This article was nominated for deletion on 16 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
The article
Divine name was
nominated for
deletion.
The discussion was closed on 11 January 2024 with a consensus to
merge the content into
Names of God. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page. Do not remove this template after completing the merger. A bot will replace it with {{
afd-merged-from}}. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Under the section Abrahamic Religions/Christianity, an editor says,"In the effort to translate the Bible into every language (see SIL), the Christian God has usually been named after a pagan or philosophical concept that was present in the language before Christianity."
No evidence has been provided for this statement. Is the writer perhaps confusing the concept 'god' with the actual personal name of the supreme deity as revealed/recorded in the Bible?--
Lepton6 (
talk) 16:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've expanded the Hinduism section, which originally was very limited and placed an undue emphasis on Krishna-centered traditions, and previously failed to mention any traditions except for the two main, Vaishnavism and Shaivism. -- Shruti14 talk • sign 20:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to ask why Hare Krishna continues to be added to the "Main articles" line. I don't think it should, and here is why:
For these reasons I disagree with the placement of the article as a "Main article" within the section. -- Shruti14 talk • sign 14:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Hare Krishna is the most prominent form of chanting the "Holy Names" of Krishna. [2] and "Names of God" [3] If the Sahasranama was changed to Names of God in Hinduism and thus became main article, Hare Krishna will still remain a See also. At the moment they are both See also and lets keep Sahasranama article first, since its more generic. Hare Krishna should remain Wikidās ॐ 14:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Restructure is clearly required:
Wikidās ॐ 14:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Religions of X is a universal expression, as for example Buddhism is a religion of India but not the Indian Religion. In some religions use or a reference to the name of God is undocumented or is OR idea, they should not be part of this article. I am yet to find references to use of Holy Name in African religions for example. If a religion is not confirmed by the secondary sources as addressing God with a name being His name or to Holy Name, it should be removed to comply with policies of inclusion. Wikidās ॐ 22:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
"How do we objectively assess the relevance? " - objectivity could be a consesus, but lets suggest alphabetical order the the place of origin, I have updated the list to reflect the order according to the "from" factor. That creates a NPOV approach and nobody gets a special mention. Neutral. Wikidās ॐ 08:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
One thing is being selective in content selection (ie it has to be verifiable, notable and supported by reliable sources), and completely another thing is categorization. Wikidās ॐ 09:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
They are not being treated in the same way. If you want to treat them the same way, select one single criteria - at the moment it is country of origin not the founder. Wikidās ॐ 10:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Not just Hinduism, so other ancient traditions particularly of Egypt. For example: No weight is to be laid on the equation Krsna = Christos, for Krsna was a god before Christ was born. - Epic Mythology With Additions and Corrections: With Additions and Corrections - Page 216 by Edward Washburn Hopkins - 1968; It can be seen from the perspective of Proto-Indo-European religion or from the perspective of Proto-Indo-European language. Wikidās ॐ 22:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
it appear that items listed in the Chinese religions section are hardly fitting the description and are more like terms used by other religions in order to compensate for the fact that there is no specific equivalent. Should be moved to Phrases and alternatives. Wikidās ॐ 14:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
There is no evidence since two months as to wether the claims in the section of African religions are true. It appears to be a list of names, that refer to some forms of tribal gods without any sub-articles. The section should be cleaned up to omit OR list. Wikidās ॐ 14:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I have removed complete OR section. It was tagged for 15 weeks. It is unreasonable to have so much OR in one section. Below is removed material/ -- Wikidās ॐ 09:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
As it is with many translations by early missionaries, the existing names of God existing in many Africanlanguages were employed in the Christian Bible such as Olodumare in the Yoruba version. citation needed
This is a brief list of Ethiopian tribes and their respective names for the Supreme Being. citation needed
The lead of the article first talks about Names of God in "monotheistic" religions (whatever that is), then contradicts it by "Conceptions of God can vary widely" in the second paragraph, before which there is a breach into "Holy Names", while the bulk of the article is/was about words for God in different religions as if languages were co-eval with religions.
The original intent of this article was Names of God in Sikkhism, which -- within a year -- morphed into Names of God in so-called "monotheism" (and included the word "Christ"!). It then gets progressively weirder (no wonder given its magnetism for OR), leaving us with the mess we have today. That its an OR magnet is not surprising given the 6 billion different definitions of "thingamabob". There is not a shred of proper sourcing either.
Something needs to be fixed. We have (as far as I can see) only two options:
Perhaps there are other options?
Thoughts? Ideas? -- Fullstop ( talk) 13:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I do not agree the article is a mess, nor do I accept your implication that monotheism isn't a meaningful term, but I do agree that by its structure this article could easily be {{ split}} into a disambiguation page to a discussion of names of God sorted by religious tradition. The problem with this is that in spite of all you say, names for the notion of a singular God tend to come grouped by language, not by religious tradition. viz. Allah is the Arabic for "God" regardless of which flavour of monotheism you happen to prefer. Your objection to "Christ" figuring as a name for God in monotheism, viz. in the particular brand of monotheism that is Trinitarian Christianity, contains the implication that Trinitarian Christianity isn't monotheistic. All Muslims would agree with this, but 99% of Christians would disagree. So there. Protesting a lack of sources for this is disingenious, since the problem is illustrated perfectly adequately at Trinity/ Christology. -- dab (𒁳) 15:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm amazed this is such an issue. Whether a religion should be included should be based on whether it contains a God character (ie, whether it includes as a character the entity described in the God article). This is not a logical consequence of it being monotheistic (or henotheistic, or etc). And these religions should only be discussed in relation to the names they assign to that God character. Ilkali ( talk) 13:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
http://www.nawawi.org/downloads/article2.pdf
check it out its great i think it should be added —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.38.232 ( talk) 17:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I do see that there are some names on this list which are not technically "names of God", in the sense of names used by worshippers for their God in prayer, etc., but rather names of avatars or incarnations of God, which is a rather different matter. And it is fairly likely that some people would be confused by seeing both kinds of names included in one list. It might be a good idea to separate out the names of avatars from the names of the general name of the god to prevent that sort of confusion. John Carter ( talk) 00:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
The Columbia Encyclopedia [5] here lists Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, and some Vaishnavite and Saivite branches of Hinduism as being "monotheistic". On that basis, I would assume that there is substantial cause to include at least the primary name of the monotheistic gods of these groups in this article. Although I can't say this is referenced from that source, I also have to believe that most of the other religions which we have categorized in Category:Abrahamic religions, including Bahá'í Faith, Bábism, Druze, Gnosticism, Rastafari, Modekngei, and Noahidism probably qualify as monotheistic as well. Also, the others in the Category:Monotheistic religions, including Ayyavazhi, Mandaeism, Ravidasi, Yazidi, Ahl-e Haqq, Cao Dai, Cheondoism, Meivazhi, Seicho-No-Ie, Universal Faithists of Kosmon, Yazdânism, and the Universal Zulu Nation probably merit inclusion as well. I know a little about world mythology/religion, but can't remember any other specifically monotheistic ones right off. I do have access to some decent collections regarding religion and mythology, and will try to find sources for any other religious systems of a monotheistic nature probably at least over the weekend. I'm not sure I will be able to do anything before then due to other considerations. John Carter ( talk) 19:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Title corresponds to the content. Introduction needs some work. There is no difference between appellation and name in most sources. It appears you just do not like this list. There is no need to scream here, just improve the article instead of spending hours on the talk page. Wikid as© 16:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
The generic list is given in Miriam Bokser Caravella in her The holy name. But expanding a generic list does not constitute an original research. A better and more complete case is Sourcebook of the world's religions by Joel Diederik Beversluis. It looks like you are trying to pin me on a kind of OR. In reality there is no OR, just poor sources that I am working on and you seem not to even look at the article before commenting here. It is not OR to expand the original lists quoted in the sources, while I understand that you pecieve it that way. There are so many lists and the list may not be complete list in any particular source, that does not make a list OR. I appreciate you coming down to this single issue. Wikid as© 08:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
(UTC)
Despite some obvious logical inconsistency of your position I will agree that this particular source by RSSB is not RS and instead will rely on Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts by Paragon. Lists of names form part of anthology and are scriptural, thus forming part of comparative anthology. I do not accept that the article using SOME questionable sources is necessarily OR, that is outrageous. I think you should withdraw your accusation that everything in this article is OR and if you wish and can see something, please tag individual sections, otherwise I find this discussion unreasonable. Wikid as© 16:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
(you made a few points before, I take it that you withdrew all others)
(I have not added a single instance of OR to this article. Any specific instance of OR should be addressed. I do not accept that topic is OR as there are lots of sources to it. Incidentally I removed some OR already from the article as per above discussion)
(each statement added is sourced)
(the source is not reliable, it is not a 'false claim' - there are plenty of other sources, so for the sake of discussion lets leave this one aside. It was not actually used in the article as yet.
(I suspect that you do not want to listen, eg. you have already formed an opinion and will not want to change it no matter what but that is what you call 'reading your mind' and you really do not like it, do you?)
There is no chance for this article to be deleted or erased in any other way by you, specifically as you the only person trying for it, so stop trying! All my future replies to you will be of one sentence long on that basis (do not worry, I will not ignore you). Wikid as© 17:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
In the above talk, I repeatedly asked for proper sourcing, for quotations that show that the "sources" were not being misused, to show the relationship between obviously unrelated sentences, to define whatever it is that this "article" is about. None of these were addressed (and indeed were explicitly refused to be addressed). After having waited an additional six days for WP:V/WP:NOR to be honored, during which time no attempt was made to do so, I have now removed the material cobbled together from web searches by Wikidas. An archive of that material is provided in the "box" following this comment. -- Fullstop ( talk) 09:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The Name of God, or Holy Name is a form of addressing God present in a majority of world religions as used in liturgy or prayer. [1] [2] Prayer with the Holy Name or the Name of God has been established as most common spiritual practice in Western and Eastern spiritual practices. [2] A number of traditions that have lists of many names of God which enumerate God's various qualities. The Qur'an contains the Ninety-Nine Most Beautiful Names of Allah, Judaism refers to 72 Divine Names and the Mahabharata contains a thousand names of Vishnu. [3]
The English word God is used by multiple religions to refer to different deities. [4]
Eastern and Western correlation and intercultural interpretations of the philosophy of the Name of God have been a subject of study for thinkers in the east and west. [5] The names of God in different traditions are sometimes referred as symbols. [6] The question of whether divine names used by different religions are equivalent has been raised and analyzed. [7]
Exchange of symbols of religion between different traditions is limited; the usage of the names of God mostly remain in the domain of a particular religion, such as in the case of recitation the names of God ( japa). [8] The Divine Names, the classic treatise by Pseudo-Dionysius defines scope of traditional understandings in Western traditions such as Hellenic, Christian, Jewish and Islamic that concern the Names of God, [9] with further historical interfaith lists such as The 72 Names of the Lord showing parallels in history and interpretation of the list of the names of God in Kabbalah, Christianity, Hebrew and Slavic, Palestine, Balkans and Provence etc. [10]
One definition of the Name of God was given by Elisha Mulford as 'that name which passes into the common forms of thought'. The author states that in its derivation it may have an ethical significance. [11] While others suggest that the "name of God represents the nature of God". [12] An early Greek theological treatise De Mundo, initially ascribed to Aristotle, outlines brief theological basis of philosophical understanding of the oneness of God in the context of Hellenistic thought. It ends with a statement on God and his names, "God being one yet has many names, being called after the various conditions he himself inaugurates." [13] In many cultures, the transmission of the name of God was surrounded by secrecy. The pronunciation of the Name of God in Judaism has always been guarded with great care. It is believed that in ancient times the sages communicated the pronunciation only once every seven years. [14]. This system was challenged by more recent movements. The nature of the name can be described as personal and the attributive. In many cultures it is often difficult to distinguish between the personal and the attributive names of God, the two divisions necessarily shading into each other. [15] Martin Buber, a Jewish mystic, provides more clarity on the interfaith perspective when he writes "all God's names are hallowed", which is also reflected in a traditional view of many Hindus and Buddhists, who maintain the same about the names of God, suggesting that there are "many ways to the truth". [16]Anyone of the editors can help to work out a better lede based on the text below. All suggestions are welcomed, the sources are rather very close to the text of original, but it better to stick close to the matter in my opinion.
The Name of God, or Holy Name is a form of addressing God present in a majority of world religions as used in liturgy or prayer. [1] [2] Prayer with the Holy Name or the Name of God has been established as most common spiritual practice in Western and Eastern spiritual practices. [2] Number of traditions that have lists of many Names of God which enumerate his various qualities have a special mention. The Qur'an contains the Ninety-nine Most Beautiful Names of Allah, Judaism refers to 72 Divine Names and Mahabharata text contains a thousand names of Vishnu. [17]
The English word God is used by multiple religions to refer to different deities. [4]
Eastern and Western correlation and intercultural interpretations of the philosophy of the Name of God had been as subject of study for thinkers in the east and west. [18] In Christian theology the Word must be a personal and a proper name of God; hence it cannot be dismissed as mere metaphor. [19] On the other hand, the Names of God in a different tradition are sometimes referred as symbols. [20] The question whether divine names used by different religions are equivalent has been raised and analyzed. [21]
Exchange of symbols of religion between different traditions, is limited, symbols of religious core are shared (for example Om and Gayatri by members of Indian Christian community) but the usage of the names themselves mostly remain in the domain of a particular religion, such as in the case of recitation the names of God ( japa). [22] The Divine Names, the classic treatise by Pseudo-Dionysius defines scope of traditional understandings in Western traditions such as Hellenic, Christian, Jewish and Islamic that concern the Names of God, [23] with further historical interfaith lists such as The 72 Names of the Lord showing parallels in history and interpretation of the list of the Name of God in Kabbalah, Christianity, Hebrew and Slavic, Palestine, Balkans and Provence etc. [24]
One definition of the Name of God was given by Elisha Mulford as 'that name which passes into the common forms of thought'. The author states that in its derivation it may have an ethical significance. [25] While others suggest that the "name of God represents the nature of God". [26] The attitude as to the transmission of the Name in many cultures was surrounded by secrecy. The pronunciation of the Name of God, in Judaism, has always been guarded with great care. It is believed that in ancient times the sages communicated the pronunciation only once every seven years. [27]. This system was challenged by more recent movements. The nature of the name can be described as personal and the attributive. In many cultures it is often difficult to distinguish between the personal and the attributive names of God, the two divisions necessarily shading into each other. [28]
- ^ a b Baesler, E.J. (2001). "The Prayer of the Holy Name in Eastern and Western Spiritual Traditions: A Theoretical, Cross-Cultural, and Intercultural Prayer Dialogue*". Journal of Ecumenical Studies: 196–217.
- ^ a b c d Mario Fernando (2008). Spiritual Leadership in the Entrepreneurial Business: A Multifaith Study. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 105. ISBN 1-84720-350-7. Cite error: The named reference "isbn1-84720-350-7" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts p. 596 International Religious Foundation, Paragon House, 1991 ISBN 0892261293
- ^ a b Velde, Rudi van de (2006). Aquinas on God: the 'divine science' of the Summa theologiae. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. pp. 45–46. ISBN 0-7546-0755-0.
- ^ Jordan, Mark D. (1983) The Names of God and the Being of Names. In The Existence and Nature of God, edited by Alfred J. Freddoso, pp. 161-190. University of Notre Dame Press. ISBN 0268009112
- ^ Aiyadurai Jesudasen Appasamy, G. S. S. Sreenivasa Rao, Inter-faith dialogue and world community Christian Literature Society for India (1991) "All these names of God are, of course, symbols. ... All names of God or the Absolute are symbols." p. 9
- ^ Peter C. Phan Being religious interreligiously: Asian perspectives on interfaith dialogue. 2004 p.102
- ^ Jerald D. Gort On sharing religious experience: possibilities of interfaith mutuality p.146 Encounter of Religions Research Group Rodopi, 1992 ISBN 0802805051
- ^ Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: a commentary on the texts and an introduction to their influence. Oxford University Press, 1993, p.163 ISBN 0195076648
- ^ Valentina Izmirlieva, All the names of the Lord: lists, mysticism, and magic, University of Chicago Press, 2008 ISBN 0226388700
- ^ Elisha Mulford The republic of God: An institute of theology p.5 1882 "The name of God is that name which passes into the common forms of thought. In its derivation it may have an ethical significance."
- ^ James Montgomery Boice Foundations of the Christian faith: a comprehensive & readable theology p.231 1986
- ^ Arone Raymond Meeks; Grant, Robert (1986). Gods and the one God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. p. 78. ISBN 0-664-25011-4.
{{ cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link)- ^ James Orr "The International standard Bible encyclopaedia Edition: 2 - Item notes: v. 1 - 1959 1915 p. 1267
- ^ John S. Mbiti Concepts of God in Africa p.217 1970
- ^ Parrinder, Geoffrey (1975). Comparative religion. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. pp. 49, 99. ISBN 0-8371-7301-9.
- ^ Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts p. 596 International Religious Foundation, Paragon House, 1991 ISBN 0892261293
- ^ Jordan, Mark D. (1983) The Names of God and the Being of Names. In The Existence and Nature of God, edited by Alfred J. Freddoso, pp. 161-190. University of Notre Dame Press. ISBN 0268009112
- ^ Sacraments of the Incarnate Word: The Christological Form of the Summa theologiae C Wells
- ^ Aiyadurai Jesudasen Appasamy, G. S. S. Sreenivasa Rao, Inter-faith dialogue and world community Christian Literature Society for India (1991) "All these names of God are, of course, symbols. ... All names of God or the Absolute are symbols." p. 9
- ^ Peter C. Phan Being religious interreligiously: Asian perspectives on interfaith dialogue. 2004 p.102
- ^ Jerald D. Gort On sharing religious experience: possibilities of interfaith mutuality p.146 Encounter of Religions Research Group Rodopi, 1992 ISBN 0802805051
- ^ Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: a commentary on the texts and an introduction to their influence. Oxford University Press, 1993, p.163 ISBN 0195076648
- ^ Valentina Izmirlieva, All the names of the Lord: lists, mysticism, and magic, University of Chicago Press, 2008 ISBN 0226388700
- ^ Elisha Mulford The republic of God: An institute of theology p.5 1882 "The name of God is that name which passes into the common forms of thought. In its derivation it may have an ethical significance."
- ^ James Montgomery Boice Foundations of the Christian faith: a comprehensive & readable theology p.231 1986
- ^ James Orr "The International standard Bible encyclopaedia Edition: 2 - Item notes: v. 1 - 1959 1915 p. 1267
- ^ John S. Mbiti Concepts of God in Africa p.217 1970
I have included ref list above for checking and formatting. Wikid as© 17:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that the article is partially organised by language, and partially organised by religion. Can we pick one or the other? Personally, I think organising by religion/deity would make the most sense. Listing translations of the word "God" in different languages seems more the purview of Wiktionary. -- Alynna ( talk) 12:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've finished reorganising by religion. I'm not sure what order the religions should go in, though. -- Alynna ( talk) 12:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
God (word) is just a dictionary definition of 'God', whereas this article is about all the names of God in the abstract, and so is encyclopedic (encyclopedias are about abstract concepts not words, that's what dictionaries are for), so they should be merged I think; it's seems to be either that or AFD God (word).- ( User) Wolfkeeper ( Talk) 20:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
But the article looks like it would fit in fine here to me.- ( User) Wolfkeeper ( Talk) 20:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Just taking a quick look at the article section 'taboos'. And it seems to be from a somewhat religious point of view. "More pious swearers try to substitute the blasphemy against holy names with minced oaths like Jeez!" Just because someone swears with 'Jeez' hardly means they're purposely trying to substitute blasphemy against holy names.
"Most observant Jews forbid discarding holy objects" I'm less sure of my arguments against this one, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but it seems to somewhat belittle any Jew who forgets he is not meant to be discard objects such as these is not 'observant'.
Perhaps there's more. It's also very possible I'm being too picky. But some of this article does seem to be a little iffy. Thoughts? -- 86.27.90.244 ( talk) 19:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Is that simply an error in the section heading levels? I'd move the sections myself, but I'm not familiar with the history of this page and don't want to intrude on your territory. Aristophanes68 ( talk) 05:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
In my opinion, Jehovah's Witnesses are at least as Christian as Roman Catholics. Is there a reason why the sect is listed under "Other religions" rather than under "Christianity"? -- Damian Yerrick ( talk | stalk) 14:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
This article needed extensive grammatical correction and both the intro and the section on Abrahamic tradition contained much OR which I have taken pains to extensively rewrite. I could not find any cite on the web for the claim that YHWH is pronounced AEIOU. A cite is provided for the claim that Yahweh be pronounced Ιαου in Greek, but that was mentioned elsewhere in the article; perhaps the author of this claim was going off of some sort of personal revelation. Yow! I think I was charitable in rewriting and not deleting as much as I did.
Feel free *cough* to provide citations for the following stuff I deleted (
rewrote section):
Yclept:Berr (
talk) 17:31, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
"The earliest mention of the name of God is found in the Koran sura 2, The Cow;`When your Lord said to the angels: 'I am placing on the earth one that shall rule as My deputy,' they replied: 'Will You put there one that will do evil and shed blood, when we have for so long sung Your praises and sanctified Your Name?' It is only fairly recently that it's been determined that life on earth probably exceeds 3.4 billion years and certainly there is a likelihood that the creation of the angels predates that. The phrase 'so long' is both extremely literal as well as an amazing understatement. During the lifetime of Adam and Eve, the record from the Bible indicates that the name of God was used, but by the time Moses was born the scriptures show that none of mankind still knew the Name. Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was lost at the time of Noah, when only he and his relatives survived the flood.
"The Torah further describes the role of Aaron who acted as Moses' mouthpiece and conveyed the Name of God distinctly as 'AEIOU' to the Israelites. The pronunciation of 'AEIOU' is described in Psalms 8.2 by the prophet who wrote, 'Thou hast made babes, infants at the breast sound aloud Thy praise.' The power of the name AEIOU in its unique ability to allow the creation of all words in every human language is evident and befitting God and conveys the absolute infinite potential of God's character. In what is commonly referred to as the 'New Testament' God is referred to by a slightly abbreviated form as the 'Alpha and Omega', the beginning and the end, literally and figuratively.
"This name constitutes the First Commandment and embodied in the rest of the Ten Commandments is the rest of the alphabet as revealed by God to Moses and Aaron, ultimately replacing for the first time the hieroglyphics of the Egyptians and making writing based on a lettered alphabet possible. At the completion of Soloman's Temple the name of God was made unlawful; its public use was punishable by death by the Jews living at the time. 'Allah' was the only name which has been preserved and has continued to be used throughout the middle east. A simple google/ youtube search, 'infant cry' provides the best pronunciation as mentioned by Psalms 8.2. In the New Testament the reference is Matthew 21.16."
- "Legendary English rock musician, Eric Clapton, is often referred to as God with the common slogan "Clapton is God".
Yclept:Berr ( talk) 17:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
In which chapter and verse of which scripture did God "appear[] to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai" and Moses fail to pronounce God's personal name due to cleft lip? 173.174.83.181 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) is under the impression it was somewhere between Genesis and Deuteronomy. I don't remember any specific mention of a cleft lip in my studies of the Torah. -- Damian Yerrick ( talk | stalk) 17:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Looks Like this page has quite a bit of vandalism on it. 74.202.23.198 ( talk) 20:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This really needs to either referenced or removed. 131.217.33.146 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
All is article is article is accomplishing is basically giving linguistic translations [albeit some into phrases and ideas] of the idea that, in English, is written as "God". Wikipedia is not a reference of translation lists; and, despite how some people feel about the idea of "God," said idea should be treated the same as all others in the eyes of an encyclopedia. If Wikipedia is to have this article, then all other ideas should be represented in articles titled "Names of [insert idea]", in which said idea is then linguistically translated into all other possible languages.
I may have just not studied enough, but I have never seen heard of these two names being used in the passages quoted (I always read that it was simply "I AM" in that passage), and a search through the specific "Names in Judaism" article, as well as just searching "AEIOU" on wikipedia, gives no relevant results. The section this claim appears in is bulleted and reads somewhat out of place, and is not supported by a source; furthermore, searching for "AEIOU god" or "AEIOU god moses" only gets me sites that copy that passage straight from wikipedia. Is it possible that these are vandalism? 192.249.47.196 ( talk) 19:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Adi Purush is currently a redlink, though there is an Adi Purusha article, which is a redirect to Svayam Bhagavan. However, I'm not familiar enough with the subject to know which is the correct spelling (with or without the a) and whether the redirected article describes the same concept, and so I've not done anything. Can someone more knowledgeable help? —[ AlanM1 ( talk)]— 21:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
In section 2, Abrahamic Religions, the statement is made: "According to the Bible, the name of God was used during the lifetime of Adam and Eve, but by the time Moses was born, the scriptures imply that none of mankind still knew the name." I believe this to be incorrect. I believe that the name of God was in continuous use from the time of Adam and Eve up to the time period identified with Exodus 3:13-15 and beyond. For example, Noah (Genesis 9:26), Abraham (Genesis 15:8), Lot (Genesis 19:18) and Job (Job 1:21) used the name of God, Jehovah, in conversations with the Most High and others. The original Hebrew shows the divine name in these and many other instances during this time period. Translators into English have chosen to convert it to the word "Lord". Other translators have left the divine name in. Can we agree to remove the entire sentence after the word "Eve"? Now'n'Them ( talk) 20:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
This section needs a fair bit of work I think.
Take the following paragraph. "The earliest mention of the name of God in the Koran is found sura 2, The Cow: "When your Lord said to the angels: 'I am placing on the earth one that shall rule as My deputy,' they replied: 'Will You put there one that will do evil and shed blood, when we have for so long sung Your praises and sanctified Your Name?'. During the lifetime of Adam and Eve, the record from the Bible indicates that the name of God was used, but by the time Moses was born the scriptures show that none of mankind still knew the Name. Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was lost at the time of Noah, when only he and his relatives survived the flood. When Moses first spoke with God and asked His Name, God said, "I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but I did not let myself be known by My Name." When Moses heard the name of God he realized that since he had a speech impediment as a result of a harelip, he was unable to pronounce it accurately. He was able to say "Allah" and that was the name conveyed to Pharaoh and the Egyptians and the name Allah was referenced from that point in time till today. Further details in the Torah describe the role of Aaron who acted as Moses" mouthpiece and conveyed the Name of God distinctly as "YHWH" to the Israelites. The pronunciation of YHWH is described in Psalms 8.2 by the prophet who wrote, "Thou hast made babes, infants at the breast sound aloud Thy praise.""
There are no references what so ever in there apart from a reference to Psalms near the end, and some vague reference to the Koran at the start.
It should either be referenced, or fixed, or removed, as sentences like "Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was ......" make it look like opinion.
131.217.33.146 (
talk) 00:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
{{So, does the christian god have a name? No...and Jehovah is not a name but comes from the jewish translation of Yiddish to english "I am". Read on... In Exodus 3:13-14, the christian god is reported to have answered that question saying "I AM WHO I AM". However, some people say that the name of God is Jehovah or Yahweh. [[[Exodus 3:13 - King James Version (KJV) (13) And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? (14) And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.]]] The reason is that in Hebrew (the Book of Exodus was written in Hebrew) the word for “I AM” is a Hebrew word translated as YHWH. This is why a lot of English translations will say that the name of God is Jehovah or Yahweh. It is an English-styled version of those four letters. It is an English, from the Hebrew, mistranslation of "I AM WHO I AM", and unlike any of the other gods down through recorder history, the christian god is the only "god" that does not have a name.}}
Moved from main article by -- Auric talk 21:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Names of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Should Christ Pantocrator be included in this article? the eloquent peasant ( talk) 00:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Names of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The article's title implies there is some kind of monotheistic consensus that the Abrahamic and Indian deities are the same god. While both branches of belief refer to their supreme being as 'God', clearly they are not the same. Obscurasky ( talk) 20:12, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
The Bible is quite clear in many ways that the religion of the Israelites was changing over time, and that it was not monotheistic, but rather henotheistic, that God was localised geographically (Yhwh "went forth from Seir" and "marched out of the field of Edom" [Judges 5:4], "God came from Teman" [Habbakuk 3:3]), etc. The article disregards all that and sticks to modern rabbincal Judaism. Arminden ( talk) 08:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
The article
Divine name was
nominated for
deletion.
The discussion was closed on 11 January 2024 with a consensus to
merge the content into
Names of God. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page. Do not remove this template after completing the merger. A bot will replace it with {{
afd-merged-from}}. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Under the section Abrahamic Religions/Christianity, an editor says,"In the effort to translate the Bible into every language (see SIL), the Christian God has usually been named after a pagan or philosophical concept that was present in the language before Christianity."
No evidence has been provided for this statement. Is the writer perhaps confusing the concept 'god' with the actual personal name of the supreme deity as revealed/recorded in the Bible?--
Lepton6 (
talk) 16:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've expanded the Hinduism section, which originally was very limited and placed an undue emphasis on Krishna-centered traditions, and previously failed to mention any traditions except for the two main, Vaishnavism and Shaivism. -- Shruti14 talk • sign 20:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to ask why Hare Krishna continues to be added to the "Main articles" line. I don't think it should, and here is why:
For these reasons I disagree with the placement of the article as a "Main article" within the section. -- Shruti14 talk • sign 14:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Hare Krishna is the most prominent form of chanting the "Holy Names" of Krishna. [2] and "Names of God" [3] If the Sahasranama was changed to Names of God in Hinduism and thus became main article, Hare Krishna will still remain a See also. At the moment they are both See also and lets keep Sahasranama article first, since its more generic. Hare Krishna should remain Wikidās ॐ 14:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Restructure is clearly required:
Wikidās ॐ 14:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Religions of X is a universal expression, as for example Buddhism is a religion of India but not the Indian Religion. In some religions use or a reference to the name of God is undocumented or is OR idea, they should not be part of this article. I am yet to find references to use of Holy Name in African religions for example. If a religion is not confirmed by the secondary sources as addressing God with a name being His name or to Holy Name, it should be removed to comply with policies of inclusion. Wikidās ॐ 22:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
"How do we objectively assess the relevance? " - objectivity could be a consesus, but lets suggest alphabetical order the the place of origin, I have updated the list to reflect the order according to the "from" factor. That creates a NPOV approach and nobody gets a special mention. Neutral. Wikidās ॐ 08:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
One thing is being selective in content selection (ie it has to be verifiable, notable and supported by reliable sources), and completely another thing is categorization. Wikidās ॐ 09:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
They are not being treated in the same way. If you want to treat them the same way, select one single criteria - at the moment it is country of origin not the founder. Wikidās ॐ 10:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Not just Hinduism, so other ancient traditions particularly of Egypt. For example: No weight is to be laid on the equation Krsna = Christos, for Krsna was a god before Christ was born. - Epic Mythology With Additions and Corrections: With Additions and Corrections - Page 216 by Edward Washburn Hopkins - 1968; It can be seen from the perspective of Proto-Indo-European religion or from the perspective of Proto-Indo-European language. Wikidās ॐ 22:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
it appear that items listed in the Chinese religions section are hardly fitting the description and are more like terms used by other religions in order to compensate for the fact that there is no specific equivalent. Should be moved to Phrases and alternatives. Wikidās ॐ 14:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
There is no evidence since two months as to wether the claims in the section of African religions are true. It appears to be a list of names, that refer to some forms of tribal gods without any sub-articles. The section should be cleaned up to omit OR list. Wikidās ॐ 14:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I have removed complete OR section. It was tagged for 15 weeks. It is unreasonable to have so much OR in one section. Below is removed material/ -- Wikidās ॐ 09:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
As it is with many translations by early missionaries, the existing names of God existing in many Africanlanguages were employed in the Christian Bible such as Olodumare in the Yoruba version. citation needed
This is a brief list of Ethiopian tribes and their respective names for the Supreme Being. citation needed
The lead of the article first talks about Names of God in "monotheistic" religions (whatever that is), then contradicts it by "Conceptions of God can vary widely" in the second paragraph, before which there is a breach into "Holy Names", while the bulk of the article is/was about words for God in different religions as if languages were co-eval with religions.
The original intent of this article was Names of God in Sikkhism, which -- within a year -- morphed into Names of God in so-called "monotheism" (and included the word "Christ"!). It then gets progressively weirder (no wonder given its magnetism for OR), leaving us with the mess we have today. That its an OR magnet is not surprising given the 6 billion different definitions of "thingamabob". There is not a shred of proper sourcing either.
Something needs to be fixed. We have (as far as I can see) only two options:
Perhaps there are other options?
Thoughts? Ideas? -- Fullstop ( talk) 13:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I do not agree the article is a mess, nor do I accept your implication that monotheism isn't a meaningful term, but I do agree that by its structure this article could easily be {{ split}} into a disambiguation page to a discussion of names of God sorted by religious tradition. The problem with this is that in spite of all you say, names for the notion of a singular God tend to come grouped by language, not by religious tradition. viz. Allah is the Arabic for "God" regardless of which flavour of monotheism you happen to prefer. Your objection to "Christ" figuring as a name for God in monotheism, viz. in the particular brand of monotheism that is Trinitarian Christianity, contains the implication that Trinitarian Christianity isn't monotheistic. All Muslims would agree with this, but 99% of Christians would disagree. So there. Protesting a lack of sources for this is disingenious, since the problem is illustrated perfectly adequately at Trinity/ Christology. -- dab (𒁳) 15:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm amazed this is such an issue. Whether a religion should be included should be based on whether it contains a God character (ie, whether it includes as a character the entity described in the God article). This is not a logical consequence of it being monotheistic (or henotheistic, or etc). And these religions should only be discussed in relation to the names they assign to that God character. Ilkali ( talk) 13:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
http://www.nawawi.org/downloads/article2.pdf
check it out its great i think it should be added —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.38.232 ( talk) 17:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I do see that there are some names on this list which are not technically "names of God", in the sense of names used by worshippers for their God in prayer, etc., but rather names of avatars or incarnations of God, which is a rather different matter. And it is fairly likely that some people would be confused by seeing both kinds of names included in one list. It might be a good idea to separate out the names of avatars from the names of the general name of the god to prevent that sort of confusion. John Carter ( talk) 00:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
The Columbia Encyclopedia [5] here lists Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, and some Vaishnavite and Saivite branches of Hinduism as being "monotheistic". On that basis, I would assume that there is substantial cause to include at least the primary name of the monotheistic gods of these groups in this article. Although I can't say this is referenced from that source, I also have to believe that most of the other religions which we have categorized in Category:Abrahamic religions, including Bahá'í Faith, Bábism, Druze, Gnosticism, Rastafari, Modekngei, and Noahidism probably qualify as monotheistic as well. Also, the others in the Category:Monotheistic religions, including Ayyavazhi, Mandaeism, Ravidasi, Yazidi, Ahl-e Haqq, Cao Dai, Cheondoism, Meivazhi, Seicho-No-Ie, Universal Faithists of Kosmon, Yazdânism, and the Universal Zulu Nation probably merit inclusion as well. I know a little about world mythology/religion, but can't remember any other specifically monotheistic ones right off. I do have access to some decent collections regarding religion and mythology, and will try to find sources for any other religious systems of a monotheistic nature probably at least over the weekend. I'm not sure I will be able to do anything before then due to other considerations. John Carter ( talk) 19:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Title corresponds to the content. Introduction needs some work. There is no difference between appellation and name in most sources. It appears you just do not like this list. There is no need to scream here, just improve the article instead of spending hours on the talk page. Wikid as© 16:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
The generic list is given in Miriam Bokser Caravella in her The holy name. But expanding a generic list does not constitute an original research. A better and more complete case is Sourcebook of the world's religions by Joel Diederik Beversluis. It looks like you are trying to pin me on a kind of OR. In reality there is no OR, just poor sources that I am working on and you seem not to even look at the article before commenting here. It is not OR to expand the original lists quoted in the sources, while I understand that you pecieve it that way. There are so many lists and the list may not be complete list in any particular source, that does not make a list OR. I appreciate you coming down to this single issue. Wikid as© 08:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
(UTC)
Despite some obvious logical inconsistency of your position I will agree that this particular source by RSSB is not RS and instead will rely on Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts by Paragon. Lists of names form part of anthology and are scriptural, thus forming part of comparative anthology. I do not accept that the article using SOME questionable sources is necessarily OR, that is outrageous. I think you should withdraw your accusation that everything in this article is OR and if you wish and can see something, please tag individual sections, otherwise I find this discussion unreasonable. Wikid as© 16:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
(you made a few points before, I take it that you withdrew all others)
(I have not added a single instance of OR to this article. Any specific instance of OR should be addressed. I do not accept that topic is OR as there are lots of sources to it. Incidentally I removed some OR already from the article as per above discussion)
(each statement added is sourced)
(the source is not reliable, it is not a 'false claim' - there are plenty of other sources, so for the sake of discussion lets leave this one aside. It was not actually used in the article as yet.
(I suspect that you do not want to listen, eg. you have already formed an opinion and will not want to change it no matter what but that is what you call 'reading your mind' and you really do not like it, do you?)
There is no chance for this article to be deleted or erased in any other way by you, specifically as you the only person trying for it, so stop trying! All my future replies to you will be of one sentence long on that basis (do not worry, I will not ignore you). Wikid as© 17:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
In the above talk, I repeatedly asked for proper sourcing, for quotations that show that the "sources" were not being misused, to show the relationship between obviously unrelated sentences, to define whatever it is that this "article" is about. None of these were addressed (and indeed were explicitly refused to be addressed). After having waited an additional six days for WP:V/WP:NOR to be honored, during which time no attempt was made to do so, I have now removed the material cobbled together from web searches by Wikidas. An archive of that material is provided in the "box" following this comment. -- Fullstop ( talk) 09:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The Name of God, or Holy Name is a form of addressing God present in a majority of world religions as used in liturgy or prayer. [1] [2] Prayer with the Holy Name or the Name of God has been established as most common spiritual practice in Western and Eastern spiritual practices. [2] A number of traditions that have lists of many names of God which enumerate God's various qualities. The Qur'an contains the Ninety-Nine Most Beautiful Names of Allah, Judaism refers to 72 Divine Names and the Mahabharata contains a thousand names of Vishnu. [3]
The English word God is used by multiple religions to refer to different deities. [4]
Eastern and Western correlation and intercultural interpretations of the philosophy of the Name of God have been a subject of study for thinkers in the east and west. [5] The names of God in different traditions are sometimes referred as symbols. [6] The question of whether divine names used by different religions are equivalent has been raised and analyzed. [7]
Exchange of symbols of religion between different traditions is limited; the usage of the names of God mostly remain in the domain of a particular religion, such as in the case of recitation the names of God ( japa). [8] The Divine Names, the classic treatise by Pseudo-Dionysius defines scope of traditional understandings in Western traditions such as Hellenic, Christian, Jewish and Islamic that concern the Names of God, [9] with further historical interfaith lists such as The 72 Names of the Lord showing parallels in history and interpretation of the list of the names of God in Kabbalah, Christianity, Hebrew and Slavic, Palestine, Balkans and Provence etc. [10]
One definition of the Name of God was given by Elisha Mulford as 'that name which passes into the common forms of thought'. The author states that in its derivation it may have an ethical significance. [11] While others suggest that the "name of God represents the nature of God". [12] An early Greek theological treatise De Mundo, initially ascribed to Aristotle, outlines brief theological basis of philosophical understanding of the oneness of God in the context of Hellenistic thought. It ends with a statement on God and his names, "God being one yet has many names, being called after the various conditions he himself inaugurates." [13] In many cultures, the transmission of the name of God was surrounded by secrecy. The pronunciation of the Name of God in Judaism has always been guarded with great care. It is believed that in ancient times the sages communicated the pronunciation only once every seven years. [14]. This system was challenged by more recent movements. The nature of the name can be described as personal and the attributive. In many cultures it is often difficult to distinguish between the personal and the attributive names of God, the two divisions necessarily shading into each other. [15] Martin Buber, a Jewish mystic, provides more clarity on the interfaith perspective when he writes "all God's names are hallowed", which is also reflected in a traditional view of many Hindus and Buddhists, who maintain the same about the names of God, suggesting that there are "many ways to the truth". [16]Anyone of the editors can help to work out a better lede based on the text below. All suggestions are welcomed, the sources are rather very close to the text of original, but it better to stick close to the matter in my opinion.
The Name of God, or Holy Name is a form of addressing God present in a majority of world religions as used in liturgy or prayer. [1] [2] Prayer with the Holy Name or the Name of God has been established as most common spiritual practice in Western and Eastern spiritual practices. [2] Number of traditions that have lists of many Names of God which enumerate his various qualities have a special mention. The Qur'an contains the Ninety-nine Most Beautiful Names of Allah, Judaism refers to 72 Divine Names and Mahabharata text contains a thousand names of Vishnu. [17]
The English word God is used by multiple religions to refer to different deities. [4]
Eastern and Western correlation and intercultural interpretations of the philosophy of the Name of God had been as subject of study for thinkers in the east and west. [18] In Christian theology the Word must be a personal and a proper name of God; hence it cannot be dismissed as mere metaphor. [19] On the other hand, the Names of God in a different tradition are sometimes referred as symbols. [20] The question whether divine names used by different religions are equivalent has been raised and analyzed. [21]
Exchange of symbols of religion between different traditions, is limited, symbols of religious core are shared (for example Om and Gayatri by members of Indian Christian community) but the usage of the names themselves mostly remain in the domain of a particular religion, such as in the case of recitation the names of God ( japa). [22] The Divine Names, the classic treatise by Pseudo-Dionysius defines scope of traditional understandings in Western traditions such as Hellenic, Christian, Jewish and Islamic that concern the Names of God, [23] with further historical interfaith lists such as The 72 Names of the Lord showing parallels in history and interpretation of the list of the Name of God in Kabbalah, Christianity, Hebrew and Slavic, Palestine, Balkans and Provence etc. [24]
One definition of the Name of God was given by Elisha Mulford as 'that name which passes into the common forms of thought'. The author states that in its derivation it may have an ethical significance. [25] While others suggest that the "name of God represents the nature of God". [26] The attitude as to the transmission of the Name in many cultures was surrounded by secrecy. The pronunciation of the Name of God, in Judaism, has always been guarded with great care. It is believed that in ancient times the sages communicated the pronunciation only once every seven years. [27]. This system was challenged by more recent movements. The nature of the name can be described as personal and the attributive. In many cultures it is often difficult to distinguish between the personal and the attributive names of God, the two divisions necessarily shading into each other. [28]
- ^ a b Baesler, E.J. (2001). "The Prayer of the Holy Name in Eastern and Western Spiritual Traditions: A Theoretical, Cross-Cultural, and Intercultural Prayer Dialogue*". Journal of Ecumenical Studies: 196–217.
- ^ a b c d Mario Fernando (2008). Spiritual Leadership in the Entrepreneurial Business: A Multifaith Study. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 105. ISBN 1-84720-350-7. Cite error: The named reference "isbn1-84720-350-7" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts p. 596 International Religious Foundation, Paragon House, 1991 ISBN 0892261293
- ^ a b Velde, Rudi van de (2006). Aquinas on God: the 'divine science' of the Summa theologiae. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. pp. 45–46. ISBN 0-7546-0755-0.
- ^ Jordan, Mark D. (1983) The Names of God and the Being of Names. In The Existence and Nature of God, edited by Alfred J. Freddoso, pp. 161-190. University of Notre Dame Press. ISBN 0268009112
- ^ Aiyadurai Jesudasen Appasamy, G. S. S. Sreenivasa Rao, Inter-faith dialogue and world community Christian Literature Society for India (1991) "All these names of God are, of course, symbols. ... All names of God or the Absolute are symbols." p. 9
- ^ Peter C. Phan Being religious interreligiously: Asian perspectives on interfaith dialogue. 2004 p.102
- ^ Jerald D. Gort On sharing religious experience: possibilities of interfaith mutuality p.146 Encounter of Religions Research Group Rodopi, 1992 ISBN 0802805051
- ^ Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: a commentary on the texts and an introduction to their influence. Oxford University Press, 1993, p.163 ISBN 0195076648
- ^ Valentina Izmirlieva, All the names of the Lord: lists, mysticism, and magic, University of Chicago Press, 2008 ISBN 0226388700
- ^ Elisha Mulford The republic of God: An institute of theology p.5 1882 "The name of God is that name which passes into the common forms of thought. In its derivation it may have an ethical significance."
- ^ James Montgomery Boice Foundations of the Christian faith: a comprehensive & readable theology p.231 1986
- ^ Arone Raymond Meeks; Grant, Robert (1986). Gods and the one God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. p. 78. ISBN 0-664-25011-4.
{{ cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link)- ^ James Orr "The International standard Bible encyclopaedia Edition: 2 - Item notes: v. 1 - 1959 1915 p. 1267
- ^ John S. Mbiti Concepts of God in Africa p.217 1970
- ^ Parrinder, Geoffrey (1975). Comparative religion. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. pp. 49, 99. ISBN 0-8371-7301-9.
- ^ Andrew Wilson, World scripture: a comparative anthology of sacred texts p. 596 International Religious Foundation, Paragon House, 1991 ISBN 0892261293
- ^ Jordan, Mark D. (1983) The Names of God and the Being of Names. In The Existence and Nature of God, edited by Alfred J. Freddoso, pp. 161-190. University of Notre Dame Press. ISBN 0268009112
- ^ Sacraments of the Incarnate Word: The Christological Form of the Summa theologiae C Wells
- ^ Aiyadurai Jesudasen Appasamy, G. S. S. Sreenivasa Rao, Inter-faith dialogue and world community Christian Literature Society for India (1991) "All these names of God are, of course, symbols. ... All names of God or the Absolute are symbols." p. 9
- ^ Peter C. Phan Being religious interreligiously: Asian perspectives on interfaith dialogue. 2004 p.102
- ^ Jerald D. Gort On sharing religious experience: possibilities of interfaith mutuality p.146 Encounter of Religions Research Group Rodopi, 1992 ISBN 0802805051
- ^ Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: a commentary on the texts and an introduction to their influence. Oxford University Press, 1993, p.163 ISBN 0195076648
- ^ Valentina Izmirlieva, All the names of the Lord: lists, mysticism, and magic, University of Chicago Press, 2008 ISBN 0226388700
- ^ Elisha Mulford The republic of God: An institute of theology p.5 1882 "The name of God is that name which passes into the common forms of thought. In its derivation it may have an ethical significance."
- ^ James Montgomery Boice Foundations of the Christian faith: a comprehensive & readable theology p.231 1986
- ^ James Orr "The International standard Bible encyclopaedia Edition: 2 - Item notes: v. 1 - 1959 1915 p. 1267
- ^ John S. Mbiti Concepts of God in Africa p.217 1970
I have included ref list above for checking and formatting. Wikid as© 17:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that the article is partially organised by language, and partially organised by religion. Can we pick one or the other? Personally, I think organising by religion/deity would make the most sense. Listing translations of the word "God" in different languages seems more the purview of Wiktionary. -- Alynna ( talk) 12:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've finished reorganising by religion. I'm not sure what order the religions should go in, though. -- Alynna ( talk) 12:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
God (word) is just a dictionary definition of 'God', whereas this article is about all the names of God in the abstract, and so is encyclopedic (encyclopedias are about abstract concepts not words, that's what dictionaries are for), so they should be merged I think; it's seems to be either that or AFD God (word).- ( User) Wolfkeeper ( Talk) 20:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
But the article looks like it would fit in fine here to me.- ( User) Wolfkeeper ( Talk) 20:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Just taking a quick look at the article section 'taboos'. And it seems to be from a somewhat religious point of view. "More pious swearers try to substitute the blasphemy against holy names with minced oaths like Jeez!" Just because someone swears with 'Jeez' hardly means they're purposely trying to substitute blasphemy against holy names.
"Most observant Jews forbid discarding holy objects" I'm less sure of my arguments against this one, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but it seems to somewhat belittle any Jew who forgets he is not meant to be discard objects such as these is not 'observant'.
Perhaps there's more. It's also very possible I'm being too picky. But some of this article does seem to be a little iffy. Thoughts? -- 86.27.90.244 ( talk) 19:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Is that simply an error in the section heading levels? I'd move the sections myself, but I'm not familiar with the history of this page and don't want to intrude on your territory. Aristophanes68 ( talk) 05:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
In my opinion, Jehovah's Witnesses are at least as Christian as Roman Catholics. Is there a reason why the sect is listed under "Other religions" rather than under "Christianity"? -- Damian Yerrick ( talk | stalk) 14:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
This article needed extensive grammatical correction and both the intro and the section on Abrahamic tradition contained much OR which I have taken pains to extensively rewrite. I could not find any cite on the web for the claim that YHWH is pronounced AEIOU. A cite is provided for the claim that Yahweh be pronounced Ιαου in Greek, but that was mentioned elsewhere in the article; perhaps the author of this claim was going off of some sort of personal revelation. Yow! I think I was charitable in rewriting and not deleting as much as I did.
Feel free *cough* to provide citations for the following stuff I deleted (
rewrote section):
Yclept:Berr (
talk) 17:31, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
"The earliest mention of the name of God is found in the Koran sura 2, The Cow;`When your Lord said to the angels: 'I am placing on the earth one that shall rule as My deputy,' they replied: 'Will You put there one that will do evil and shed blood, when we have for so long sung Your praises and sanctified Your Name?' It is only fairly recently that it's been determined that life on earth probably exceeds 3.4 billion years and certainly there is a likelihood that the creation of the angels predates that. The phrase 'so long' is both extremely literal as well as an amazing understatement. During the lifetime of Adam and Eve, the record from the Bible indicates that the name of God was used, but by the time Moses was born the scriptures show that none of mankind still knew the Name. Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was lost at the time of Noah, when only he and his relatives survived the flood.
"The Torah further describes the role of Aaron who acted as Moses' mouthpiece and conveyed the Name of God distinctly as 'AEIOU' to the Israelites. The pronunciation of 'AEIOU' is described in Psalms 8.2 by the prophet who wrote, 'Thou hast made babes, infants at the breast sound aloud Thy praise.' The power of the name AEIOU in its unique ability to allow the creation of all words in every human language is evident and befitting God and conveys the absolute infinite potential of God's character. In what is commonly referred to as the 'New Testament' God is referred to by a slightly abbreviated form as the 'Alpha and Omega', the beginning and the end, literally and figuratively.
"This name constitutes the First Commandment and embodied in the rest of the Ten Commandments is the rest of the alphabet as revealed by God to Moses and Aaron, ultimately replacing for the first time the hieroglyphics of the Egyptians and making writing based on a lettered alphabet possible. At the completion of Soloman's Temple the name of God was made unlawful; its public use was punishable by death by the Jews living at the time. 'Allah' was the only name which has been preserved and has continued to be used throughout the middle east. A simple google/ youtube search, 'infant cry' provides the best pronunciation as mentioned by Psalms 8.2. In the New Testament the reference is Matthew 21.16."
- "Legendary English rock musician, Eric Clapton, is often referred to as God with the common slogan "Clapton is God".
Yclept:Berr ( talk) 17:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
In which chapter and verse of which scripture did God "appear[] to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai" and Moses fail to pronounce God's personal name due to cleft lip? 173.174.83.181 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) is under the impression it was somewhere between Genesis and Deuteronomy. I don't remember any specific mention of a cleft lip in my studies of the Torah. -- Damian Yerrick ( talk | stalk) 17:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Looks Like this page has quite a bit of vandalism on it. 74.202.23.198 ( talk) 20:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This really needs to either referenced or removed. 131.217.33.146 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
All is article is article is accomplishing is basically giving linguistic translations [albeit some into phrases and ideas] of the idea that, in English, is written as "God". Wikipedia is not a reference of translation lists; and, despite how some people feel about the idea of "God," said idea should be treated the same as all others in the eyes of an encyclopedia. If Wikipedia is to have this article, then all other ideas should be represented in articles titled "Names of [insert idea]", in which said idea is then linguistically translated into all other possible languages.
I may have just not studied enough, but I have never seen heard of these two names being used in the passages quoted (I always read that it was simply "I AM" in that passage), and a search through the specific "Names in Judaism" article, as well as just searching "AEIOU" on wikipedia, gives no relevant results. The section this claim appears in is bulleted and reads somewhat out of place, and is not supported by a source; furthermore, searching for "AEIOU god" or "AEIOU god moses" only gets me sites that copy that passage straight from wikipedia. Is it possible that these are vandalism? 192.249.47.196 ( talk) 19:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Adi Purush is currently a redlink, though there is an Adi Purusha article, which is a redirect to Svayam Bhagavan. However, I'm not familiar enough with the subject to know which is the correct spelling (with or without the a) and whether the redirected article describes the same concept, and so I've not done anything. Can someone more knowledgeable help? —[ AlanM1 ( talk)]— 21:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
In section 2, Abrahamic Religions, the statement is made: "According to the Bible, the name of God was used during the lifetime of Adam and Eve, but by the time Moses was born, the scriptures imply that none of mankind still knew the name." I believe this to be incorrect. I believe that the name of God was in continuous use from the time of Adam and Eve up to the time period identified with Exodus 3:13-15 and beyond. For example, Noah (Genesis 9:26), Abraham (Genesis 15:8), Lot (Genesis 19:18) and Job (Job 1:21) used the name of God, Jehovah, in conversations with the Most High and others. The original Hebrew shows the divine name in these and many other instances during this time period. Translators into English have chosen to convert it to the word "Lord". Other translators have left the divine name in. Can we agree to remove the entire sentence after the word "Eve"? Now'n'Them ( talk) 20:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
This section needs a fair bit of work I think.
Take the following paragraph. "The earliest mention of the name of God in the Koran is found sura 2, The Cow: "When your Lord said to the angels: 'I am placing on the earth one that shall rule as My deputy,' they replied: 'Will You put there one that will do evil and shed blood, when we have for so long sung Your praises and sanctified Your Name?'. During the lifetime of Adam and Eve, the record from the Bible indicates that the name of God was used, but by the time Moses was born the scriptures show that none of mankind still knew the Name. Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was lost at the time of Noah, when only he and his relatives survived the flood. When Moses first spoke with God and asked His Name, God said, "I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but I did not let myself be known by My Name." When Moses heard the name of God he realized that since he had a speech impediment as a result of a harelip, he was unable to pronounce it accurately. He was able to say "Allah" and that was the name conveyed to Pharaoh and the Egyptians and the name Allah was referenced from that point in time till today. Further details in the Torah describe the role of Aaron who acted as Moses" mouthpiece and conveyed the Name of God distinctly as "YHWH" to the Israelites. The pronunciation of YHWH is described in Psalms 8.2 by the prophet who wrote, "Thou hast made babes, infants at the breast sound aloud Thy praise.""
There are no references what so ever in there apart from a reference to Psalms near the end, and some vague reference to the Koran at the start.
It should either be referenced, or fixed, or removed, as sentences like "Perhaps an argument could be made that this knowledge was ......" make it look like opinion.
131.217.33.146 (
talk) 00:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
{{So, does the christian god have a name? No...and Jehovah is not a name but comes from the jewish translation of Yiddish to english "I am". Read on... In Exodus 3:13-14, the christian god is reported to have answered that question saying "I AM WHO I AM". However, some people say that the name of God is Jehovah or Yahweh. [[[Exodus 3:13 - King James Version (KJV) (13) And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? (14) And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.]]] The reason is that in Hebrew (the Book of Exodus was written in Hebrew) the word for “I AM” is a Hebrew word translated as YHWH. This is why a lot of English translations will say that the name of God is Jehovah or Yahweh. It is an English-styled version of those four letters. It is an English, from the Hebrew, mistranslation of "I AM WHO I AM", and unlike any of the other gods down through recorder history, the christian god is the only "god" that does not have a name.}}
Moved from main article by -- Auric talk 21:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Names of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Should Christ Pantocrator be included in this article? the eloquent peasant ( talk) 00:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Names of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The article's title implies there is some kind of monotheistic consensus that the Abrahamic and Indian deities are the same god. While both branches of belief refer to their supreme being as 'God', clearly they are not the same. Obscurasky ( talk) 20:12, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
The Bible is quite clear in many ways that the religion of the Israelites was changing over time, and that it was not monotheistic, but rather henotheistic, that God was localised geographically (Yhwh "went forth from Seir" and "marched out of the field of Edom" [Judges 5:4], "God came from Teman" [Habbakuk 3:3]), etc. The article disregards all that and sticks to modern rabbincal Judaism. Arminden ( talk) 08:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)