When you use the word God...

[Deeje]

A question for all of you: do you also capitalize “Satan?”

It is a matter of English grammar to capitalise proper nouns, so in keeping with that rule any title or proper noun will have a capital letter. I personally refuse to give one to satan, but that is just my personal opinion exercised.

Just as a point of interest, there are no capital letters in Greek. So when the Greek scriptures were translated into English, some translation choices such as John 1:1 came to mean something that was not intended.

The word "God" in Greek is "theos" which is a word describing any kind of deity (Greeks were polytheistic so they had no word for Israel's one and only God) The way they differentiated that one God, was to use the definite article "ho" (THE)....a bit like the way we describe someone who has the same name as a well known celebrity like Brad Pitt. We say "not THE" Brad Pitt.

Also, in Greek, there is no indefinite article ("a" or "an") or any punctuation, so again it is up to translators to insert these in English so that we can understand the text better.

One instance of misplaced punctuation is Jesus' declaration to the robber hung alongside him. He said "truly I tell you today you will be with me in paradise". The placement of one simple comma, can make the declaration mean two entirely different things. If placed, as many modern translation do, after the word "you" it is taken to mean that the robber would be with Jesus in paradise that very day. The facts of scripture tell us that Jesus was dead in his tomb for three days, so he couldn't be with this man that day. He did not return to heaven for 40 days.

But if you place the comma after the word "today", it means that Jesus has made that solemn promise to the man that day, which fits exactly what the scriptures tell us. He was not promising heaven to a criminal who had a last minute change of heart. He was in fact, promising him a resurrection to life in the earthly paradise to come. (2 Peter 3:13) He will be king of God's kingdom then and will rule over the whole earth.

 

[Deeje]

God is not God's name though. Jehovah in English is His name. God is just easier and quicker.

"God" is what He is but "Jehovah" (Yahweh, YHWH) is "who" he is.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Could you clarify how you are using the word "respect?" Without this clarification, the argument doesn't follow very well for me. For me, respect has nothing to do with liking something or agreeing with something. The idea of being unable to respect things one disagrees with or dislikes is very strange to me, actually.

I'm using the word the way I think most people would use it regarding relationships with other people; i.e. to feel or show deferential regard to or to show honour to something. Respect is earned, not given. Even when it comes to gods. In my opinion, respecting a god simply because it is a god is an attitude which stems from 'might makes right' - that because a god is more powerful than us it deserves deferential regard by default.

There's a difference between acknowledging a god's superior power, wisdom etc and actively showing respect or reverence for it. The concept of reciprocity comes into play here; I'm not going to look kindly or respectfully upon a god if it has a habit of treating its worshippers like chattels or slaves or for being petty, small-minded and jealous (looking primarily at the Abrahamic god here). These are qualities which rightly repel us when displayed by humans. I acknowledge that the Abrahamic god, if it exists, is more powerful than I am and more than likely has greater knowledge, wisdom & perception than I do but because it does not act in a way that garners respect, I cannot respect it.

 

[Willamena]

When you use the word God (upper case), which of these do you mean?

NOTE - "god" and "God" do not necessarily refer to the same thing; I am specifically asking about the upper case variant

This poll is mostly for curiosity. Regardless of your choice, why do you use the upper case "God" in the way that you do?

The upper-case variant refers to any monotheistical god, the lower-case refers to the concept.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One instance of misplaced punctuation is Jesus' declaration to the robber hung alongside him. He said "truly I tell you today you will be with me in paradise". The placement of one simple comma, can make the declaration mean two entirely different things. If placed, as many modern translation do, after the word "you" it is taken to mean that the robber would be with Jesus in paradise that very day. The facts of scripture tell us that Jesus was dead in his tomb for three days, so he couldn't be with this man that day. He did not return to heaven for 40 days.

But if you place the comma after the word "today", it means that Jesus has made that solemn promise to the man that day, which fits exactly what the scriptures tell us. He was not promising heaven to a criminal who had a last minute change of heart. He was in fact, promising him a resurrection to life in the earthly paradise to come. (2 Peter 3:13) He will be king of God's kingdom then and will rule over the whole earth.

So in the original text, the Bible is ambiguous? Where else in the Bible does the original text support multiple interpretations?

 

[Willamena]

It is a matter of English grammar to capitalise proper nouns...

Actually, I think that's borrowed from German.

 

[Deeje]

So in the original text, the Bible is ambiguous?

Not at all. The English translators of the scriptures had a notion that Jesus was somehow raised in the spirit before he was raised in the body on the third day after his execution. The Bible does not say that. Jesus himself said that he would be 'in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights'. (Matthew 12:38-40) Christendom's scholars wanted to perpetuate their belief that when a person dies, they go straight to heaven even if they convert on their deathbed. Now if you read Jesus' words without knowing what Jews believed about death, (the ancient Jews did not believe in an immortal soul) and if you were ill informed about the way Jesus was resurrected, and when he went to heaven, you could read the scripture that way, putting the comma after the word "you" and assume it was correct.
But I believe that the Bible interprets itself. You use scripture to interpret scripture because it does not contradict itself...if it did, it could not be the word of God.

Placing the comma after the word "today" agrees with the rest of the Bible.

Where else in the Bible does the original text support multiple interpretations?

John 1:1 is a classic example of this. It is used by trinitarians to prove that Jesus was God incarnate, but on a closer reading of the whole chapter several things come to light.

In verses 2-4 it says...."He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4 in him was life, and the life was the light of all people."

So the Word (Logos or spokesman) was "with God...in the beginning".....and "through" Jesus as the Word, all things came to exist. This is backed up by Paul in Colossians 1:15-17....

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers—all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together."

In calling Jesus the "firstborn of all creation" Paul is identifying this firstborn son as a 'creation' of his Father. All things were created "through" him by God. This is called agency. God used his son as the agent of creation. God produced the raw materials and his son was used to fabricate all those materials into what we see as creation. (Proverbs 8:30, 31)

He is called "monogenes" in Greek which is the same words used in scripture for an 'only child'. How is Jesus an "only child"?.....because he is the very beginning of God's creative works....as Revelation 3:14 says ...."To the angel of the congregation in La·o·di·ceʹa write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God"

It also says in John 1:18 that..."No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father’s side is the one who has explained Him." How many people saw Jesus?
It calls Jesus "the only begotten god" but we know that God cannot be 'begotten' because that implies a 'begetter'.
Some translations try to cover this by translating it "only begotten Son" (KJV) but if you translate "theos" as "son" in verse 18, you also have to translate it that way in verse 1...."and the Word was the Son". So scripture interprets scripture if we don't let doctrines get in the way.

It is fascinating to study scripture free of Christendom's false teachings and just allow the Bible to speak for itself.

There are other examples as well....

 

[Deeje]

Actually, I think that's borrowed from German.

I don't know too much about German grammar.

 

[1137]

Uppercase G God is the mindless, deterministic, unchanging, foundation of reality. To me it is the Horus of Set-Horus, the "primordial god" of process theism.

 

[dfnj]

When you use the word God (upper case), which of these do you mean?

NOTE - "god" and "God" do not necessarily refer to the same thing; I am specifically asking about the upper case variant

This poll is mostly for curiosity. Regardless of your choice, why do you use the upper case "God" in the way that you do?

God is a word above all else. What the word means is defined by every sentence that uses it. That is it. What the word means is kind of irrelevant and arbitrary since God only exists in our words and language. But if you have God sitting in your kitchen, please invite me over so I can shake His hand.

The upper lower case thing is just a convention for showing reverence. The symbols used to represent a concept really are not that important. Unless you are a fanatic who is into fandom and idol worships the words of the Bible like an NFL football team. Then, opening your eggs on the right end becomes very important.

It's funny how people think their words are actually part of reality. It's a form of delusion. Words are an abstraction of reality. Words are never the reality they represent.

 

[Quintessence]

I'm using the word the way I think most people would use it regarding relationships with other people; i.e. to feel or show deferential regard to or to show honour to something. Respect is earned, not given.

I think people are of a different mind on that. For me, it is very much the opposite - disrespect has to be earned. Respect is automatic.

In my opinion, respecting a god simply because it is a god is an attitude which stems from 'might makes right' - that because a god is more powerful than us it deserves deferential regard by default.

That's interesting... I wouldn't have thought of it that way. I can see where you'd be more reserved with how you use the word respect coming from this perspective. For me, inherent respectfulness of the gods relates more to what you talk about here:

There's a difference between acknowledging a god's superior power, wisdom etc and actively showing respect or reverence for it.

Do you think you could give more examples to illustrate? For me there isn't much of a difference, so I'm interested to see what this looks like on, say, the level of practice for you (or others who think similarly). Does refusal to show respect translate, say, into never really worshiping those gods through ritual, chant, and so forth? Something else entirely?

 

[savagewind]

To me, the word God means the originator and the sustainer of life. Without God, there would be nothing.

 

[Enoch07]

So let me get this straight: if you give someone a nickname, you won't capitalize it until the person hears it and "claims" it? Until then, you use lowercase?

Which style guide did you get this rule out of?

Yes, if I was to say to you "hey, slugger" a common term of endearment. I would not capilitalize "slugger". I have a cousin my dad nicknamed Rambo as a child, and since my cousin claimed it I capilitalize it as shown.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So in the original text, the Bible is ambiguous?

It's the reason we need to know the context..... all of it.

For instance, (not a grammar example tho) in Genesis 3, we have a talking, lying snake. The Bible doesn't tell us who was behind that, until John 8:44 gives us an idea, where Jesus called the Devil "the father of the lie."
But, we really don't have confirmation until Revelation 12:9, where Satan is directly referred to as the Original Serpent.

All of it needs to be considered, to claim an understanding.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's the reason we need to know the context..... all of it.

For instance, (not a grammar example tho) in Genesis 3, we have a talking, lying snake. The Bible doesn't tell us who was behind that, until John 8:44 gives us an idea, where Jesus called the Devil "the father of the lie."
But, we really don't have confirmation until Revelation 12:9, where Satan is directly referred to as the Original Serpent.

All of it needs to be considered, to claim an understanding.

So to understand what the author of Genesis 3 meant, we have to take into account works by other authors written centuries later, which weren't compiled into a single volume until centuries after that?

This approach seems... problematic to say the least.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So to understand what the author of Genesis 3 meant, we have to take into account works by other authors written centuries later, which weren't compiled into a single volume until centuries after that?

This approach seems... problematic to say the least.

Why does it seem problematic? For those who lived before the Bible was finished, you mean?

Actually, the Apostle Paul's words (again, in the Bible itself), @ 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, indicate that the miracles performed by the first-cent. Christian congregation would end "when that which is complete arrives. Referring to the writings of God's Word being complete.... it would be enough. Why? Because the complete Bible has everything we need to strengthen our faith.....no more need for miracles!

(Did I answer your concern? Hope you were able to follow my line of thought, and understand my point? I can go off on other tangents, sometimes. I do better face to face, than writing.)

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

It depends on the context.

When I say the word "God", if I'm talking about my own beliefs then I'm talking about the universe itself (as a metaphor) and the unknown. But if I'm not talking about my beliefs, I'm obviously referring to another religion's deity

 

[URAVIP2ME]

God would never be a personal name for a biblical character considering the word is a derivation of the 6th century ad german word gott.
It is a name of identification

I find the Tetragrammaton letters YHWH is the identification for God's name over the titles of Lord or God.
Jesus taught he would see to it that God's name would 'be made known' at John 17:6; John 17:26.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The upper-case variant refers to any monotheistical god, the lower-case refers to the concept.

At Psalms 110 (KJV Bibles ) I find the Upper-Case variant 'LORD' stands for the Tetragrammaton YHWH.
Whereas, I find the lower-case variant 'Lord' stands for the Lord Jesus, and Not his God (YHWH).

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So to understand what the author of Genesis 3 meant, we have to take into account works by other authors written centuries later, which weren't compiled into a single volume until centuries after that?

I find Genesis 3 is part of the second viewpoint account starting at Genesis 2:5 and ending at Genesis 4:26.
So, to me all of that view should be taken into account.
Whereas the first view, or account of creation, is between Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4.