Naming the god and the theological fight, but is linguistic!


Naming the god and the theological fight, but it is only linguistic!

Vedaprakash

In the “Year of Darwin”[1], as scientists have started discussing about the evolution of man, language etc., ordinary man has also started thinking in the same lines about the connected factors, as they are more concerned about them than the professors, experts and others, who conduct “conferences” inside air-conditioned halls with all facilities[2], whereas, they have to worry about Dhal selling at Rs. 100/ kg, rice Rs.100 / kg and so on. The Dhal and rice families never fool man, but the man fool man by his skill of economics, statistics, inflation, negative-inflation[3], but still prices going up!  So also, our Sanskrit imported Professors[4] start talking about “phylogeny vs epigenesist”, “origin of language” etc. in India!

The evolution and / or creation of man are connected with the concept of god and naming the god. Evolution might oppose god, but still “god” is denied there, however, without naming. Naming god as per the existing literature or the so-called “revealed books” of the “chosen” people[5] with such “books” (al-kithabiya) has been semantics coupled with theological syntax.

Man started pronouncing or rather naming the god as follows, according to his “sound” producing capabilities:

  • El-eli-ela-elah-elahi-elohim-
  • El-elah-elohim-elahi-allah
  • l-la-lah-lahi-laha [when this is combined with al-lah, it becomes allaha]
  • ha-aha-aya-hayah-yhwh [here, “l” sound is avoided]
  • m-am-um-iam [without opening mouth]-om-ohm [opening mouth][6]

YHWH and ALM: Scholars, theologians and other experts confess that they do not know how these two words or expressions have come, how to pronounce or what is the meaning. As for as ALM is concerned, Quranic experts claim that many ayats start with ALM implying Alif-lam-mim[7], but none knows its meaning. Thus, many claims are made by the biblical and quaranic scholars and pundits. The first name that God told Moses about was Hayah and it is a Hebrew word meaning I AM. The second name that God told Moses about was YHWH and it is also a Hebrew word for which only four consonants are used without any vowels. Thus, god only knows what YHWH means, or how is has to be pronounced.

Lord, LORD, God, GOD, LORD-GOD: However, the King James Version translates YHWH as “LORD” — all in capital letters and the practice of representing YHWH by “LORD” is done in many translations, including but not limited to the KJV, NKJV, NIV, and NAS[8]. Thus, LORD represents God’s name, YHWH, whereas “Lord” represents God’s, adonay. As they have difficulty or do not know how to translate, they may still translate “adonay YHWH” as “the Lord LORD,” Elohim is translated as God / god which means “mighty ones.” They know El (God in Hebrew), Eli (Singular), Elohim (Plural), Eloi (Aramic), Ilahi, elahi etc., denote only GOD, but mentioned as differently in the context.

The word used

Meaning

How many times appears

example

“EL” Mighty One

225

Gen. 14:20, “Blessed be the Most High EL”.
“YHVH” GOD’s Personal Name, not to be pronounced or not known

248

Is. 40:10,   “The Lord YHVH will come with a strong hand.”
“Tzur” A Rock

1

lsa. 44:8, “Yes, there is no Tzur,   I know not any.”.
“Elah” An object of Worship[9]

88

Ezra 5:11, “We are the servants of Elah of heaven”.
“Elohim” Object of Worship

2222

Plural used  in Hebrew to denote plenitude of might
.  “EL” Mighty One

225

. Gen. 14:20, “Blessed be the Most High EL”. Gen. 1:1,   “In the beginning Elohim created.”
“Eloah” An object of Worship

55

Deut. 32:17,  “They sacrificed unto devils, not to Eloah”.
“Theos” Object of Worship (in Greek)

1274

Matt. 1:23,  “They will call Him (the Messiah)  Emmanuel,  a Name which means ‘Theos is with us’ “.

God, existence of God, God knowing other God: In Bible, the following are quoted as the word of God (Exodus: 20:2-5):

  • I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;
  • Do not have any other gods before me.
  • You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
  • You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

Thus, the doubt of God thinking about, warning about other God is intriguing and interesting to note [Ontogeny]. If one God is the God, then, that God cannot think of another God existing on the earth and that earth too, in fact creation of that God only. Therefore, where is the question of anything existing below the earth or above in the heaven? Thus, one God talking about the exigencies of existence of other Gods proves that that God knew the existence of other Gods and therefore, he was “jealous God” as declared himself!

Ontogenesis, phylogenesis and epigenesis of God: Thus, it is quite evident that the scriptures mentioned or the literature of the people mentioned talk about the existence of more than one God in the sense, that the “jealous God” is so jealous about other God. Thus, the evolution or creation of the concept of God is closely related to the speech or language of the people evolved or created. If the sounds came out represented words and words formed into meaningful sentences and such sentences with all semantics and linguistic laws made them into identifiable language, and that language related to one particular people, as they spoke and thus, the language speaking people with that particular literature could be identified easily. As now, evolution requires male and female, necessarily, there has to be a family for god. As there have been “Son of God” [generally understood as Jesus, the son of Mary], “daughters of Allah” [al-Manat, al-Uzza and al-Lat] etc, it is evident that progeny of god is also implied.

Man, sex, language and mixing of races and languages[10]: Monogenetic or autogenetic creation of humanity has been divine and thus such things cannot take place. Only one Man can create woman[11] and only one Woman can create Man[12] and none can do such things thereafter. Thus, “the babel of tower” confronts the theologians, who make the deployment of linguists, psychologists, genetic experts and others come to rescue to come out with the concepts of ontogeny, phylogeny and epigeny in the creation of languages. Heterogenetics and variety of species, different languages etc., question the monogeny, autogeny, immaculate conception etc[13]. Thus, homosexuality confronts such theologians and scientific experts. However, in flora and fauna, there have been species that produce on their own. Believing in one makes to bewilder at times about the existence of more than one. Accepting more than one has no problem in considering one or the only one also without any difficulty. But, knowingly the existence of more than one, if one claims that it is only one and there is no one other than it etc., makes not only mathematics but also theology complicated. However, monists, monotheists and such other “only one” / “The One” hypothesists and theorists confront with others.

Vedaprakash

21-07-2009


[1] The year 2009 is the bicentennial of Darwin’s birthday, and sesquicentennial of publication of his book “The Origin of Species”.  http://darwin-year-2009.org/

However, the Indians never bother about Indian literature, where thousands of books have been written and available since c.3500 BCE etc., but, they are not worried about such 35 century year, 30 century year…….celebrations of the poet, astronomer etc.

[2] As in Chennai, we used to attend such conferences held in Five-star Hotels, where the elite and rich would come in BMWs and lecture about “Anatomy of poverty” and so on!

[3] The moment Chidambaram was made HM instead of FM, all have changed upside down or going reverse etc. in India. Note, now Kasab has started confessing differently.

[4] Note the irony, our Sanskrit Pundits and others have to listen to such “species” (with all due respects to Darwin), who descended here from heavens!

[5] In that way, other then the “chosen people”, the heathen / kafirs etc., have no redemption without the acceptance of Christ or Allah. The Afganisthanis have already started demanding Jizya from Kafirs.

[6] Of course, our Christian friends of expertise would give different interpretation about such “sounds”!

[7] Refer to Hussian Mohammed Pikthall’s translation of Quran for more details.

[8] Now, remember about Iravatham Mahadevan’s assertion about Authorized Version etc. Anyway, our Wales Professor of Sanksrit at Harvard University, USA has not still sent his papers and his friend IM has ben keeping quite!

Dr. Michael Witzel, Wales Professor of Sanskrit at Harvard University (USA), will deliver a set of three conferences in India. A very proper event in the year of the commemoration of Charles Darwin (1809-1882), the famous scientist who was opposed by the Christian church for so long time.

http://asiatica.org/news/2009/06/26/conferences-in-india/

[9] Here, also there would be debate about “worship” and “veneration” of Mary, Joseph, Jesus, Christ, Allah, Mohammed etc., as the respective believers would give different interpretation.

[10] Vedaprakash, Honing Celina, Yogic Ramdev, Worrying Christians and Gleeful Gays, dated 19-07-2009 posted in different forums.

[11] As Adam created Eve [autogenetic].

[12] As Mary begot Jesus [autogenetic ignoring Joseph or epigenetic with the impregnation of the Holy Spirit].

[13] So in the year of Darwin, the battalion of Holy Warriors has started trotting global countries taking about such things and educates the believers properly.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Naming the god and the theological fight, but is linguistic!”

  1. DEVAPRIYA Says:

    Various Biblical Lexicons say they do not know origin or Root of El or Mighty One

    The Meaning is only assumed.

    Elohim. m- Plural hi-Femine. saying God is dual

  2. DEVAPRIYA Says:

    ” The Great Majority of readers take for Granted that Some Word Equivalent to “LORD” is in the Hebrew Text, but it is not. The Word-“Lod” is a title, not name;and not Name; and Putting it in Capital Letters does nothing to change this fact. But where the Bible Specifically has the personal name, translators should not take it upon themselves to make a substitution. The use of “Lord” instead of “Yahweh” effectively Depersonalises the Deity, turns Him into a kind of Vaugue abstaraction and rejects the repeated Emphasis in the Bible on his Unique personal relationship with Israel. It also disguises the fact tat YAHWEH is a Character in the Biblical Drama, with entrances and exis and a role to play, all assigned by the Writers.”
    -Page 313 -Bible As Literature, Oxford University Press,
    written by 3 Professors John.A.Gabel, Charles B.Wheelr and Antony.D.York.

  3. Faith Lim Says:

    OK… cool

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: