Talk:Tetragrammaton/Archive

message: Considering the many requests on both entries, Yahweh and Tetragrammaton are now merged together.  See below and Talk:Yahweh.  --Wighson 05:02, 2004 Apr 26 (UTC)
I find the information on this page redundant with regard to the page Yahweh, and so I'm considering replacing it with a redirect. What do you think about it? --Uri
I think that while redundancy may be high right now, this page could contain a lot of information not suited for placement in Yahweh: Metaphysical meaning of the letters, polymorphism in pronounciation, relation to the various sephiroth of the tree of life and so on. Too bad i'm not knowledgable enough to write about it myself, being an engineer, rather than a doctorate in comparative religions ;-) --Anders Törlind
: Yes, but what can go into Tetragrammaton that can't into Yahweh?
: Well, I just thought that Yahweh would get a bit inflated by a future discussion on how the various parts of the letters correspond to the Ain and the sephira, the role of the tetragrammatron in kabbalistic charms and so on. Seems like a subject worthy of an article by itself to me, thats all.  --AT
:: Yeah, but considering the fact that Tetragrammaton and Yahweh are two different names for almost exactly the same thing, I think it would be best to cut the total bloat of having two articles with a very unclear difference between them and have only one. I think that having two articles is justifiable only as long as we propose some criterium to differentiate between them --Uri
:: Ah, that's rather simple actually: Everything that is about the godhead of judaism that does not pertain to the actual lettering of the tretragrammatron and interpretations of it should go under Yahweh. This is actually a quagmire to enter, as the tetragrammatron has aquired meaning outside the original "textual representation of the jewish god", and entered the mainstream of western occultism (via syncretism and the kabbalah, no less :-). That in itself should warrant an article of itslf...  --AT
Er, no. Yahweh is G-d. The Tetragrammaton is the name of G-d. A thing is not the same thing as its name (unless it's a fixed point!).
: True, but since now most of Yahweh deals with the name, I feel that it (and The name of God in Judaism) is redundant, and should be merged into a single article ("The Name of God in Judaism" is the best). I volonteer to re-write Yahweh about the subject. --Uri
:Some suggestions here. The tetragrammaton is Yahweh (Jehovah) and should be identified as such. However, the way the two terms are used today calls for some distinction to be made. I suggest the following: Tetragrammaton focus on the religious and mystical aspects of the name, i.e., the refusal by Orthodox Jews to write or even pronounce it, the role it plays in the sephirot of Jewish mysticism, its role in the Temple ritual (surmised), its relationship to the seventy letter name of God in Jewish mysticism, the divine atribute of mercy (Elohim is justice), etc. Yahweh, on the other hand, can be a more historical survey of the name, including the history of its pronunciation (Yahweh is wrong), the grammatical structure of the word as an indication of omniscience (its all-important Hebrew root is based on the verb "to be"), its role in biblical criticism (J documentation vs. E documentation), and even the LDS (Mormon) hypothesis that Jehovah and Elohim are two distinct persons. Sure there would be overlap, but together the two articles could offer very thorough coverage of the topic. Danny
: I broadly agree with Danny about the need to separate out various aspects, some historical/factual others specific to particular religious groups. Unfortunately with religious texts the same words have differing significance and use in various traditions. It would seem useful to put in a section that which is commonly shared, and use a different one to outline the differing uses and rationales, ~I would be interested to see Uriyan's draft, perhaps a brief systematic outline would be a useful first step rather than see the proposal as a completed article which might have a variety of proposals for re-structuring. An outline; followed by redrafting to the skeleton would seem the way to get, and most efficient. [[User:Tedclapham]
:I have noted, ironically, that folks spell the word "God" as G-d, and then go on to spell out the full word "Yahweh", thus compromising their own custom! See, the rationale behind spelling the word in English as "G-d" is to caution against "pronouncing" the sacred Name. When one spells the word (in transliterated Hebrew), one is kinda "pronouncing" the Name. Now, I'm not criticizing anyone here, I just find it humorous. As for the controversy over the Name, I believe Tedclapham's idea is a good one - a common POV, followed by the POVs of disagreeing sides, is a good way to approximate NPOV. Rickyrab 06:05, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged

message: To remove an entire change from the server? I made and edit to the page and it is now completely gone. No trace of it in the page history.
george
:Ah, you have seen the hand of God.--Administer
Seriously, that has happened to me sometimes, too. I've found that leaving Wikipedia entirely and then reloading the page restores my recent edits. Fire Star 22:09, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  does someone have a magical power?