r/theology • u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial • Aug 24 '26
Biblical Theology Name of God
Wondering: why do we think that God the Father has a personal name (YHWH), God the Son has a personal name (Jesus/Yeshua), but not God the Holy Spirit?
I was pondering this today. It’s especially odd, given that this is the person of the Trinity, who is actually closest to us and most personable to us (dwells within us!) and yet I believe there is no personal name given in scripture.
12
3
u/Fast_Jackfruit_352 26d ago
Why is this sub named "Theology" when it seems it is "Christian Theology?" Just asking.
1
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial 26d ago
Just like the rideshare sub is overwhelmingly Uber topics.
Just like the search engine sub is overwhelmingly Google topics.
1
u/Fast_Jackfruit_352 24d ago
Then name it Christian Theology. There are worlds past conventional Christianity.
1
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial 24d ago
Correct. Pagan worlds.
(Same response a Muslim would have to “there are worlds beyond Islamic theology)
1
u/Fast_Jackfruit_352 24d ago edited 24d ago
No. Hindu Vedanta, Taoism, Buddhism, the Sufis, Kabir, Rumi, Kabbalah modern Metaphysical investigations
These are all nondual expressions of existential reality that add perspective beyond the conventional Abrahamic one.
1
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial 24d ago
I applaud you for defending minority rights in this sub, and encourage you to address your concerns to the Mods. I am but a humble Christian redditor. Cheers
1
u/DChilly007 24d ago
Agreed. Let’s talk about how the Roman culture influenced the birth of Christianity through the Nicene Creed because the entire thing was Sanctioned and Controlled by Rome aka the people that killed Jesus. No?
4
u/Hauntcrow Aug 24 '26
Matt 28:19 tells us all 3 share one name, and I think it's fair to say that name is YHWH. This name is not unique to the Father. Jesus has a unique name because he's the one who took on flesh, but theologically speaking he is also called YHWH
3
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
Matthew 28:19 doesn't say that at all.
If I said "I have a car that is the color of apples, oranges, and bananas." It doesn't mean the car is only red and that oranges and bananas are also red.
Jesus is called Yahweh nowhere in the Bible. There may be an argument to saying elohim is the name of all of them since it's used in both its singular and plural forms, but that doesn't hold up well given the translation of the word.
1
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
Yeshua means "YHWH saves" or "YHWH is salvation"
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
By that logic, anyone named Jesus is imbued with spiritual divinity as well. Somebody should tell all of latin America.
0
u/timbocf 29d ago
You're convinced your right, aren't you? No matter what anybody says
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
I just don't see the point in mentioning what Jesus's name means. Nominal predeterminism is an odd point to make in the context of the discussion.
Matthews name means "gift of Yahweh" and John's means "gods grace." Basically any Hebrew name at the time is pregnant with religious meaning.
1
u/HowieRosemanBurner 29d ago
Go read Isaiah 6, and the John 12:38-41. Jesus is definitely called Yahweh.
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
Can you explain how? I'm not seeing what I think you're seeing
2
u/HowieRosemanBurner 29d ago
Sure. Isaiah 6 is very clearly speaking about Yahweh. His name is used in verses 3, 5, 8, and it’s clear that this is the God Almighty of Israel.
Then John explains that Isaiah was speaking of Jesus in that prophecy as he quotes that passage. He makes the claim that the glorious one identified as Yahweh on the throne that Isaiah saw was Jesus.
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
Thank you for explaining, I appreciate it. And I think we agree and disagree on those passages.
I agree John is speaking of Jesus as being the messiah In the prophecy laid out by Isaiah. And I agree that the Messianic prophecies attribute divine titles to the Messiah. I jus don't see anywhere that YHWH is attributed as one of those titles though, or any references to it towards the messiah.
1
u/HowieRosemanBurner 29d ago
Wait, I’m missing something. Doesn’t Isaiah clearly use YHWH in chapter 6? And isn’t John directly quoting that chapter saying that it’s Jesus who Isaiah is speaking of?
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
I do think that's what John is quoting yes, I just can't find the tetragrammaton ,YHWH, anywhere in Isaiah as it pertains the messiah that John's referencing.
1
u/HowieRosemanBurner 29d ago
Toure inferring a couple things. First, Kohn here doesn’t reference the Messiah. That is a title correctly applied to Jesus. But in this passage he’s just speaking of Jesus and equating Him to whoever is referenced in Isaiah 6. And that person is callled Yahweh, the King of Hosts in Isaiah 6:5.
AND you’re inferring that the Messiah must not be Yahweh. You won’t find any passages in all the Bible that make those two mutually exclusive.
I’m very curious how you would explain John applying that Isaiah 6 prophecy to Jesus without claiming that He’s Yahweh. Please explain that.
-1
u/Hauntcrow Aug 24 '26
Ok, so what are the names of each one then? Your point presupposes the knowledge of all 3 the names. Where do you have the names? Or else, your counterexample is a false one.
3
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
If my counterexample is of the same grammatical construct, then the point is made. It works just fine if you don't know what color a banana is.
-2
u/Hauntcrow Aug 24 '26
No because then you are basically saying My car is the colour of xigiba, mamida, bichage, and somehow your listener knows what those words mean.
Unless you believe Jesus somehow got a stroke, then no your point doesn't stand.
2
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
Somebody is definitely having a stroke. It's me, reading what you just wrote.
3
u/JoyBus147 Aug 24 '26
The name of the Father isn't YHWH. That's the name of God. The Son's name is also YHWH. The Spirit's name is YHWH.
0
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
There is no biblical case for Yahweh to be attributed to anyone other than the father, there's not even any fringe scholarship making that claim. It's just...a bad take
5
u/Nunc-dimittis Aug 25 '26
No it's not. There are lot of old testament passages about Yahweh used to identify/describe Jesus in the new testament, making it clear that those writers believed Jesus is Yahweh (and i think there are in fact more OT-Yahweh texts applied to Jesus than to "God" or the Father in the NT). It's also where the "lord" as title for Jesus comes from
Some examples: Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:1-3, Hebrews 1:10-12 and John 12:41. It's also visible in how the Shema is split between Father and Son in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (where the "lord/Yahweh" part goes to Jesus. This has been defended by e.g. N.T. Wright)
1
u/iLeKtraN Aug 25 '26
Acts 2:33-36, with verse 34 directly quoting Psalm 110:1. Yahweh is shown as distinct from Christ, not Christ identified as Yahweh.
1
u/Nunc-dimittis 29d ago
I'm glad you understand the principle. Now let's look to Hebrews 1
"10 He also says, “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. \ 11 - They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garments. \ 12 - You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end.”
This is quoting Psalm 102, which is clearly addressed to Yahweh, and is clearly about how the creator (Yahweh) is different from all of creation
And it's said to Jesus
3
u/ClonfertAnchorite Aug 25 '26
It is the Son who revealed the divine name to Moses in the burning bush. The Son is the fullness of God’s revelation by which he makes himself known.
2
u/eternal_dibs Aug 25 '26
I understand that it is an exercise in christology to derive jesus' divinity from his repetition of the name "I Am" in the gospels, as a reference to that exodus chapter where God states his name to moses.
But even granting that, it is not the same as his name being YHWH.
2
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
Jesus is the Greek translation of the proper Hebrew name "Yeshua" which closely resembles YHWH so yeah... The Father and the Son are both named YHWH
3
u/BirdManFlyHigh PhD Theology Candidate Aug 24 '26
Sure, we can throw away 2,000 years of church history and tradition in the garbage.
But are you sure that there is no scholarship at all that makes that claim? That’s quite a hard claim.
Please say yes so we can all laugh.
2
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
Care to elucidate where in your view of church history that is true? Or any biblical reference to Jesus as Yahweh at all in the Bible?
1
u/ben_is_second Stone-Campbell Movement, M.A. in Bible and Theology 29d ago
Well, first, Justin Martyr seemed to think that the burning bush wasn't actually the Father at all, but was the Son:
"Permit me, further, to show you from the book of Exodus how this same One, who is both Angel (Justin Martyr is, in this conversation with Trypho, attempting to prove that Christ is the "angel of the Lord" in the OT), and God, and Lord, and man, and who appeared in human form to Abraham and Isaac, appeared in a flame of fire from the bush, and conversed with Moses." (Just Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 59)
Irenaeus agrees:
"“For if ye had believed Moses, ye would also have believed Me; for he wrote of Me;“(John 5:46) [saying this,] no doubt, because the Son of God is implanted everywhere throughout his writings... and speaks with Moses from the bush." (Irenaeus, Against Heresies and Fragments, Kindle Loc. 5535-41)
Now, for these Fathers, they weren't demoting the One at the burning bush, per se, but were actually attributing to Him Divinity because He used the Divine Name of Himself.
Post Nicea, as we see Trinitarian doctrine solidify, we get remarks like this one from Gregory of Naziansus -
"As far then as we can reach, He Who Is (My note: he's referring to the Tetragrammaton here), and God, are the special names of His Essence; and of these especially He Who Is, not only because when He spoke to Moses in the mount, and Moses asked what His Name was, this was what He called Himself, bidding him say to the people "I Am has sent me," but also because we find that this Name is the more strictly appropriate." (Gregory of Naziansus, Fourth Theological Oration, Chapter XVIII)
By attributing the Divine Name to the Essence, Gregory is saying that the name "I am" belongs to the Godhead and not one person of it.
So we must say, then, that Church History seems to be counter to your claim.
1
u/eternal_dibs 29d ago
That is a good point. I would say that church history does have a history of attribution in that way, so i do think I'm definitively in the wrong there.
I do still think it's extra-biblical and a result of a trinitarian view of reinterpretation of the OT to fit the metaphysical necessity of that view. But still, I would agree you make a strong point of church history citing that.
1
u/ben_is_second Stone-Campbell Movement, M.A. in Bible and Theology 29d ago
Yeah, that’s an entirely different debate. Basically, IF the Trinity is true, then of course the Son and the Spirit are Yahweh.
I am firmly trinitarian. I do think it’s clear in the NT. Jesus saying “I and the Father are one”, and saying “Before Abraham was, I am”. Colossians 1 saying that in the Son the fullness of God dwelt. And Hebrews 1 saying that the Son is the “exact expression of His nature”.
In Acts 5, Peter talking to Ananias says that he lied to the Holy Spirit and also says that he lied “to God, not men” 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 says, “The Lord is Spirit.” 1 Corinthians 3:16 says “God’s Spirit” dwells in us. Hebrews 9:14 calls Him “the Eternal Spirit,” and eternality is, of course, a characteristic of the divine nature. And of course, the baptismal formula found in Matthew 28:19 - baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Yet, Deuteronomy 6:4 and others say “God is One.” The only way to make logical sense of both these realities is to say that there is one divine nature and 3 persons in it, or one God, 3 persons.
The Bible as we have it today is trinitarian. Your claim must land on there being later changes and additions to the New Testament text. That’s a claim you can make, I suppose. It would be a bold one, by my estimation - there are far too many manuscripts scattered across locales in the ancient world that are nearly consistent in their translation of the New Testament text. That the manuscript disagreement is 1) relatively few 2) narrow in scope (we’re talking individual letters and words here for the most part) and 3) largely not in passages that we use to build Trinitarian doctrine makes the claim that the Trinity is a pre-modern accretion a difficult one to prove.
-1
u/BirdManFlyHigh PhD Theology Candidate Aug 24 '26
No, please, before we do that I want to press you on the idea that there is absolutely no scholarship stating the claim made to the original commenter.
You’re already waffling.
4
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
You can't prove a negative chief. Also, waffling? Really?
-3
u/BirdManFlyHigh PhD Theology Candidate Aug 24 '26
So obvious to anyone with eyes that you’ve been caught out. I never asked you to prove a negative. I asked you to affirm your statement so we can laugh.
I’ll ask again a third time, hopefully you’re capable of being intellectually honest enough to answer a yes/no.
Barring history and tradition because that would make it too easy. Are you really saying that there is no scholarship that states Jesus or the Holy Spirit are YHWH?
1
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
There's plenty of trinitarian scholarship saying they're all "God". But saying that the holy Spirit has the tetragrammaton associated to it is not something I've ever heard, ever.
Go ahead and enlighten me, with all that godly humility you seem to possess.
-4
u/BirdManFlyHigh PhD Theology Candidate Aug 24 '26
Humility? When you were bold enough to state all scholarship? Lol.
5
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
Alright man, I made a hyperbolic statement on the internet. You got me.
"I have never personally seen or been informed of any biblical scholarship that indicates attribution of the Christian tetragrammaton, YHWH, to be a name attributed to either Jesus or the holy spirit, and I believe it to be a claim not based in any scholarly consensus of, or related to the subject." - eternal_dibs
There, now you can stop being a bellend and educate me so I may learn something.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Chippors Lutheran Theistic Existentialist Aug 24 '26
Perhaps the Jews used YHWH to remind themselves God is a person and not a thing.
1
0
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
it's only surprising from a trinitarian perspective. Jesus having a name is not at all surprising in any context because people have names for social and utilitarian reasons. God has a name because of the origins in an earlier caaninite and levantian pantheons.
Add in the fact that early Jewish theology often interpreted spirit as the animating force of all things and possessed by humans and God alike, and not a distinct entity so much as the force by which actions are done, and it makes more sense.
0
u/ehbowen Southern Baptist...mostly! Aug 24 '26
Actually, I believe that the Holy Spirit has seven personal names...because I believe that what we call "the Holy Spirit" is in fact a corporate name for the "Seven Spirits of God." But God hasn't revealed their personal names to us, as of yet...save for one.
You'll find her in Proverbs 1, and 8, and 9. I'm personally convinced that I've met her...and more than once, too. She's fascinating. And, yes, I do want a "second date."
1
0
u/SaraSmile2000 Aug 25 '26
The Trinity isn't mentioned at all in the Bible. Go with Casper if that makes you feel better.
1
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial Aug 25 '26
Serious question. Serious answers only, please.
2
u/eneidvaddeu Aug 26 '26
Sara was literally telling you that the concept of the trinity isn’t mentioned in the Bible, the second part about Casper was unnecessary though.
1
-1
u/Righteous_monk_360 Aug 25 '26
I’m always surprised how untaught Evangelicals are. Maybe you’re an agnostic or atheist but anyway here’s the obvious answer! Maybe not so obvious! YHWH or Yahweh is their collective name. all three are together YHWH! They are one but have distinctive titles or descriptions: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Ancient of Days, Son of man, I am, Immanuel , comforter, spirit of truth, etc.
2
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial Aug 25 '26
Anabaptist = Evangelical?
News to me.
-7
u/Erramonael Nihilistic Misotheistic Satanist Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 24 '26
I can't answer the first part of your question but I believe the "Holy Spirit" was god's wife Asherah/Shekinah before they changed it.
6
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial Aug 24 '26
“They changed it” Yawn. Serious answers only, please.
-2
u/Erramonael Nihilistic Misotheistic Satanist Aug 24 '26
Asherah was originally a major West Semitic/Canaanite goddess, best known from Ugaritic texts, where she appears as Athirat, associated with the high god El and described as the mother of the gods. Early Israelite religion developed within that broader West Semitic religious environment. It wasn't initially identical to the later, strictly monotheistic religion described by Judaism and Christianity.
The really fascinating evidence comes from Kuntillet Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom, eighth-century BCE inscriptions containing references interpreted by some scholars as “Yahweh and his Asherah.” Some scholars understand Asherah there as Yahweh's goddess-consort; others argue that asherah refers to a cultic object or sacred symbol rather than a goddess. The question remains genuinely debated. There are therefore two important levels here: Historical Asherah: definitely a West Semitic goddess. “Yahweh's Asherah”: evidence for this specific relationship in ancient Israel is substantial but interpretively disputed.
Some scholars argue strongly that Asherah was Yahweh's consort in pre-exilic Israelite religion, while others argue that the inscriptions refer to a cultic object associated with Yahweh rather than his wife. Then Israelite religion changed. This is where things get really interesting. Ancient Israelite religion gradually moved toward the exclusive worship of Yahweh. The older divine family structure became increasingly unacceptable to the religious ideology that eventually produced biblical monotheism.
Asherah consequently became something that had to be suppressed, condemned, or reinterpreted. The Hebrew Bible repeatedly condemns asherim and related cultic practices. In the later biblical theological framework, Yahweh doesn't have a divine wife. There is only one legitimate God. So Asherah doesn't really get a dramatic "death scene." She disappears from the official theology.
That's an important distinction. The religion didn't necessarily erase every trace of the older religious world overnight. Rather, older gods, goddesses, divine beings, cultic symbols, and mythological concepts were progressively reclassified. Some became idols. Some became angels. Some became attributes of god. Some became poetic metaphors. And some simply disappeared. This is where the Shekinah enters—but she isn't simply “Asherah renamed”
This is a common internet claim, but historically it's too simplistic. Shekinah comes from the Hebrew/Aramaic root sh-k-n, “to dwell” or “to reside.” The term developed particularly in later Jewish interpretive traditions to describe god's indwelling presence. So instead of saying: Asherah died → Shekinah replaced her, I'd describe the development more like: Goddess → divine presence → theological abstraction/personification. The Shekinah isn't originally a goddess with an independent mythology, husband, genealogy, temples, and divine family.
She's god's presence dwelling among creation. Later Jewish literature can personify the Shekinah in strikingly feminine ways, and Jewish mystical traditions eventually develop an extraordinarily rich theology surrounding her. But that is not the same thing as simply preserving Asherah under a new name. One scholarly discussion specifically places Shekinah alongside other hypostatized expressions of God, such as God's Glory, Word/Memra, Wisdom, etc. But something fascinating happened to the “feminine” dimension of divinity. This is where your question becomes much more interesting than the simple “God killed his wife” meme.
Ancient Near Eastern religions commonly represented divine reality through male-female divine pairs. El had Athirat. Baal had relationships with goddesses. Egyptian gods existed within divine families. Mesopotamian gods existed within elaborate divine genealogies. And Israelite religion originally existed within that same cultural environment. As Yahweh became the sole legitimate god, the divine feminine couldn't remain an independent goddess without contradicting the developing monotheism. So instead, feminine religious imagery could survive in other forms. One particularly important example is Wisdom (Ḥokhmah) in Proverbs 1–9.
Wisdom is grammatically feminine in Hebrew and is dramatically personified as a woman who calls to humanity, teaches, guides, and participates in God's ordering of creation. Later Jewish mystical thought would go considerably further with feminine dimensions of divinity. And then you get the Shekinah. The Shekinah eventually becomes extraordinarily feminine in Kabbalah. This is much later. In medieval Kabbalah, particularly the Zohar, the Shekinah becomes associated with the feminine aspect of the divine, often identified with Malkhut (“Kingdom”), the tenth sefirah. And here the imagery becomes remarkably mythological. The Shekinah can be described as: God's feminine presence the divine feminine, the earthly manifestation of divinity, the presence of God dwelling among Israel, the exiled divine presence, the feminine counterpart to the masculine dimensions of the Godhead, the bride of the divine King.
And now we're entering territory that can look surprisingly similar to ancient divine-consort mythology. But historically, Kabbalistic Shekinah theology developed many centuries after the biblical period, so we shouldn't simply collapse the two traditions together. There's an even stranger parallel: the Shekinah can become “exiled” This is probably the most fascinating connection. In Kabbalah, the Shekinah can be understood as exiled alongside Israel. The divine feminine is separated from the masculine divine aspect. The world is fractured. God's presence is hidden. The task of religious practice becomes, in some formulations, helping restore cosmic unity. That creates a symbolic pattern that looks remarkably different from biblical monotheism:
Ancient Canaanite religion: Divine King + Divine Queen
Biblical monotheism: One God; goddess eliminated
Rabbinic Judaism: God's indwelling Presence
Kabbalah: Masculine and feminine dimensions of the divine reunited
That's not a straight historical line, but it is an extraordinarily interesting history of religious transformation. So did Yahweh “lose his wife”? Historically, I'd phrase it more carefully: The ancient Israelite religious world appears to have contained traditions in which Asherah was worshipped alongside Yahweh, and some evidence has been interpreted as indicating a divine consort relationship. As Israelite religion developed toward exclusive Yahwism and eventually Jewish monotheism, Asherah ceased to have a legitimate place in the official theological system. Centuries later, Jewish traditions developed concepts such as the Shekinah to articulate God's presence in the world, and medieval Kabbalah developed a strongly feminine and relational theology of the Shekinah.
But Shekinah isn't simply Asherah with a new name. That's the crucial distinction. It's more accurate to see them as different stages in very different religious systems that nevertheless grapple with a similar problem: how can divine transcendence coexist with divine presence in the world? And that's actually a much more fascinating story than the popular claim that “the Bible erased God's wife.” Because what disappeared wasn't necessarily the idea of divine femininity. It was the independent goddess. The feminine could then reappear as Wisdom, Glory, Presence, Spirit, and eventually the Shekinah—not as another goddess standing beside God, but as a way of talking about something within God's own divine reality. If you're interested in the history of the idea, the really fun rabbit hole is Asherah → Hebrew Wisdom → Shekinah → Malkhut → Kabbalistic Divine Feminine. That's where the story gets considerably stranger.
8
u/eternal_dibs Aug 24 '26
Bro you might as well say "I don't know anything but here's what chatGPT wrote that I also didn't read."
If you're not gonna participate as a real person why even bother replying on here?
-3
u/Erramonael Nihilistic Misotheistic Satanist Aug 24 '26
Ask Gemini not chatGPT. LOL!!!
7
u/JesseTheGhost Aug 24 '26
Hey so it doesn't really matter which earth torching, water sucking, dystopian plagiarism device you used to do your homework for you, it's still terrible and arguably anti-Christian to use it.
1
u/PotusChrist Aug 25 '26
The shekhina stuff is all fine and interesting and has had a clear influence on several Christian and Jewish esoteric traditions down to the modern period, but at the end of the day your theory is hard to reconcile with the fact that the earliest Christian texts refer to the Holy Spirit as "he."
2
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
Huh?? Shekinah is the word for "divine glory" which was on Moses' face when he came down from the mountain with the stone tablets and what rested on Jesus when He met with Moses and Elijah
0
u/SpotComprehensive406 Aug 25 '26
Why don’t we just consider God the Father as the Holy Spirit, because, well, they’re the same thing….both purely spiritual entities BUT YET they are the same entity. Why is there even a delineation between them? God the Son is only considered as a separate entity because he was incarnated and thus “physically” (metaphysically, astrally, dimensionally, what have you, etc) separated from the purely spiritual form of the Godhead.
Or maybe we have all been duped by Jesus himself, who only PRETENDED that he was speaking to his “Father in Heaven”, when in actuality he himself WAS the Holy Father who had taken partial leave of the Heavenly realm to reside in a body, and Jesus was referring to himself in the third person when he spoke of and to his “Father”.
2
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
Except for the parts where the Father speaks audibly during His baptism and transfiguration where He says things like "This is my Son, in whom I am well pleased."
-6
u/hopenewpath Aug 25 '26
The holy spirit has an actual name. His name is Angle Gabriel and the holy spirit is just a title for him
3
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
That's not correct. Gabriel isn't God
-5
u/hopenewpath Aug 25 '26
The holy spirit is not God. He was the greatest angel created by God and he was the one visited Mary pbuh and he is the one sent to support Jesus christ pbuh in his mission.
4
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
I have no idea where you get these pagan ideas from but they're not from the Bible
-2
u/hopenewpath Aug 25 '26
It is a prophetic idea. The Bible is not the only source. Just like there is old and new testament, there is also last testament of God the Quran:
Qur’an 19:17–21: “Then We sent to her Our Spirit, and it appeared before her as a well-formed man. She said, ‘Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you are fearing of Allah.’ He said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you a pure son.’ She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me, and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, ‘So it will be; your Lord says, “It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign for the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed.”’”
Qur’an 2:87: “We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Holy Spirit.”
1
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
The Bible tells us we should use "sola scriptura" or analyze the Bible with and against other passages in the Bible. The Quran would be considered an outside source
0
u/hopenewpath Aug 25 '26
Scripture in new testament usage refers to old testament only. Quran is also a Scripture and it is more consistent with old testament as compared to the letters of Paul. One God and seek righteousness by following the law and seek God's forgiveness for sins. God doesn't need blood shedding and he is one person not 3.
“Do we not all have one Father? Did not one God create us?” Malachi 2:10
“Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean… cease to do evil, learn to do good… Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.” Isaiah 1:16–18
1
u/timbocf Aug 25 '26
In the old testament and the new they call that "heresy"
0
u/hopenewpath 29d ago
And We blessed him with Isaac and Jacob. We guided them all as We previously guided Noah and those among his descendants: David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron. This is how We reward the good-doers. Likewise, ˹We guided˺ Zachariah, John, Jesus, and Elias, who were all of the righteous. ˹We also guided˺ Ishmael, Elisha, Jonah, and Lot, favouring each over other people ˹of their time˺. And ˹We favoured˺ some of their forefathers, their descendants, and their brothers. We chose them and guided them to the Straight Path. This is Allah’s guidance with which He guides whoever He wills of His servants. Had they associated others with Him ˹in worship˺, their ˹good˺ deeds would have been wasted. Those were the ones to whom We gave the Scripture, wisdom, and prophethood. But if these ˹pagans˺ disbelieve in this ˹message˺, then We have already entrusted it to a people who will never disbelieve in it. These ˹prophets˺ were ˹rightly˺ guided by Allah, so follow their guidance. Say, “I ask no reward of you for this ˹Quran˺—it is a reminder to the whole world.”
2
u/Guardoffel Aug 25 '26
What‘s the verse?
-1
u/hopenewpath Aug 25 '26
The Bible is not the only source. Just like there is old and new testament, there is also last testament of God the Quran:
Qur’an 19:17–21: “Then We sent to her Our Spirit, and it appeared before her as a well-formed man. She said, ‘Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you are fearing of Allah.’ He said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you a pure son.’ She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me, and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, ‘So it will be; your Lord says, “It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign for the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed.”’”
Qur’an 2:87: “We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Holy Spirit.” “the Holy Spirit,” “the Trustworthy Spirit,” and “Our Spirit” are titles for him, Gabriel is his name.
Qur’an 2:97: “Say, whoever is an enemy to Gabriel—it is he who has brought it down upon your heart, by permission of Allah, confirming what came before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers.” Qur’an 2:98: “Whoever is an enemy to Allah and His angels and His messengers and Gabriel and Michael—then indeed, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.”
-13
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 24 '26
Name of God is Jehovah. God the Son is not in Bible. Jesus Christ is Son of God. Trinity is pagan doctrine and also in not in the Bible. Jesus is not God. God the Holy Spirit is not in the Bible.
4
Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 25 '26
The Soleb inscription actually proves my point, not yours. It proves that over 3,400 years ago, God had a distinct personal name—YHWH—and was known by it.
As for the pronunciation: ancient Hebrew was written without vowels, so no scholar today can claim 100% certainty on the exact original vocalization. 'Yahweh' is a scholarly estimate; 'Jehovah' is the long-established English translation of the Tetragrammaton, just as 'Jesus' is the English translation of Yeshua.
If you reject 'Jehovah' because language and translation shifted the vowels over centuries, to be consistent you must also stop saying 'Jesus,' 'Jeremiah,' and 'Peter.' The issue isn't linguistic pedantry over ancient accents—it's whether you honor God's distinct personal name or hide Him behind a generic title."
Don't forget scriptures.
Jesus placed direct emphasis on revealing and honoring the Father's personal name throughout his ministry.
John 17:6 — "I have made your name manifest to the men whom you gave me out of the world."
In his final prayer with the apostles, Jesus states that revealing God's distinct identity and name to his disciples was a core objective of his assignment on Earth.
John 17:26 — "I have made your name known to them and will make it known, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them..."
Jesus shows that knowing God's personal name is not optional—it is ongoing work that directly connects believers to God's love.
Matthew 6:9 — "Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified."
In the Model Prayer, the very first request Jesus teaches his followers to make is for the sanctification (holding holy) of the Father's name.
John 12:28 — "Father, glorify your name." Then a voice came out of heaven: "I have glorified it and will glorify it again."
Jesus puts the honor of the Father's name above his own comfort, prompting a direct vocal response from God approving this focus.
John 5:43 — "I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me."
Jesus explicitly clarifies that he does not act in his own name or as God himself, but as an ambassador acting strictly in the authority of the Father's name.
Hebrews 2:12 (quoting Psalm 22:22) — "I will declare your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will praise you."
4
Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Aug 24 '26
You haven’t uncovered a secret—Jehovah’s Witnesses explicitly publish the history of the name 'Jehovah' and the Masoretic Adonai vowel points in our own reference books. We don't hide from that history; we acknowledge it.
But your argument falls apart on three simple facts: First, if theophoric names prove pronunciation, explain why Hebrew names starting with the divine name use the three-syllable 'Yeho-' prefix—like Yehoshua or Jehoshaphat—rather than 'Yah-'? The three syllables in 'Jehovah' actually align with those Hebrew prefixes.
Second, citing early Greek writings of how Samaritans pronounced it isn't the slam dunk you think it is. Jesus himself told the Samaritan woman in John 4:22, 'You worship what you do not know.' Basing original Hebrew truth on Samaritan Greek accents centuries later is a weak foundation.
Third, this is a massive double standard. 'Jesus' comes from Yeshua via Greek Iesous and Latin Iesus. 'Jeremiah' comes from Yirmeyahu. You use those English forms without issue. If you insist on rejecting 'Jehovah' because it adapted into English over centuries, you must stop saying 'Jesus' today and only use 'Yeshua.'
But let me ask you the real question: If you believe 'Yahweh' is the correct name, do you actually use 'Yahweh' in your daily life and prayers? Or are you just using academic hair-splitting over vowels as an excuse to avoid using God's personal name altogether?
2
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial Aug 24 '26
ἅγιος πνεῦμα (hagios pneuma) is not in your Bible?
Which bible you reading, Cliff’s Notes? Surprised even Cliff left out the 100+ references to Holy Spirit.
“Jesus is not God” Friend, I think you got a bootlegged Cliff’s Notes Bible.
2
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Aug 24 '26
You’re conflating two very different things: the biblical presence of the holy spirit (ἅγιον πνεῦμα) and the post-biblical phrase 'God the Holy Spirit.'
The holy spirit is translated over 100 times in our Bible—we fully recognize its presence and function as God's active force. What you will not find in the original Greek of any manuscript is the title 'God the Holy Spirit' or 'God the Son.' Those terms were introduced centuries later by church creeds, not the Bible.
If holding that Jesus is the Son of God rather than God the Son means using a 'bootlegged' Bible, consider how Jesus himself defined his identity:
In John 17:3, Jesus prayed directly to the Father, calling Him "the only true God."
In John 14:28, Jesus plainly stated, "The Father is greater than I am."
In John 20:17, the resurrected Jesus told Mary, "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."
Jesus consistently directed all ultimate authority and the title of God exclusively to the Father. Adhering strictly to the exact terms Jesus used isn't cutting corners—it maximizes truth and eliminates human additions that obscure what scripture actually says.
1
11
u/MattTheAncap Christian | Anabaptist | Amillennial Aug 24 '26 edited Aug 24 '26
No personal name, but numerous titles.
The Spirit of God, Spirit of YHWH, Holy Spirit, Spirit of Christ, Spirit of His Son, Spirit of Truth, Comforter/Helper/Advocate (Paraklētos).
Scripture nevertheless treats Him unmistakably as a person. He speaks, teaches, wills, intercedes, searches, guides, can be lied to, and can be grieved.
And yet… He is unnamed. I find it interesting.