Has Jesus ever disclosed the name of GOD?

Post Reply New Topic

It's his name that is what is important to theists.

We were created in His image. We have been endowed with all the qualities God has such as love, reasoning abilities, compassion, justice, and so forth (even in an imperfect state we find ourselves in). Of all the material creations in existence humans are the most unique because only we have the ability to mirror our Creator's qualities in abundance. The plants cannot do this, nor the animal, or the air or the earth, or our sun... only humans.

One of our Godly qualities is the desire to name things. We love to name objects and discoveries. We love to give websites names instead of remembering their IP address. We name planets, and creatures in the sea. We name everything. Parents have the wonderful privilege of naming their offspring. Jehovah God -- who is described at Isaiah 40:26 and 12 as having "dynamic energy" and "being vigorous in power", "who has measured the waters in the mere hollow of his hand, and taken the proportions of the heavens themselves with a mere span" -- loves to name all the stars and even remembers all of them by name. (Psalms 147:4; Isaiah 40:26) One of the coolest tasks Adam was given was to name all the animals in the garden. (Genesis 2:19,20) Adam even named his wife. (Genesis 3:20) Jehovah gave Abram and Sarai new names to represent who they would eventually become. (Genesis 17:5, 15) Does it seem reasonable to conclude that if we humans enjoy naming people and things, and Jehovah God enjoys naming celestial objects, then why can't God give himself a name? A name that is unique to the skills and abilities he possesses.

God has chosen to call himself יְהֹוָה. . (Isa 42:8; 54:5) This name appears nearly 7,000 times in the bible. The name means "I am that I am" or “He Causes to Become” and only the Almighty could give himself such a name. His name simply means he can become whatever he needs to be to fulfill his purposes. In keeping with the meaning of God's name at Isaiah 55:11 Jehovah states, "so my word that goes forth from my mouth will prove to be. It will not return to me without results, but it will certainly do that in which I have delighted, and it will have certain success in that for which I have sent it."

Can titles such as "The God of Abraham", or "the King of the Jews", or even just "My Lord" compare to a name like JEHOVAH? Let me put it this way... could a title such as "English Writer" compare to William Shakespeare? Could a title such as "great basketball player" compare to Michael Jordan? Would you not agree that names like William Shakespeare and Michael Jordan themselves brings up images that express the greatness of what these men achieved? Is the name JEHOVAH not as powerful?

Do you think it is possible to develop a close personal relationship with someone if you never know their name? Why would this not apply with God's name? His name appears over 6,000 times in bible. There are plenty of scriptures, such as John 17:3 and James 4:4, that show Jehovah wants people to know him. He wants people to develop a close, personal relationship with him. As his Witnesses our job is to go out and help people learn, from God's word the bible, about Jehovah God, how to develop a close personal relationship with him, and what He purposes for mankind in the near future.

Last edited by kxmode on 09 Jul 2012, 2:17 am, edited 12 times in total.

Good point I give it A PLUS.

If the central fixation of your faith is "The Bible sez that God created such a horrible, yucky world that is deserves to be destroyed, along with everyone in it, except for me and some others who believe as I do, and who have found a special trick for evading damnation", then, yes, Southern Baptists maintain a much lower opinion of the universe than most people do.


Southern Baptists really do represent a special case. Other faiths are much more focused on helping the needy, doing charitable works, and maintaining a decent level of humility. Baptists are only concerned with getting everyone to believe the same things, and to be angered at the same things. Uniformity of anger is a paramount virtue.

You really have no empirical evidence to back up your belief system. You only believe that believing what you believe automatically makes it come true. Believing something to be true does not automatically make it true.

Otherwise, the suicide bombers who believe that they will be greeted by 72 nubile virgins will similarly not be disappointed. They believe that the virgins will be there. And, POOF!! ! There they are!

Yes.

You lie.

Wrong.

Lazy straw man argument.


We do that.


We do that.


We do that, too.


Even if that were true, it's no more/less than any religious group. We all group ourselves according to common beliefs and practices. Those who identify as Catholics go to Catholic churches. Besides that, all Christians share a concern and desire for all people to live eternally in God's presence--or at least they should. And if all Christians believe the same things, then it naturally follows that we are angered by the same things. Your issue isn't with Baptists. It's with Christians as a whole.

151 posts on Utter Nonsense

ruveyn

Another straw man. If something is true, it is true whether you believe it or not, not because of wishful thinking. You seem to be making a false assumption about whether we are justified in believing what we hold to be true.

Okay. What is the "true" assumption about whether you are justified in believing what you hold to be true, then? And, what do you mean by "straw man" exactly?

What can one expect from a bunch of goyim?

I hope that you've subtracted your posts from that number.

No, mostly Baptists. Other Christians aren't quite so obsessed with how horrible the world is, nor with forcing everyone to conform to their silly sense of morality.

http://articles.cnn.com/1997-06-18/us/9 ... n?_s=PM:US



Southern Baptists are just plain ridiculous and obnoxious. There really isn't any corporation that is more family-friendly than Disney.

Southern Baptists even go so far as to label Timon and Pumba as a "gay couple." But, David and Jonathan? Heavens, NO!! !!

Dismissing an argument as a "Lazy straw man argument" is even lazier.


Not that I can see. And, boycotting Disney doesn't count.

By straw man, I mean that you are arguing against something I don't believe, such as "You only believe what you believe automatically makes it come true." I said nothing of the sort, and that doesn't even remotely fit what I believe. Most negative things you've had to say against Baptists aren't even true. You have a prejudice against Baptists that you can't even back up, but rather you make us scapegoats for everything you find distasteful about conservative evangelicals in general--some of whom for which the things you said may hold true against certain groups and individuals that aren't a part of the SBC.

People in the western world can follow whatever moral code they choose for themselves as long as it is in keeping with the law. We're not forcing anything on anyone.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is an abomination. Baptists believe the Bible. There is nothing wrong with withholding support from something someone believes violates a religious moral principle. What you're doing here is expressing a subjective opinion.

By attacking me specifically because I happen to be a Southern Baptist, are you not trying to impose your own morality on me? If forcing morality on someone is a bad thing, why would you be such a hypocrite to do the very thing you're accusing someone of doing?

Straw man attacks are misleading statements that have the effect of misleading an opponent into defending something that is untrue. I'm not obligated to defend a position I don't even hold. If I'm going to spend the time and energy defending something, I'd rather it be something I hold to be true than something that is not.