Talk:Names of God in Judaism/Archive 1

message: The singular form of elohim is only used in "word-pair" form; where it indicates god of + the thing after it, thus elohei is only used and should be listed.
:Elohei is plural. The singular would be Eloha, the pair version is undistinguishable from the regular version. Gadykozma 17:41, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elohei 

message: Please see NYTimes Science Section, first. Sept 28th 2004,  discovery of Priestly Blessing in Silver Amulets, with God's name in ancient script
:Finally got a copy of that article and accompanied photos. Will try to make sense of it and add a comment. Thanks for the pointer. --Zappaz 16:28, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solving a Riddle written in Silver 

message: Shouldn't 
* YHWH-Ra-ah: The Lord my Shepherd (Psalms 23:1)
Be actually
* YHWH-Ro'i: The Lord (is) my Shepherd (Psalms 23:1).
elpincha 22:14, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inquiry 

message: Someone should add the bit about why it is sometimes written G-d or L-rd in english. "G-d" redirects here.  I couldn't find a relvanat place to add it.  Also, I don't remember how to sign things.
: Use four tiles '~' Larklight 18:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  G-d 

message: No offence, but this article just doesn't seem to be of Featured Article quality yet.  It's often repetitive and even contradictory.  In case I don't have time to fix these issues, let me try to be concrete:
# Under Tetragrammaton, first "Modern scholars conjecture that it was pronounced "Yahweh"" followed by "The name YHWH is often reconstructed as Yahweh"
# Under Tetragrammaton, first "Because Jews have, for a long period of time, considered it blasphemy to pronounce, the correct pronunciation of this name has been forgotten" followed by "The prohibition of blasphemy, for which capital punishment is prescribed in Jewish law, refers only to the Tetragrammaton".  Surely these could be combined.  Then in the next section, "All modern denominations of Judaism teach that the four letter name of God, YHWH, is forbidden to be uttered except by the High Priest, in the Temple ... Instead of pronouncing YHWH during prayer, Jews say Adonai.".  Then again, under Adonai, "Since pronouncing YHWH is considered sinful, Jews use Adonai instead in prayers".  This all seems quite redundant.
# Under Tetragrammaton, "This name is first mentioned in the book of Genesis and is usually translated as "the Lord""; then under Pronouncing the tetragrammaton, "English translations of the Bible generally render YHWH as "the LORD" (in small capitals)".  Surely these could be combined.
# The Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh section seems quite piecemeal as it is.
# The Kabbalistic use section needs extensive copyediting, especially (but not only) the 42-letter name paragraph.
::I'm also confused by the rastafarian reference under the Yah heading.  This is names for god used by Judaism, not the world. Also, the link to Yam there seems extraneous.  Any comments?Fcsuper 03:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs more work 

message: [quote]Despite the -im ending common to many plural nouns in Hebrew, the word Elohim, when referring to God, is grammatically singular, and regularly takes a singular verb in the Hebrew Bible[/quote]
This is an opinion. The use of 'Elohim' in Gen 1 can also be understood as being a reference to "The Gods", or "The Spirits". Thus, the gods created the races of man (each in his own image and likeness), and after this background Gen 2 discusses the activities of that elohim who was the tribal deity (YHWH elohim).
However, the article is specifically about in Juadism, so perhaps this need not be pointed out. Ie: it's an opinion, but the opinion of modern Judaism.
:Its not an opinion of modern Judaism its typical smart-ass pseudo-scholarship. It can't be understood to mean Gods or spirits, it takes the singular verb bara' not the plural bar'u. Kuratowski's Ghost 23:43, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is good, Kuratowsky. Why don't you be bold and add it? Thanks . --Zappaz 16:22, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I edit articles based on bursts of motivation, too lethargic at the moment to think how to word it nicely, besides I'm meant to be working :) Kuratowski's Ghost 20:49, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elohim 

message: I can't see the Y of the YHVH on the priestly benediction picture. Does anyone else see it? 
To me it appears to show Heh (possibly Samech?) Vav Heh. Is it inferred the Yud was once there or is it just very faint? --Cypherx 05:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caption on Priestly Benediction Picture 

message: Something needs to be said about the possible connection between Shadai and the word shadayim that means breasts and the interpretation that it thus means something similar to English "bountiful". Kuratowski's Ghost 4 July 2005 23:32 (UTC)
:Interesting concept, but unless we find some references of such connection made by scholars or rabbis, I am afraid we will be getting into original research, and outside of the WP policies. --Zappaz 7 July 2005 06:15 (UTC)
::Nothing original about it is a known view popular amongst Reconstructionists. Will see what I can dig up Kuratowski's Ghost
::Ok I've added some stuff, cheating a bit cos I haven't actually read the reference I added but used an article that referenced it 
:::Fascinating angle... A feminine aspect of God... excellent find. Thanks... --Zappaz 7 July 2005 16:10 (UTC)
::::I think there is a confluence of the various meanings of Shaddai in the title The Humbler.  It gets around Volcano-Chthonic perceptions that are misleading (at least in Judaism).    210.50.176.10 05:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Shadai shadayim

message: This is a great article, BTW. I see Hashem has two separate sections. I'm loathe to change it myself so as not to louse up a well crafted page, but maybe somebody who's more familiar with the history of the page could investigate? Gzuckier 15:43, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  hashem duplicated 

message: THe ogg format is inefficient and pointless. No one (except advanced computer users) use it. 
I recommend converting all the .ogg files to .mp3 as this will make the files universally listenable.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.42.245.54 (talk • contribs) .
:As practical as that would be, the patents on the mp3 format unfortunately make it impossible for Wikipedia to use mp3's. Out of the formats which are unencumbered by patents, Ogg Vorbis is by far the most widely supported. —Gabbe 23:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ogg format? 

message: The caption currently reads "...The Tetragrammaton in paleo-Hebrew can be clearly seen five times in this portion." I'm no scholar, so I didn't change it, but I count 6 of what may be the Tetragrammaton. On the 7 lines shown, (top=1, bottom = 7):
line 2: twice
line 5: once
line 6: twice
line 7: once?
Anyone who can actually read Hebrew, feel free to implement this change (if I'm actually correct).Mayor Of France 01:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still curious, paleo-Hebrew readers/scholars, is it 5 or 6?Mayor Of France 00:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qumran scroll Tetragrammaton 

message: What is the source for the section on Had'var/Hadavar? I have never heard of that term used as a name of God by anyone, nor have I seen it in any traditional texts. --DLandTALK 00:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As nobody has responded to this, I have removed the sentence in the article that refers to Hadavar. --DLandTALK 21:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why was the bit about G-d removed, G-d redirects to this page. Epson291 03:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I tried to add something, but it needs to be edited. Epson291 04:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hadavar 

message: In which case it should be translated into english as JOB.  The book of JOB dealt with people that used the lords name, or more pressisly a name that sounded like the word "I Am", for their own benifit.  Many names have many similairities, I have heard the middle easterners pronounce john similairly to Ja-O-Va{which incidently sylibalisticly means son of the light of the moon son of light, JOB that is].  So why don't people spell YHVW as JOB? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.14.129.251 (talk • contribs).
:Because it's wrong. Try learning Hebrew, then you'll understand that איוב is nothing like the Tetragrammaton. — Gareth Hughes 11:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't YHVW   Ja-O-Va? 

message: Support given this is the article to inform on the subject--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  YHWH Aleim merge proposal 

message: Wikipedia should adopt a uniform Hebrew transliteration.  I don't particularly care which one, but some of the translits on this page are different (elohe) for constructive plural gods?  Also, it's hard to put my finger on, but for an article on Judaism, this article has a goyish tone to it.--71.93.234.180 (talk) 04:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Transliteration

message: : In many of the passages in which elohim [lower case] occurs in the Bible it refers to non-Israelite deities, or in some instances to powerful men or judges, and even angels (Exodus 21:6, Psalms 8:5).
What does "lower case" mean in Hebrew?! —Tamfang (talk) 15:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  the case of the case 

message: Trying to print preview this pages causes Firefox to lock up.  Is this some sort of encoding error? --CableModem^^ (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Printing 

message: They are several problems which I have identified. The first being that of the mention of Jehovah. Why would we mention more about Jehovah, which is utterly disregarded as a philogical impossibility - over the more accurate Yahweh???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alleichem (talk • contribs) 10:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The original writing seems to have been unclear.  I appreciate your bringing this to everyone's attention so it could be clarified.Tim (talk) 15:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: Does anyone know how the different names relate to the Sephiroth of Kabbalah? I know they do, I just don't know how... ThePeg (talk) 14:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they really do, directly.  I mean, Elokim is considered to reflect the attribute of Din (justice), and the sephirah of Gevurah is sometimes associated with Din as well.  Similarly, the Tetragrammaton is associated with the attribute of Rachamim (mercy), and Tiferet is sometimes also called Rachamim.  But I think they're separate paradigms. -LisaLiel (talk) 17:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Names & Sephiroth

message: I'd like to hear the input of different contributors about this subject. Apparently, some Bibles such as the MJK Bible have a mention, and other Bibles that have nothing to do with the Tetragrammaton, yet under the Tetragrammaton section no Bible is mentioned that uses the Name Yahweh exclusively. For this reason I added the note of the SSBE, the most well-known Bible in the Sacred Name Movement which uses the Name Yahweh in the OT and NT. 
It's important not to get carried away with the Jehovah Bibles, because it doesn't help. I thought that at least a mention of the SSBE was fitting, but the user Skywriter (Tim) does not agree. I'd like to hear other views about the section. See history page for details. 
Kiddish.K (talk) 18:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Notable 

message: I cannot see the ne necessity of the of the POV-section|date=February 2008 and the Copyedit|date=February 2008 warnings in the section on Hashem! Can they be removed. All that is written there is solid and uncontroversial information, and there do not seem to be any style problems. How or who can remove them? Benqish (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hashem 

message: "To show the sacredness of the names of God, and as a means of showing respect and reverence for them, the scribes of sacred texts took pause before copying them, and used terms of reverence so as to keep the true name of God concealed."
Did they even know his true name? If not, this is POV conjecture. 75.118.170.35 (talk) 12:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: True Name?

message: Hi, in the section entitled Elohim, the following text contains an extra closing bracket:
The Jewish grammarians call such plurals … plur. virium or virtutum; later grammarians call them plur. excellentiae, magnitudinis, or plur. maiestaticus. This last name may have been suggested by the we used by kings when speaking of themselves (compare 1 Maccabees 10:19 and 11:31); and the plural used by God in Genesis 1:26 and 11:7; Isaiah 6:8 has been incorrectly explained in this way) [Emphasis added]. It is, however, either communicative (including the attendant angels: so at all events in Isaiah 6:8 and Genesis 3:22), or according to others, an indication of the fullness of power and might implied. It is best explained as a plural of self-deliberation. The use of the plural as a form of respectful address is quite foreign to Hebrew.
I'm not sure if the closing bracket should be deleted or if there needs to be a corresponding opening bracket added. Could someone please correct this? Thanks. --— Jclu: talk-contribs 04:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra closing bracket 

message: Does someone know the meaning of the Hebrew word Elohim used in Psalm 8:5?
"You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor." (NIV tranlsation)
The New International Version English translation uses heavenly beings with a footnote denoting "Or than God". The New American Standard Bible English tranlsation uses God, as does the New Living Translation English translation with the following footnote: "Or Yet you made them only a little lower than the angels; Hebrew reads Yet you made him [i.e., man] a little lower than Elohim." Yet the King James Version English translation reads "a little lower than the angels".
As a Christian growing up in church, I grew accustomed to the KJV translation, and it wasn't until recently that I realized the usage of angels or heavenly beings was a translation choice. After reading Names of God in Judaism, I'm curious, now more than ever, about what the correct translation should be. To me, from a theological point of view, there's a lot of difference between man being made a little lower than the angels (or other heavenly beings) versus a little lower than God.
Thanks. — Jclu: talk-contribs 05:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psalm 8:5