Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mike@turing.cs.unm.edu (Michael I. Bushnell) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: gulf crisis, spiritual help for peace Message-ID: Date: 23 Sep 90 06:03:31 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of No Money, Albuquerque, New Mexico Lines: 32 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article lae@io.UUCP (Larry Enos) writes: Therefore, I cannot agree with you that you can approach God by any name. You might call this bigotry, but that is only because you do not understand the importance of His Name. ... If you call Allah, Buddha, Gaia, Krishna, etc., you might get those persons (although it's unlikely since they either never existed or are now dead), but you will never get the unique, true, living God. I wouldn't put it this way, and I'm somewhat dismayed that the author characterized his ideas as typical of Jews and Christians. On an exegetic basis, there is considerable debate about the meaning of the tetragrammaton. It is traditionally translated into most languages elliptically rather than as a proper name. Most English bibles use the word "LORD" written in small caps, following a tradition started (I think) by the KJV. Most Christians don't think there is a special import to the name YHWH as a proper name. Exegesis of that passage in Exodus, therefore, tends to focus on it as a variant of the verb to be. Also, note that Allah is Arabic for God. It is the direct translation. The Qur'an refers to Allah as the same god as YHWH. Arabic Bibles uniformly use Allah as we use God. I don't know what they use for the tetragrammaton. -- Michael I. Bushnell \ This above all; to thine own self be true LIBERTE, EGALITE, FRATERNITE \ And it must follow, as the night the day, mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu /\ Thou canst not be false to any man. CARPE DIEM / \ Farewell: my blessing season this in thee!