@Northstar provided an explanation that reads like an incorrect attempt to translate Hebrew.If @Northstar told you the name, it wouldn't be secret any more.
Who created God?
- Thread starter muhammad_isa
- Start date
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
Rip Van Winkle said that when he arose from his sleep.
Northstar
Member
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 3
It is called the Tetragram. YHWH some say yahweh or jehovah but noone knows anymore what is missing and how it is pronounced anymore. That is why I said it is a secret and you really dont have to know how it is pronounced only the meaning is important. When I started to believe in Jesus because I read the gospel of John and when I prayed I called him God of the metaverse and he still answered my prayers. I am not calling him that way when I pray. I call him almighty creator, lord of hosts and the most high.
Here's the thing. The translation you have provided is not that of the Tetragrammaton. The Tetragrammaton is third person masculine singular. Any translation that does not begin "He...." is wrong.
You have confused the Tetragrammaton with what G-d is quoted as saying in Exodus 3:14 - אהיה אשר אהיה - "I will be what I will be".
You're new here, you haven't asked, but just so you know, I am a rabbi.
I always enjoyed my Course Director's suggestion that one could read this text as a rebuke.
Moses goes up the mountain to speak with God, and says: "I shall go to the children of Israel, and say to them: The God of your fathers hath sent me to you. If they should say to me: What is his name? what shall I say to them?"
To which God makes His famous reply, which can be read to imply "I am who I am, who the hell do you think you are?"
I'm not saying it's an exegetical reading, but it is a valid point. Moses turns up to the people of Israel and says, 'God says follow me and He will lead you to freedom,' to which they reply, 'who is this 'He' you're talking about?'
Moses goes up the mountain to speak with God, and says: "I shall go to the children of Israel, and say to them: The God of your fathers hath sent me to you. If they should say to me: What is his name? what shall I say to them?"
To which God makes His famous reply, which can be read to imply "I am who I am, who the hell do you think you are?"
I'm not saying it's an exegetical reading, but it is a valid point. Moses turns up to the people of Israel and says, 'God says follow me and He will lead you to freedom,' to which they reply, 'who is this 'He' you're talking about?'
Craz
Well-Known Member
I agree.
Craz
Well-Known Member
"Ehyeh" is future tense.
I don't why so many people make it the present tense. @RabbiO has already mentioned this in #804.
Here is the text from Exodus 3:14.(sorry for the poor formatting).
ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:
You may be interested in what Rashi( a Torah commentator) has to say. See here https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9864/showrashi/true
I should add that I am not a Rabbi.
I hope you are well
Part of the problem is the nature of Biblical Hebrew tenses - or the lack thereof.
Craz
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I understand.
Did you mean that classical(Biblical) Hebrew has a different grammar to modern Hebrew?
However both have past, present and future.
When I first went to Israel, Israelis chuckled at me for using classical Hebrew mixed with modern Hebrew.
I am now remembering that it's more complicated. I was taught this stuff over 60 years ago and remember how difficult it was for me.
I found a good article on this for anyone who is interested.
Hebrew Tenses | Biblical Hebrew
biblicalhebrew.org
Last edited:
Northstar
Member
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 3
alright, then tell me the meaning of his name because you are a rabbi.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
No secret, not wrong. I was there when he said that.
A light will be seen if there is a lamp. No lamp, no light.
Last edited:
jimmysmith
New Member
God created all of creation, He Himself is the Creator.
If God were created by someone, then He would no longer be the Creator.
God cannot be counted as part of creation, nor can we ask when He began or where He came from, because those questions depend on time.
God created time itself, so He exists beyond time and beyond His creation.
That is why these rules do not apply to Him.
If God were created by someone, then He would no longer be the Creator.
God cannot be counted as part of creation, nor can we ask when He began or where He came from, because those questions depend on time.
God created time itself, so He exists beyond time and beyond His creation.
That is why these rules do not apply to Him.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
Circular reasoning.
Alif Balaam Yashin
SINISTERIST
- Messages
- 194
- Reaction score
- 82
- Points
- 28
If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
However, Evil exists.
If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn’t have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn’t know when evil exists, or doesn’t have the desire to eliminate all Evil.
Conclusion: God Does Not Exist
It does. G-d created creatures capable of evil.
I don't agree with that.
That is like saying that G-d does not care one way or the other, whether we choose evil
or not. I don't believe that.
Alif Balaam Yashin
SINISTERIST
- Messages
- 194
- Reaction score
- 82
- Points
- 28
No, it's proving that god doesn't exist, and if god did exist, he isn't omniscient, omnipotent, or moral, which means this god is nothing like the Abrahamic faiths make him out to be.
You don't need to agree with it; it's philosophically sound. Prove it's wrong.
The 'problem of evil' is generally formulated in two forms: the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil.
The example you cite is the logical problem, that goes back to Antiquity, and argues the logical impossibility in the coexistence of a God and evil. This version of the problem has in fact been answered by various defenses – so your conclusion is neither necessary nor inevitable, so is not proven.
The evidential arguments remains a point of debate in contemporary philosophy, so again is an argument, but not a proof.
So you are expressing an opinion, based on a certain set of assumptions, but that's no sufficient reason to think anyone else need accept nor share your conclusions.
I would have thought you might realise the argument against God works against your own LHP ideology?
A general question to all –
It occurred to me that the Problem of Evil rests upon making certain absolute statements, not only about the deity, omniscience, omnipotence, all-Perfect, etc., and our apprehension and understanding of the world and all that occurs therein — but our powers of observation and therefore our conclusions are finite and contingent, and therefore any determinations we can make are relative to our own position?
I might be wrong here, and probably am, but just throwing it out there.
It occurred to me that the Problem of Evil rests upon making certain absolute statements, not only about the deity, omniscience, omnipotence, all-Perfect, etc., and our apprehension and understanding of the world and all that occurs therein — but our powers of observation and therefore our conclusions are finite and contingent, and therefore any determinations we can make are relative to our own position?
I might be wrong here, and probably am, but just throwing it out there.