[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Need input from Christians (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/14/2003 4:02:58 PM EDT
|
I would like your input regarding Easter. Do you celebrate Easter given the association with Ishtar? If you do celebrate Easter, are you bothered by the pagan roots of the traditional Easter celebration? I'm not asking these questions to cause any trouble, I would just like your input. Thanks |
|
Excellent question! I've noticed an increasing awareness of the pagan origins of many things that are taken for granted in the Christian faith (Such as Christmas being rooted in Saturnalia). I'm trying to strike a balance on this right now. There's no doubt in my little noggin that the resurrection is probably the most significant event in our history, and thus I can't criticize its commemoration. However, things such as colored eggs, rabbits, and other vestiges of paganism are out. So, I've weeded out the non-Christian elements and use it as an opportunity to teach about the resurrection. Have you read any of Josh McDowell's apologetics on it? Cool stuff! |
|
Quoted: I would like your input regarding Easter. Do you celebrate Easter given the association with Ishtar? If you do celebrate Easter, are you bothered by the pagan roots of the traditional Easter celebration? I'm not asking these questions to cause any trouble, I would just like your input. Thanks [b]atomicferret[/b] said it well. [^] [b]pkennedy[/b], do you celebrate July 4th (Independance Day) even though it has it's roots in colonists deciding to become slave-owning [u]Americans[/u] (as opposed to slave-owning Brits)? [stick] |
|
Quoted: Excellent question! I've noticed an increasing awareness of the pagan origins of many things that are taken for granted in the Christian faith (Such as Christmas being rooted in Saturnalia). I'm trying to strike a balance on this right now. There's no doubt in my little noggin that the resurrection is probably the most significant event in our history, and thus I can't criticize its commemoration. However, things such as colored eggs, rabbits, and other vestiges of paganism are out. So, I've weeded out the non-Christian elements and use it as an opportunity to teach about the resurrection. Have you read any of Josh McDowell's apologetics on it? Cool stuff! The resurrection is the most significant event in history. I don't criticize the commemoration of it, in fact, it is commemorated every Sunday morning. I do take issue with many of the pagan aspects of Easter and have tried to ensure they are not a part of any celebration in my family. McDowell is great. I used his Evidence that demands a Verdict books for years. Great references. |
|
Quoted: atomicferret summed it up quite well. The difference between Jesus and the other gods is that Jesus rose from the grave! There is no debate to that fact at all. [b]Jesus did rise from the grave![b] The question however, is regarding the pagan origins of Easter. Is there anyone who thinks it should not be celebrated due to the ties with Ishtar? |
|
Quoted: The "pagan" roots of any holiday mean nothing to me. I celebrate Easter as the most important holiday of the year. Christmas wouldn't mean anything if Jesus hadn't died and risen from the grave. He means all the world to me. Consider that the traditional celebration of Easter is known to be quite similar to the "pagan" roots. Have you studied those roots? |
|
Quoted: Your trolling, dude. The Bible makes no mention of bunnys and colored eggs. Those things have nothing to do with our risen Savior. Not trolling at all, I believe this is a legitimate topic of discussion. But since you mentioned that the bible does not mention colored eggs or bunnies, the bible also does not mention Easter. The only word translated as Easter in the the KJV is the word for passover. |
|
Quoted: Please explain your reference to "Pagan Roots" and "Ishtar"? Because I do not want to prejudice you with my opinion on this, I will simply suggest doing a search in the search engine of your choice on Easter and Ishtar or something like that. You should be provided with plenty of references, both good and bad. |
|
Why in the World would a [b]Christian[/b] care one way or the other about the significance [b]non-Christians[/b] may attach to a particular day? If you were baptized into the Body of Christ on a Wednesday, does that mean that Woden has some claim on your allegiance? Or, if on a Thursday, that you have something going with Thor? I mean, c'mon, every day is sacred to some group somewhere, somehow. Hell, I may be a Hun, but I'm no pagan! [:D] Eric The(MemberOfTheBodyOfChrist)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The "pagan" roots of any holiday mean nothing to me. I celebrate Easter as the most important holiday of the year. Christmas wouldn't mean anything if Jesus hadn't died and risen from the grave. He means all the world to me. Consider that the traditional celebration of Easter is known to be quite similar to the "pagan" roots. Have you studied those roots? I'll have to agree with Old_Painless. Additionally, I would assert there are no "pagan roots" other than a potential, [b]intentional usurpation[/b] of the pagan holidays. Sort of a "in your face" statement oriented towards the paganism of the day. My .02, Kevin |
| The Christian preparations and rememberance of the Death, and three days later the celebration of the birth of the first born of the dead, Our Risen Saviour Jesus Christ, is in some ways related to your pagan rituals- they are both celebrations of birth- for us, rebirth into life, as to you rebirth of the natural cycles of spring as the earth shows its continued renewal. The big difference is that one day the earth, and all that worship it, will be destroyed, and all worldly things will pass away... But the life we have, reborn in Christ, will never pass away. |
|
Quoted: Why in the World would a [b]Christian[/b] care one way or the other about the significance [b]non-Christians[/b] may attach to a particular day? [u]Deuteronomy 12:29[/u] The LORD your God will cut off before you the nations you are about to invade and dispossess. But when you have driven them out and settled in their land, 30 and after they have been destroyed before you, be careful not to be ensnared by inquiring about their gods, saying, "How do these nations serve their gods? We will do the same." 31 [red]You must not worship the LORD your God in their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the LORD hates.[/red] They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods. [i][BAAL][/i] 32 See that you do all I command you;[red]do not add to it or take away from it[/red] [u]Malachi 3:6[/u] For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. [u]Hebrews 13:8[/u] Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. |
|
I gotta go with Boom_Stick and PKennedy. We are taught in Scripture to avoid Pagan things, and not to even take the names of foreign gods in our mouths. Weekdays are meaningless tags, but "easter" is the Germanic fertility goddess analog of Ishtar - Ashtoreth. Check it out - the Israelites were killed for keeping her holiday, even though they followed Yahweh in all other things. He has shown he takes this seriously; I have to follow Him. The fertility roots of bunnies, eggs, and the Maypole (not used in our country) sre undeniable. We are given the Lord's Day to celebrate His ressurrection and victory over sin; "As often as ye come together". EVERY meeting of the Body is a celebration of that blessed life that gave life to us. Larry |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Please explain your reference to "Pagan Roots" and "Ishtar"? Because I do not want to prejudice you with my opinion on this, I will simply suggest doing a search in the search engine of your choice on Easter and Ishtar or something like that. You should be provided with plenty of references, both good and bad. 1. It would be impossible for you to prejudice me with your opinion. 2. Oh yeah, I believe everything I read on the internet! |
|
Quoted: 1. It would be impossible for you to prejudice me with your opinion. 2. Oh yeah, I believe everything I read on the internet! Two minutes doing a little research on your own will go farther than 2 hours arguing with me. There are plenty of good resources on the internet, and I'm sure you can find some credible ones. |
|
[b]Colossians 2[/b] 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. 16 [b]Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:[/b] 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. And here is a little longer piece from St. Paul about such things: [b]Romans 14[/b] 1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. 4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. [b]5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.[/b] 7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. 8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. 10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. [b]14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.[/b] 15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. 16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of: 17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Amen! Eric The(EverdayIsTheLord'sDay)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Here is the only reason my family celebrates easter! [url]http://www.gieson.com/Library/projects/animations/risen/index.html[/url] I am considered cruel because I teach my children that santa clause and the easter bunny have absolutly nothing to do with their respective holidays! |
|
Easter, as celebrated today, is split into 2 holidays, much like Christmas: The 'Hershey Holiday', with the bunnies, chocolate, and baskets (basically what Santa Claus & the commercial rat-race is to Christmas)... and the Christian holiday... Christian Easter is tied to the end of the Jewish passover, and is completely focused on commemorating the death & ressurection. That another holiday was celebrated near that time, and the name was co-opted (probably for 1st century security reasons. Christiantity wasn't that popular with the PTBs in the early days) is a sidenote... It's what you're celebrating, not what the holiday is called, that makes the difference... Halloween is the direct opposite: The name comes from 'All Hallows Eve' (the night before the Catholic 'All Saints Day'), but the current version has nothing to do with saints or the Church (but rather with monsters, witches, etc)... |
|
As the church spread into new lands there was a tendency to adopt the pagan holidays and dress them up in Christian terminology. An example is Christmas. December 25 was the day that the Roman Mithra cult celebrated Saturnalia. Constantine, as emperor, was the head of the Mithra religion. He "converted" to Christianity, but was more concerned with political matters than being theologically correct. He attempted to blend the two, keeping the holiday, but inventing new "Christian" meanings for the symbols. Because of the extra-scriptural and pagan things that have accumulated over the years, I've been trying to get back to a First Century faith. That is, stripping away the things that are not supported by scripture and trying to practice the faith as it was originally handed to us. For example, the first century Christian believers did not cut down trees, bring them in the house, and decorate them. That's a practice later adopted from pagans. The main points here are 1) Incorporating core doctrines that define the true Christian faith (such as the virgin birth, deity of Yeshua, the resurrection, etc.), and 2) Excluding doctrines that are patently false as measured by Scripture. The first point defines our relationship to our Creator and the salvation He has provided for us. The second prevents contamination and dilution of that message by outside sources. Holding fast to pure doctrine (as best as we can understand it) is more a matter of being set-apart (not of this world) than a spiritual superiority unto ourselves. It is actually a concept that is directed by God Himself. “When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there… You must be blameless before the LORD your God. (Dt 18:9, 13 NIV).” Here He warns the Israelites, and us, against learning the ways of the pagans, in essence, to keep themselves set apart and to not let themselves be contaminated by pagan traditions, customs, and beliefs. There was good reason why He became so angry at the Israelites bowing down to the golden calf in the wilderness. Naturally this was not just for the Israelites thousands of years ago. Today, maybe even more than then, it is imperative to keep ungodly influences from contaminating our doctrine. So many non-Christian groups have adopted Christian terminology or even (mis)use the Bible itself, claiming to be the “true” church. The need for unadulterated doctrine is emphasized in James 1:27, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. (NIV)” And, as Paul wrote to Timothy: “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Tim 4:16, NIV).” Continuing in this vein, the concept of keeping the sheep and goats separated is expounded in II Cor 6:14-18, "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said, “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God and they will be my people. “Therefore come out of them and be separate, says the LORD. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the LORD Almighty.” Obviously this is referring to being vigilant against outside (pagan) influences creeping into the Church and polluting the pure faith. We are called to be set apart from the world and avoid being contaminated by it. From these verses we can see that we have an obligation to our Creator and ourselves to carefully guard our doctrine. This consists of two parts. The first is to carefully evaluate spiritual teachings, incorporating what is true and rejecting the false. The second is to inventory what we have already adopted and evaluate it also according to our Scriptural reference. It’s not an easy or comfortable thing to do, especially when you feel like that one voice crying out in the wilderness. People will tend to question your mental (not just spiritual!) state when you depart from the bounds of convention. However, when our Heavenly Father reveals truth to you there is a decision to be made. Much that is not Biblical or approved by Yahweh has been added to the Christian faith since the first century. The challenge is to identify these things and discard them, refining the faith and, hopefully, getting as close as we can to the original faith handed to us by Yeshua. Our Messiah did not tell us to be “open-minded.” Rather, He said, “…small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it (Mt 7:14, NIV).” Sticking to the narrow road with earn us the criticism of those not on it, but will indeed also lead us into life. |
|
Quoted: As the church spread into new lands there was a tendency to adopt the pagan holidays and dress them up in Christian terminology. An example is Christmas. December 25 was the day that the Roman Mithra cult celebrated Saturnalia. Constantine, as emperor, was the head of the Mithra religion. He "converted" to Christianity, but was more concerned with political matters than being theologically correct. He attempted to blend the two, keeping the holiday, but inventing new "Christian" meanings for the symbols. Because of the extra-scriptural and pagan things that have accumulated over the years, I've been trying to get back to a First Century faith. That is, stripping away the things that are not supported by scripture and trying to practice the faith as it was originally handed to us. For example, the first century Christian believers did not cut down trees, bring them in the house, and decorate them. That's a practice later adopted from pagans. The main points here are 1) Incorporating core doctrines that define the true Christian faith (such as the virgin birth, deity of Yeshua, the resurrection, etc.), and 2) Excluding doctrines that are patently false as measured by Scripture. The first point defines our relationship to our Creator and the salvation He has provided for us. The second prevents contamination and dilution of that message by outside sources. Holding fast to pure doctrine (as best as we can understand it) is more a matter of being set-apart (not of this world) than a spiritual superiority unto ourselves. It is actually a concept that is directed by God Himself. “When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there… You must be blameless before the LORD your God. (Dt 18:9, 13 NIV).” Here He warns the Israelites, and us, against learning the ways of the pagans, in essence, to keep themselves set apart and to not let themselves be contaminated by pagan traditions, customs, and beliefs. There was good reason why He became so angry at the Israelites bowing down to the golden calf in the wilderness. Naturally this was not just for the Israelites thousands of years ago. Today, maybe even more than then, it is imperative to keep ungodly influences from contaminating our doctrine. So many non-Christian groups have adopted Christian terminology or even (mis)use the Bible itself, claiming to be the “true” church. The need for unadulterated doctrine is emphasized in James 1:27, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. (NIV)” And, as Paul wrote to Timothy: “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Tim 4:16, NIV).” Continuing in this vein, the concept of keeping the sheep and goats separated is expounded in II Cor 6:14-18, "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said, “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God and they will be my people. “Therefore come out of them and be separate, says the LORD. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the LORD Almighty.” Obviously this is referring to being vigilant against outside (pagan) influences creeping into the Church and polluting the pure faith. We are called to be set apart from the world and avoid being contaminated by it. From these verses we can see that we have an obligation to our Creator and ourselves to carefully guard our doctrine. This consists of two parts. The first is to carefully evaluate spiritual teachings, incorporating what is true and rejecting the false. The second is to inventory what we have already adopted and evaluate it also according to our Scriptural reference. It’s not an easy or comfortable thing to do, especially when you feel like that one voice crying out in the wilderness. People will tend to question your mental (not just spiritual!) state when you depart from the bounds of convention. However, when our Heavenly Father reveals truth to you there is a decision to be made. Much that is not Biblical or approved by Yahweh has been added to the Christian faith since the first century. The challenge is to identify these things and discard them, refining the faith and, hopefully, getting as close as we can to the original faith handed to us by Yeshua. Our Messiah did not tell us to be “open-minded.” Rather, He said, “…small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it (Mt 7:14, NIV).” Sticking to the narrow road with earn us the criticism of those not on it, but will indeed also lead us into life. Outstanding post! Keep in mind, the Lord knows your heart. If you are moved to study and be obedient, and follow that, as your Christian faith grows so will your understanding. One thing people fail to realize is that every person is at a little different stage of understanding and maturity as a Christian. I like seeing people sharing opinions and scripture in a spirit of Love rather than a spirit of condemnation. We all grow from it. I have seen way too many Christians who lose sight of the fact that sharing and teaching are endeavors of obedience and love, rather than being about who is right or wrong. Thanks guys! |
|
Post from Brohawk - The main points here are 1) Incorporating core doctrines that define the true Christian faith (such as the virgin birth, deity of Yeshua, the resurrection, etc.), and 2) Excluding doctrines that are patently false as measured by Scripture. The first point defines our relationship to our Creator and the salvation He has provided for us. The second prevents contamination and dilution of that message by outside sources. Holding fast to pure doctrine (as best as we can understand it) is more a matter of being set-apart (not of this world) than a spiritual superiority unto ourselves. It is actually a concept that is directed by God Himself. If you really want to worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth, get yourself to the nearest church of Christ in your area. Note: not, however, a [u]United[/u] Church of Christ, as that denomination is one of the most liberal in all of Christendom. BTW, why use the word 'Yahweh'? Do you call [b]Jesus[/b], 'Yeshua'? Do you refer to the Messiah as the 'Maschiach'? Or some suitable rendition? Eric The(Clear,Concise)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Regarding "the real roots." This is not an accurate phrase. It makes it sound as if the Christian observations actually began with the pagan cultures. It may be true that some days were "co-opted" or occur near pagan days, but that does not make paganism "the real root" of any Christian observance. Christ is the "Real Root." Period. That said, here's a lil' bit from the Bible on the matter: "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone." Romans 14. So if you want to celebrate Easter, go for it. It is a joyous commemoration of the resurrection! If you don't, that's fine. fwiw Scott |
|
Quoted: I gotta go with Boom_Stick and PKennedy. We are taught in Scripture to avoid Pagan things, and not to even take the names of foreign gods in our mouths. Weekdays are meaningless tags, but "easter" is the Germanic fertility goddess analog of Ishtar - Ashtoreth. What makes the weekdays (and all but two of the months) meaningless tags? What makes "easter" [i]not[/i] a "meaningless tag?" We are given the Lord's Day to celebrate His ressurrection and victory over sin; "As often as ye come together". EVERY meeting of the Body is a celebration of that blessed life that gave life to us. Amen to that! Scott |
|
Quoted: Halloween is the direct opposite: The name comes from 'All Hallows Eve' (the night before the Catholic 'All Saints Day'), but the current version has nothing to do with saints or the Church (but rather with monsters, witches, etc)... Not in all quarters... [:)] We Lutherans celebrate it as All Hallows Eve and "Reformation Day" and we Celebrate Nov. 1, All Saints Day.... fwiw Scott |
|
I doubt any Christian sees himself or herself as separated from other Christians over something so trivial as the celebration of one day over any other, for whatever reason. There are much more important things to divide ourselves over.... Eric The(Truthful)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Quoted: I doubt any Christian sees himself or herself as separated from other Christians over something so trivial as the celebration of one day over any other, for whatever reason. There are much more important things to divide ourselves over.... Eric The(Truthful)Hun[>]:)] Truer words have not been uttered..... You da man Hun! COZ(now beginning to peel and flake from the sun at our incredible host's farm)_45 |
| I don't see any division here. I try to emphasize unity in the Body of Christ, rather than to cause division over things that may be open to interpretation. We can disagree on non-essentials, and still maintain brotherhood and fellowship. These points just make for interesting discussion. |
|
Here's some studying and reasoning I did regarding names. What’s In A Name? One question that I’ve pondered is why translate a person’s name? For example, when talking about a German named Johann Schmidt we wouldn’t call him “John Smith.” On the evening news we hear names of leaders from all over the world. Sometimes the pronunciations are entertaining, but the names are not translated into an English “equivalent.” When coming from a language that uses a different alphabet, such as Arabic, the phonetic rendering of names tries to duplicate the original pronunciation as closely as possible. If you walked into Nazareth 2,000 years ago and asked somebody where Jesus lived they would have answered that nobody by that name lived in that town. However, if you asked for Yeshua they would now who you are talking about. Why? Simply because that is His name. That’s the name He was given by Mary as directed by Gabriel, the name He grew up with, and the name He was called by all who knew Him. There is a message in the name, “Yahweh saves.” When I first learned of the name Yeshua many years ago I took an attitude of “That’s the Jewish name for Jesus.” We tend to interpret events and information according to our prior learning and experience. Little did I realize at the time that I had it completely backward. “Jesus” was the substitute name. So, why call Him Jesus? Where did it come from? One interesting factoid I learned along the way is that the letter “J” did not come into common use until the early 1500’s. “Jesus” is an Anglicized form of the Greek “Iesous”, and didn’t come into use until one-and-a-half millennia after our Savior walked the earth. In trying to maintain a reasoned approach and a perspective in keeping with the spirit of Romans 14, I dare not say that the use of the name “Jesus” is wrong. Over the years there have been too many people saved, delivered, and healed in that name to make such a statement. After all, it is the Person who gives authority and power to the name. My position is that using His given name, Yeshua, is more correct. Continuing on the topic of names, there is one that is referred to all the time, but is almost never actually pronounced. Picture a room full of people. There are Christians, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and others mixed in there. Each person makes the statement, “I love God.” Have they all said the same thing? To the uncritical ear it may seem they have, but they all said something different because they assign different meanings to the term “God.” To the Muslim it is Allah, to the Mormon it is the spirit being who came to earth in a physical body and engaged in sexual relations with Mary to beget Jesus, and so on for the people of different faiths. The point here is that the name “God” is vague and imprecise. When somebody says, “I love God”, the response should be, “God who?” We sing worship choruses proclaiming, “I will praise your name!” During an outburst of praise we declare, “I bless your name, O Lord!” However, with all of the praise directed at His name (and rightly so), have you ever noticed that we never actually use His name? Why do we not use the name He revealed through Scripture? The only admonitions I could find regarding the use of His name warnings against misusing it. For example, "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. (Ex 20:7) 'Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God. I am the LORD . (Lev 19:12) I did find some sources that indicate the tradition of not pronouncing the Name came from the Babylonian captivity. It is said that in order to keep the pagans from learning the Name and defiling it, it was decided that no one would be allowed to speak it. After the return to their homeland the tradition continued. But what if there were actual examples encouraging to use His name? Using Scripture as our guide we find examples such as: “Give thanks to the LORD, call upon his name, make known his deeds among the people (1 Chr 16:8 KJV).” “O give thanks unto the LORD; call upon his name: make known his deeds among the people (Ps 105:1 KJV).” “And in that day shall ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted (Is 12:4 KJV).” Would it not be contradictory for scripture to encourage us to call upon His name and then be forbidden to use it? These verses tell us to call upon His name, and His name is not “LORD.” His name is not “God”, nor is it “LORD”. LORD, as it appears in English language Bibles, is a substitute for the Tetragrammaton, or YHWH from the Hebrew, commonly spelled “Yahweh.” As examples, consider the two verses that follow: God also said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, 'The LORD, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation. (Ex 3:15) "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Is 42:8) Now see how this sounds: Elohim also said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, 'Yahweh, the God of your fathers-the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob-has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation. (Ex 3:15) "I am Yahweh; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Is 42:8) With the Name restored, these passages become much more specific and powerful. This is as it should be. Let’s look at another verse: Those who know your name will trust in you, for you, LORD , have never forsaken those who seek you. (Ps 9:10) Here the key point is to know His name. Not to call upon Him by some generic title or substitute name, but to know His name, the name by which He said He is to be remembered. Thus, the correct wording would be: Those who know your name will trust in you, for you, Yahweh, have never forsaken those who seek you. (Ps 9:10) A common phrase in our English language Bibles is “the name of the LORD.” Examples are: Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God. (Ps 20:7) Then I called on the name of the LORD : "O LORD , save me!" (Ps 116:4) Our help is in the name of the LORD , the Maker of heaven and earth. (Ps 124:8) Note the construction of this phrase, “the name of the LORD.” If “the LORD” was His name this would simply say, “Our help is in the LORD.” Using the name by which He revealed Himself it would read, “Our help is in the name of Yahweh.” Again, very specific and very powerful. I believe this presents a strong case for using of the proper names for our Creator and Messiah instead of substitutes that have been inserted by the translators. **************************************** My knowledge being incomplete and imperfect, I am always striving to grow closer to Truth and to our Creator. Any feedback on this topic would be respected. |
|
As I'm sure you know, Brohawk, the Jews were especially careful not to use God's name in vain. Hence, they substituted Lord in it's place. In fact, in the King James version, if you see LORD in all caps, it is translated as Yahweh. This, like many other things the Jews did, was an over reaction to God's purpose. He obviously didn't mean we couldn't write down His name, but that we shouldn't use it as a cuss word. And your point about the different religions using different names is true, but doesn't apply here. Even if we use the same names, we can be misunderstood. Just because someone tells me 'I know Jesus" doesn't mean he is a Christian. If I told you, I know Eric. And you said, "I do too. He is my best friend. Eric is about 6 foot tall and blond, and weights about 150 pounds." I would say, "That's not the Eric I know. My friend Eric is short, dark haired, and weights about 225 pounds." It is obvious that we aren't talking about the same Eric. The same is true when my Mormon friends tell me they know Jesus. Their Jesus isn't the same one I know. Completely different. So using the original Jewish names doesn't help much either. What's important is that you know the right Jesus. The one I know is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. He's coming back soon. |
|
Old Painless, I'm pretty much on board with you. After all, it is the Person who gives significance to the Name. As noted above, I'm not so muchh criticizing those who use the name of Jesus, because the Person gives power to the name. In my personal theology I think the original name is "more correct", but I don't think the issue is worth getting into a fight over. If by that name you mean the Second Person of the Trinity, who was virgin-born, led a sinless life, was sacrificed to pay for our sins, and rose on the third day, we're in agreement. These are interesting times, when you can cross-reference the newspaper with the book of Revelation, eh? See you at the throne. |
|
Quoted: If by that name you mean the Second Person of the Trinity, who was virgin-born, led a sinless life, was sacrificed to pay for our sins, and rose on the third day, we're in agreement. These are interesting times, when you can cross-reference the newspaper with the book of Revelation, eh? See you at the throne. I'll be looking for you. At the Bema Throne. Not the Great White Throne. |
| I must concur that Easter was not rooted in the pagan holidays, however it does retain undertones of the pagan holidays that are close to it. Ostara (March 21) and Beltane (May 1) are where many of the distinctly non-christian accessories of easter originate. The Bunnies and eggs come from ostara (holiday celebrating the rebirth of a new spring from the cold and harsh winter) and from Beltane (celebrating fertility and hope for the new crop) come the maypole and beltane fires. The original intent was for the holiday of Easter to eclipse both Ostara and Beltane to draw attention to the newly popular christianity and to celebrate the resurrection of the saviour in the process. |
|
The underlying basis for Christians to celebrate 'Resurrection Sunday' (my own term for 'Easter') is in the Jewish Feast of the Passover. If you carefully research the details of this celebration, you will find the Messiah hidden within the various traditions. Christians base the actual date of our own Resurrection Sunday on the date for the Jewish Feast. Ah, but blindness hath fallen upon the House of Israel for a season, until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled. Let it be. Eric The(Maranatha!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
Quoted: The underlying basis for Christians to celebrate 'Resurrection Sunday' (my own term for 'Easter') is in the Jewish Feast of the Passover. If you carefully research the details of this celebration, you will find the Messiah hidden within the various traditions. Yes, if you research the Passover you will find much pointing to the Messiah. Now, if you carefully research the traditional Easter celebration, don't you find a great amount of pagan influence and tradition? How about if you could weigh in on this question; Do you think it is right for a local church to incorporate things into the resurrection celebration that have nothing to do with the resurrection of Christ (such as Easter egg hunts)? |