – and yet they studied stuff that was extra Biblical. With this in mind a disciples sole purpose in life (in the 1st century Hebraic perspective) was to learn what their rabbi knew (in a Christians case this is Jesus), do what their rabbi did, so they can become like the rabbi (Paul speaks of being conformed into the image of the Messiah).

All truth is God’s truth, if it’s not true then it’s not of God. Jesus even says He is "the Truth"..............anything that isn't true isn't of Jesus and anything that is true is of Jesus, there is no truth outside of Jesus He is the ultimate reality.

Just because it has a Christian “label” on it doesn’t make it true, just because it doesn’t have a Christian label on it doesn’t not make it true either. Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 “test everything, hold on to the good” – notice he doesn’t say “test only Christian things”.

[arunma]

With all due respect brother this borders on replacement theology…………..which IMHO is disgusting.

I hope we can continue to maintain a spirit of Christian fellowship, but in the interest of full disclosure, perhaps I should express my view on this issue. "Replacement theology" is actually a derogatory term for Covenant Theology, which is a doctrine that the church has always embraced (at least until John Darby attacked it in 1830). I absolutely believe that the true Israel of God is, and always has been, the church which trusted in the Christ (so we never "replaced" anyone). Before Christ, Israel trusted that they would be redeemd by Christ. And now we have faith that we have been redeemed by him. Therefore I argue that the church is Israel.

[Andyman_1970]

I hope we can continue to maintain a spirit of Christian fellowship, but in the interest of full disclosure, perhaps I should express my view on this issue. "Replacement theology" is actually a derogatory term for Covenant Theology, which is a doctrine that the church has always embraced (at least until John Darby attacked it in 1830). I absolutely believe that the true Israel of God is, and always has been, the church which trusted in the Christ (so we never "replaced" anyone). Before Christ, Israel trusted that they would be redeemd by Christ. And now we have faith that we have been redeemed by him. Therefore I argue that the church is Israel.

Since the Apostle Paul says we are grafted in, note we are not “the Tree” I would have to respectfully disagree with you on this brother.

My comment was not meant as a personal attack on you per se – I however personally find the covenant/replacement theology literally stomach turning in regards to it’s treatment of the church and Israel.

Again, just because something is a doctrine the church has historically held does not IMHO make it authoritative by any means.

Anyway we’ll have to agree to disagree on this point brother………….please accept my humble apologies if I seemed a bit “fangs out” on that issue that was not my intent.

[dvd_holc]

Amen, by brother Andy!

[AmericanGirl]

Thanks for asking that question; I've wondered myself :)

[arunma]

Since the Apostle Paul says we are grafted in, note we are not “the Tree” I would have to respectfully disagree with you on this brother.

I'm all for respectful disagreement. But if you don't mind, I'd still like to discuss the issue. Paul does say in Romans 11 that we are grafted into the tree. But he also says that some branches (the unbelieving Jews) are cut off. Since he refers to the unbelieving Jews as branches (in Romans 11:17), the Jews aren't the root of the tree either. Like us, they are branches. Paul also says "And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again." (Romans 11:23). So being a part of Israel is about faith, not lineage. Wouldn't you agree?

I however personally find the covenant/replacement theology literally stomach turning in regards to it’s treatment of the church and Israel.

But why? I think it is an excellent testimony of God's work to bring ungodly people into the commonwealth of Israel, through faith in Jesus Christ. And it fulfills the words of John the Baptist, that God can make a people out of the very stones, should he desire.

Again, just because something is a doctrine the church has historically held does not IMHO make it authoritative by any means.

Certainly not. But it does mean that many godly men who were well-versed in the Bible believed in it. This means that we should at least think about it.

Anyway we’ll have to agree to disagree on this point brother………….please accept my humble apologies if I seemed a bit “fangs out” on that issue that was not my intent.

No problem at all. But I would still like to know why you're so opposed to Covenant Theology, if you don't mind.

[Andyman_1970]

I'm all for respectful disagreement. But if you don't mind, I'd still like to discuss the issue. Paul does say in Romans 11 that we are grafted into the tree. But he also says that some branches (the unbelieving Jews) are cut off. Since he refers to the unbelieving Jews as branches (in Romans 11:17), the Jews aren't the root of the tree either. Like us, they are branches. Paul also says "And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again." (Romans 11:23). So being a part of Israel is about faith, not lineage. Wouldn't you agree?

I would agree that to be truly connected to God is through faith. I however disagree that through faith we as Gentiles somehow become or take over Israel, Israel is Israel God’s chosen people with whom He has made some very specific promises with.

But why? I think it is an excellent testimony of God's work to bring ungodly people into the commonwealth of Israel, through faith in Jesus Christ. And it fulfills the words of John the Baptist, that God can make a people out of the very stones, should he desire.

God calling out Gentiles is not a new thing, read Jonah, and there were Gentiles who were with the Israelites when the Torah was given and could partake in that relationship to YHVH, so this is not a new concept Biblically.

Certainly not. But it does mean that many godly men who were well-versed in the Bible believed in it. This means that we should at least think about it.

True as Paul said test everything hold on to the good, but there are parts of that theology I disagree with.

No problem at all. But I would still like to know why you're so opposed to Covenant Theology, if you don't mind.

Well Covenant Theology finds it’s roots in Reformed Theology and Calvin – who along with Luther had some very slanted and inaccurate understandings about 1st century Judaism and that biased their writings especially with regards to Paul and the Torah. So there are parts of that philosophy that I find interesting and the parts that have been influenced by Reformed theology and Calvinism that I disagree with. I assume with it’s connection to Reformed theology and Calvin Covenant theology holds the idea of original sin which I disagree with to some extent as this was not held by the tradition Jesus and the early church (read Jewish) came from.

Anyway that’s a few of my thoughts on the subject…………..pretty far removed from the OP.

[JPPT1974]

Not a dumb question at all.
God knows our thoughts, fears, and everything else about us.
Way, way, before we think or say it our loudly ourselves.
And that He wants us to say those things even when He knows those things Himself.
Point well taken you all.