Tetragrammaton still OFF TOPIC

[Guest guest]

Ilana

You wrote about what I wrote:

>> " At any rate, it was never in any of the ancient languages involved

>> in scripture. "

>

> 1) 'scripture' if you are referring to the Hebrew Bible, was written

> in HEBREW. God's name there, in the Torah scroll, is a 4 letter (tetra

> - grammaton) word consisting of the Hebrew letters yud-hey-vah-hey....

Yes, the meaning is expressed in Hebrew throughout the Tanakh, not just

the Torah, but the word, " GOD, " itself, is not there, since that is a

Teutonic word that had not been invented or borrowed from Sanskrit yet.

As I stated, its use as a _proper_ noun was already common in OE, Anglo

Saxon, and OHG. Although it is not the ancient Hebrew name, it has been

taken as a genuine name, a form of address for supplication, for many

dozens of generations before you decided it could not be a name.

Therefore, some people today are sensitive about the newer Teutonic name

being taken in vain, joked about, or misspelled disrespectfully, just as

the ancients were concerned about abuse of the name in their language. I

think we should respect that sensitivity, even if we spell it with the

vowel included.

Scholars do not agree that the proscriptions against pronouncing it were

actually as rigid as you have indicated, although that has been a common

interpretation at least since before the Masoretes added vowel points.

That word is also not in the koine Greek of the NT.

The rest of what you wrote was also already mentioned before. So, while

you requested that we stay on topic, you yourself repeated much of the

off topic discussion. I would describe this end of the discussion more

as etymology or history than theology, but I agree it is off topic. If

you may recall, the original jumping off point was a statement that all

natural treatments were divinely endowed. As counter examples, I would

submit castor beans, belladonna, hemlock, poison ivy, rhubarb leaves,

potato greens, and tobacco.

Chuck