# Formality with God



## panjabigator

How is God addressed in your various languages?  Are you formal or informal?  If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively?  I don't want to tread to far into religious waters, however I had no idea of the concept of using God's name in vain until just recently, and I have grown up in the United States (if that makes any difference).  In Indian culture, the most informal person is invoked for God to imply familiarity (i.e. you have a very close relationship with God so it makes perfect sense to be informal).  God's name is also used in what my friends would describe as "in vain."  I feel like Hindi and Panjabi speakers address God vocatively all the time.


----------



## la reine victoria

panjabigator said:


> How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal? If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively? I don't want to tread to far into religious waters, however I had no idea of the concept of using God's name in vain until just recently, and I have grown up in the United States (if that makes any difference). In Indian culture, the most informal person is invoked for God to imply familiarity (i.e. you have a very close relationship with God so it makes perfect sense to be informal). God's name is also used in what my friends would describe as "in vain." I feel like Hindi and Panjabi speakers address God vocatively all the time.


 
In formal church worship in the UK, God is usually addressed as Lord or Almighty God.  In the prayer of confession and repentance we say,  'Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, we have sinned against you and against our fellow men, in thought and word and deed....etc.

During prayers, sometimes said by one of the congregation, each phase ends with, "Lord, in your mercy...."  Response, "Hear our prayer."

In private, when I talk to God, I use my own form of address.  It is informal but still reverential.

LRV


----------



## gaer

panjabigator said:


> How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal? If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively? I don't want to tread to far into religious waters, however I had no idea of the concept of using God's name in vain until just recently, and I have grown up in the United States (if that makes any difference). In Indian culture, the most informal person is invoked for God to imply familiarity (i.e. you have a very close relationship with God so it makes perfect sense to be informal). God's name is also used in what my friends would describe as "in vain." I feel like Hindi and Panjabi speakers address God vocatively all the time.


German uses "du" to refer to God, which normally is reserved for family members, close friends, etc., so address is "informal". This, I believe, was set in motion by Luther. Our German members can give you more information, but I believe what I just told you is essentially correct.

Gaer


----------



## vince

English uses informal, the proof is that "Thou"/"Thee" is used with God, with are the archaic informal forms of "you".

French and Spanish also use "Tu", the informal form.

I heard that Korean does not use the most informal form for God, is that true?


----------



## Kajjo

gaer said:


> German uses "du" to refer to God, which normally is reserved for family members, close friends, etc., so address is "informal". This, I believe, was set in motion by Luther. Our German members can give you more information, but I believe what I just told you is essentially correct. Gaer


Yes, right. Let me add that _using God in vain_ is not viewed negatively in Germany. Almost everyone swears a few time per day using phrases along "Mein Gott!" or "Um Gottes Willen!". The more religious people are, the more they maybe try to avoid it -- mostly unsuccessfully, though. There are even many other idioms and joking comments containing some kind of informal and non-serious referral to God.

Kajjo


----------



## Etcetera

panjabigator said:


> How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal?


In Russian, the informal "Ты" is used (as well as in English, Spanish and French), but it's always written with capital letter, as well as the pronounы"Твой". But the general tone of all prayers is very, very respectful (but what would you expect?).



> If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively?


Yes. The Bible tells the believers not to pronounce God's name in vain. However, exclamations like Боже мой! are often to be heard here. I myself prefer to avoid that and say something like "Oh Merlin!"  , but I believe that "My God!" is better than "Damn it!"


----------



## ampurdan

The traditional Catalan form of address was "Vós", which is a form with a similar verb conjugation to the French "vous". In Catalan, we've been using two formal forms of address: "vós" and "vostè". "Vostè" is analogous to Spanish "usted". Today, the normal formal form of address is "vostè", although in some formal writings the "vós" conjugation is still used.

People used this "vós"/"vostè" difference to make differences in treatement. For instance, my father used "vós" when he was talking to his father-in-law, but he used "vostè" when addressing his mother-in-law. He thought that "vós" is more "reverential".

I've read that "vós" was used as a form of address to one's parents and grand-parents as a reverential form of address, while "vostè" was used with regards to foreigners or people one did not know very well.

Anyway, the traditional prayers in Catalan use the "vós" form of address. However, I think that nowadays the Catalan believers normally use the familiar "tu".

In Spanish, the traditional prayers use "tú", the familiar form of address.


----------



## maxiogee

The predominant religion in Ireland for centuries has been Roman Catholicism. The English language and Irish language formal addressing of God are both based on the Latin used in Christianity since ancient times. God is rarely addressed formal in spoken language outside of a church setting.

Unfortunately many peopel address their God loudly and very informally in public many times a day. Usually with a genitive and an expletive.


----------



## TraductoraPobleSec

As for using the name of God in vain, I think there is also a difference between Catholic and Protestant cultures and what is considered a blasphemy in one culture is not in the other. Not so long ago, Jesús (after all, a representation of God according to Christianity) was a quite common name for boys in Spain and I was told this would be unthinkable in Protestant cultures. In fact, it is shocking to them that a person can bear such name.

Did I understand this right?


----------



## Etcetera

TraductoraPobleSec said:


> Not so long ago, Jesús (after all, a representation of God according to Christianity) was a quite common name for boys in Spain and I was told this would be unthinkable in Protestant cultures. In fact, it is shocking to them that a person can bear such name.


I can't imagine giving a child the name of Jesus in Orthodox countries, either. It would be really shocking here.


----------



## maxiogee

TraductoraPobleSec said:


> As for using the name of God in vain, I think there is also a difference between Catholic and Protestant cultures and what is considered a blasphemy in one culture is not in the other. Not so long ago, Jesús (after all, a representation of God according to Christianity) was a quite common name for boys in Spain and I was told this would be unthinkable in Protestant cultures. In fact, it is shocking to them that a person can bear such name.
> 
> Did I understand this right?


 
Not just Protestants - Catholic Ireland never produced one boy named Jesus - to the best of my knowledge.
Catholic children in Ireland tended to be named after saints.


----------



## ampurdan

I think that it's just a Hispanic thing. I doubt that there are men named Jesus in France or Gesù in Italy.


----------



## TraductoraPobleSec

Etcetera said:


> I can't imagine giving a child the name of Jesus in Orthodox countries, either. It would be really shocking here.


 
If you go to Spain (I am not certain about Latin America) you will see that there is quite a lot of men called Jesús. I guess that this gives them a hard time when they go abroad!

I said before that naming kids after Jesús was typical of Catholic countries, but, come to think of it, I have never heard of a Gesù in Italy or of a Jesus in Ireland. I don't know about countries such as Poland or Portugal. I think it's very much a Spanish thing and wonder why...


----------



## TraductoraPobleSec

Exactly, Maxiogee and Ampurdan. This is just what I was wondering...


----------



## Etcetera

TraductoraPobleSec said:


> I think it's very much a Spanish thing and wonder why...


Perhaps because it was Spain where Catholic influence was especially strong. Every time I think about Catholicism, I first think about the Vatican and Spain.


----------



## maxiogee

Etcetera said:


> Perhaps because it was Spain where Catholic influence was especially strong. Every time I think about Catholicism, I first think about Vatican and Spain.


 
 And not the Vatican and Italy?


----------



## Etcetera

maxiogee said:


> And not the Vatican and Italy?


No. The Vatican and Spain.


----------



## maxiogee

Anyway - we're getting o/t here. Naming children Jesus isn't about the formality.

I forgot to mention that the use of 'the holy name' in swearing is frowned on by older people here and tolerated by younger ones because it is so common. I think that many of them do object but don't voice their opinions for fear of appearing stuffy and for fear of getting a thumping.


----------



## ampurdan

I think that the fact that there are men named after Jesus in Spain has something to do with Catholicism and the fact that this innovation had no influence in other Catholic countries might have something to do with Spanish cultural ostracism during the centuries that followed the Reformation.


----------



## Vagabond

In Greece you address God in an informal manner (like German and "du"), but the first letter is always capital, like Etcetera described for Russia (Σε, Σου, Εσύ etc). The rule about using God's name in vain exists in books, but good luck applying it; people use expressions like "oh my God" (etc) every day and all the time. Swearing in the name of God is frowned upon by some (e.g. I swear to God), and cursing the name of God (or Jesus, or Mary) is frowned upon by everyone (it even makes my blood boil, and I do not consider myself religious).


----------



## ampurdan

Conversely, in Spain, expressions like "Oh, my God!" are deemed a little old-fashioned and affected. Swearing in the name of God is done sometimes, but it is not frowned upon (however, one is not supposed to do so in formal contexts). Spaniards curse the name of God and anything sacred to the Catholic religion millions of times every day. Most of these cursings have even lost their meaning and become mere rude language to many.


----------



## Fernando

I agree with Ampurdan.

Sometimes you would hear "Vos, Señor". "Vos" is a formal out-fashioned form in Spain Spanish.

The usual way is "Tú" or "Vos". "Vos"="Tú" in some American countries.


----------



## xrayspex

_If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively? _


Surely you've noticed that it's ok to say "damn" on TV, but not "goddam".  That's usually not even said in movies with other explicit language.


----------



## panjabigator

And that's another thing I have noticed recently.  I don't place any weight on the word God because I've always referred to God in Panjabi, the word being _/wahegurui/_.  I would never say anything "blasphemous" about God in Panjabi but in English it just never dawns on me that I am using the same word, so I would say "goddamn."  Living with my current roommates has had a sanitizing effect on me; I can never mutter even under my breath "goddamn" because of how offensive it would be to them.


----------



## danielfranco

Oh gosh, gee, guldurn it... Say it like that, and no one can complain too much of you using the name of God in vain.
However, when I do use the name of the Lord in vain and to avoid confusion and make sure that people understand that I meant to be offensive, I often prefer to use this ejaculation:
"Jesus H. Christ jumped up in a horse-drawn cart!!"

Anyway, I always found it peculiar that in Spanish we address God publicly with much deference by using many noble titles for him (Lord, Our Father Who Art in Heaven, Heavenly Father, Lord of Hosts, etc.) and proclaiming that His Will be done, etc., and still speak in the familiar "tú" form (thou/thee).
And Protestant people, especially here in the States, sure name their kids "Jesus", except they go for other variants of the name: Joshua, Jesse, etc.

I think...


----------



## ghoti

danielfranco said:


> And Protestant people, especially here in the States, sure name their kids "Jesus", except they go for other variants of the name: Joshua, Jesse, etc.
> 
> I think...


 
Just because two names are synonymous or even have the same etymology doesn't mean naming a child one is because of the other. I don't think any native English speaker in North America would name a child Joshua in honor of Jesus [except maybe a wild fan of the Joseph Girzone "Joshua" books... but even then I'd be surprised]. It would just be considered too strange, and the kid would be guaranteed to be teased or even taunted in school. What parent would do that on purpose?


----------



## gaer

panjabigator said:


> And that's another thing I have noticed recently. I don't place any weight on the word God because I've always referred to God in Panjabi, the word being _/wahegurui/_. I would never say anything "blasphemous" about God in Panjabi but in English it just never dawns on me that I am using the same word, so I would say "goddamn." Living with my current roommates has had a sanitizing effect on me; I can never mutter even under my breath "goddamn" because of how offensive it would be to them.


It sounds to me as though your roomates are fairly conservative. 

I've never understood why the same people who object to "God damn it", said in frustration for any number of reasons, will probably think that this is far more immoral than saying: "I hate you." Or even, "I don't like you."

I've always argued that it is the intent BEHIND such words that makes them objectionable, not the words themselves.

Gaer


----------



## Athaulf

maxiogee said:


> The predominant religion in Ireland for centuries has been Roman Catholicism. The English language and Irish language formal addressing of God are both based on the Latin used in Christianity since ancient times. God is rarely addressed formal in spoken language outside of a church setting.
> 
> Unfortunately many peopel address their God loudly and very informally in public many times a day. Usually with a genitive and an expletive.



In Croatia, Catholicism has also been a predominant religion since time immemorial, and yet some Croatian swearwords involving God, Jesus, and saints are such that I'd probably be banned from this forum if I cited them. Curiously, it's often the people from the most religious and conservative parts of the country that have the most elaborate and extreme repertoires of such swearwords. 

Some grossly blasphemous expressions of anger that pair the name of God with the most vulgar sexual swearwords are so popular that they can be heard on every corner, even from some otherwise quite religious people. But swearing is generally perceived as a much less serious matter in Croatia than in the English-speaking world, and pretty much any Croatian swearword is perceived as a far milder expression than its literal English translation would be.


----------



## danielfranco

ghoti said:


> Just because two names are synonymous or even have the same etymology doesn't mean naming a child one is because of the other. I don't think any native English speaker in North America would name a child Joshua in honor of Jesus [except maybe a wild fan of the Joseph Girzone "Joshua" books... but even then I'd be surprised]. It would just be considered too strange, and the kid would be guaranteed to be teased or even taunted in school. What parent would do that on purpose?


 
I sometimes imagine that in the beginning the brand new Catholics in Mexico (the conquered natives) did name their children with important names from the Bible to transfer some mystical protection to them, or because of worshipful reverence... Maybe. But I guess in the present, and for many years now, people have named their children with names they like rather than with names of portent.
So what I'm saying is that the custom of naming a child José María Jesus might not really be meant as a homage to those particular personages, but just because the parents like those names. Who knows?

Evidently, I don't.


----------



## tvdxer

ampurdan said:


> Conversely, in Spain, expressions like "Oh, my God!" are deemed a little old-fashioned and affected. Swearing in the name of God is done sometimes, but it is not frowned upon (however, one is not supposed to do so in formal contexts). Spaniards curse the name of God and anything sacred to the Catholic religion millions of times every day. Most of these cursings have even lost their meaning and become mere rude language to many.



That's sad.  

In English, we longer have a distinction between formal and informal forms of "you" as most other European languages do, but in prayers God is often addressed using the very old-fashioned "thou" (never heard in normal modern English), which was the informal second-person, akin to "du", "tu", and "tyi", several centuries past.  

I read, with some surprise, that in the Hindi language the extremely informal "tu" (what a cognate!) is used to address God.


----------



## ElaineG

> I don't think any native English speaker in North America would name a child Joshua in honor of Jesus [except maybe a wild fan of the Joseph Girzone "Joshua" books... but even then I'd be surprised].


 
Cultural footnote : [Joshua/Yehoshua or whatever was a biblical Jewish name before there was another Jew named Yeshua or Joshua or whomever that was Jesus.  My brother, my great-grandfather and dozens of other Jewish Joshes I know are Joshua _but definitely not named after "the" Jesus.]_

 That said, in my religion, on the one hand, G-d is so G-dlike that you are not even supposed to write his name, but on the other we also have a long tradition of kvetching to him very intimately.


----------



## viera

Using the 'tu' form to address God may be a relatively recent development. Back in the sixties (in Canada) I learned the Lord's Prayer with the 'vous form': "Notre père qui *êtes* aux cieux, que *Votre* nom soit sanctifié..." But now it is said with the 'tu' form. I wonder when the change occurred.


----------



## Fernando

Athaulf said:


> In Croatia, Catholicism has also been a predominant religion since time immemorial, and yet some Croatian swearwords involving God, Jesus, and saints are such that I'd probably be banned from this forum if I cited them. Curiously, it's often the people from the most religious and conservative parts of the country that have the most elaborate and extreme repertoires of such swearwords.



There is no contradiction. The most religious peoples are most blasphemious.

If you are not interested in God you are not probably swearing with His name (unless you are interested in provoking other people).


----------



## Zsanna

In Hungarian we use the equivalent form of the German "du"/French "tu". But I would not call this form "informal". 
Even if the same is used for friends and relations, apart from addressing God, we also use it in students' and university teachers' relations or  among colleagues (even with great difference in age or hierarchy). In all the cases a serious respect _can_ be expressed by this form: a strong bond with true respect. 
A lot more than by the "formal" form. 
This latter seems almost hypocritical as part of an obligatory (= not sincere) politeness.

It took me about 15 years to get used to the French way of using "vous" (formal form) here, especially with students. 
For me, for a long time, it did not mean politeness, just "pushing the other person away from me" - which seemed to me not only impolite but also unfriendly and counter productive if I want to be trusted and freely consulted... (Students shouldn't be afraid to discuss their ideas, put questions to their teachers...)

The Russian practice of writing the same "informal" word in capital seems to indicate to me a similarity in the perception of "I can only trust/respect/be true to, etc. the one I feel close to me" and it does not stop me from respecting him/her. 
Although we use capitals to indicate sg particularly important to us (at least traditionally, the latest fashion is different) even less than in French or in Italian (and therefore in English and in German).

I did not understand really the meaning behind the other question. Whoever is religious _will_ consider it a sin to use God's name for no reason (Roman Catholics in Hungary) and whoever is not will act as his/her education suggests it to him/her. (Because even if not religious, one may respect others' beliefs and make an effort...) Of course, in most of our swearings and curses God also appears fairly often, just like in other languages. But those expressions wouldn't have their strength without carrying something "heavy"/"shocking" in them...


----------



## Poetic Device

My family and I say things such as "heavenly Father" and "merciful GOD".  For the most part we consider our relationship with HIM informal because we pray to him all the time and talk to him as if he were right in front of us.Saying the Lord's name in vain does happen.  It is looked down on and we try to refrain from such things.



Fernando said:


> If you are not interested in God you are not probably swearing with His name (unless you are interested in provoking other people).


 

Sorry, I have to disagree with this.


----------



## Jenniferrrr

Fernando said:


> If you are not interested in God you are not probably swearing with His name (unless you are interested in provoking other people).


 
God has very very recently come into my life... about 2 months ago you could say that I had no interest whatsoever. Yet "oh my god" and "jesus christ" were predominant expressions in my vocabulary. Now that I am more aware, I am working very hard now to eliminate these sorts of expressions, they are so automatic I keep finding myself slipping. I don't know why or when I starting using them, but I know it definitely was not to provoke other people. I think they are just expressions that are used so often that the real meaning has been taken away.


----------



## Fernando

Poetic Device said:


> Sorry, I have to disagree with this.



I enjoy to be disagreed, but Can you explain further why?

I am not saying I agree with swearing and naming God all the time. I am saying that cultures that have a strong influence of religion have also many swear words based on religion.

As a Catholic, I do not enjoy those expressions, but I understand that most of them have lost their meaning.

As an example, it was a commonplace to laugh at the constant use of "God" ("thanks God", Let God want, etc.) by the former president of Spanish Communist Party (an atheist). Obviously, they were just expressions.


----------



## latinasoy

Unfortunately I think just the name "God" is overrated in many cultures and used in many sentences without realizing perhaps it is in fact being use in 'vain'.


----------



## Poetic Device

Fernando said:


> I enjoy to be disagreed, but Can you explain further why?
> 
> I am not saying I agree with swearing and naming God all the time. I am saying that cultures that have a strong influence of religion have also many swear words based on religion.
> 
> As a Catholic, I do not enjoy those expressions, but I understand that most of them have lost their meaning.
> 
> As an example, it was a commonplace to laugh at the constant use of "God" ("thanks God", Let God want, etc.) by the former president of Spanish Communist Party (an atheist). Obviously, they were just expressions.


 

Yes, I can explain, and if this is off topic I apologise ahead of time.  

Your quote was "If you are not interested in God you are not probably swearing with His name (unless you are interested in provoking other people)."  I know a lot of athiests and what not hat curse by using his name with every other breath, and they are not looking to provke anything or anyone. That is just how they talk.  Also, it's like what you just said:  These profanities have become part of our daily lives, so no one really thinks about the meaning behind the words.  It's like the word good-bye if you will.  You always say it, but not that many people know that it is a short version of "GOD be with ye".  Do you know what i mean?  Or should i keep going?


----------



## ghoti

I agree with Poetic Device. Sometimes saying "Oh, God" is almost like a vocal tic that people don't even realize they are saying. Much the same as "like" and "I mean." In the US it's common to hear people say thing like this: Like, I saw her, like, yesterday, I mean, she was so fat I, like, hardly recognized her, you know?


----------



## Nanon

ampurdan said:


> Conversely, in Spain, expressions like "Oh, my God!" are deemed a little old-fashioned and affected. Swearing in the name of God is done sometimes, but it is not frowned upon (however, one is not supposed to do so in formal contexts).



In French, like in English and Spanish, exclamations like "Oh my God!" are generally accepted, however swearing with the _name _of God is still considered as very offensive. In printing, an abridged form is often found.


----------



## Outsider

viera said:


> Using the 'tu' form to address God may be a relatively recent development. Back in the sixties (in Canada) I learned the Lord's Prayer with the 'vous form': "Notre père qui *êtes* aux cieux, que *Votre* nom soit sanctifié..." But now it is said with the 'tu' form. I wonder when the change occurred.


The forms of address used with God are not always the same. In formal contexts like the Lord's Prayer, he is addressed formally (I'm sure this is still the case today*). But in contexts of intimacy with the believer, he is often addressed informally.

* Alas, I spoke too soon. See below.


----------



## Nanon

viera said:


> Using the 'tu' form to address God may be a relatively recent development. Back in the sixties (in Canada) I learned the Lord's Prayer with the 'vous form': "Notre père qui *êtes* aux cieux, que *Votre* nom soit sanctifié..." But now it is said with the 'tu' form. I wonder when the change occurred.



It is relatively recent in the Catholic church - it is one of the changes induced by the Vatican II council in the mid-60's. Since I am not a practicing Catholic I searched for info... and I found this tread, among others.
The Lord's Prayer is now "Notre Père qui es aux cieux"... but the Hail Mary is still with "vous" ("Je vous salue Marie"). 

Interestingly, Protestants always used the "tu" as a symbol of direct communication with God, while Catholics used the "vous" in sign of respect.


----------



## Outsider

Interesting indeed! I don't think the prayer has been updated in Portuguese -- at least, not in Portugal. _Pai Nosso, que estais_ _no céu_ (not _estás no céu_)...


----------



## conquer

_How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal? If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively?_

I think that *first you must know the name of your god,* and *second you must repeat the question again.*

*The word god is not a personal name but a title.*

According to the bible, as an example, the *name of the god mentioned in it is YHWH (possibly pronounced as Yah-hoo-eh)*

Then, if you use this name YHWH in vain, it should view it as negatively according to the biblical statements.

*If you use the title god in vain, well, that is not the name of any deity but of Gott an ancient pagan idol, and from the biblical point it won't matter at all.*

The Hebrew narration of the Torah specifies clearly that it is the name and not the title the one to be used in vain in order to receive a "punishment" by violating a commandment.

What is the translation back into Hebrew of the title *god*? In Hebrew the word is *elohim*, in Greek is *Theous or Dyos*, in Spanish is *Dios*, in other languages is *Deu*, *and so forth*. All of these words are titles and not names.


----------



## jazyk

> Interestingly, Protestants always used the "tu" as a symbol of direct communication with God, while Catholics used the "vous" in sign of respect.





> Interesting indeed! I don't think the prayer has been updated in Portuguese -- at least, not in Portugal. _Pai Nosso, que estais_ _no céu_ (not _estás no céu_)...


That's always struck me as odd. The occasions I've had to visit the Catholic Church have shown me that Catholics say the Lord's Prayer differently from Protestants. We say _Pai nosso que estás_ nos céus, santificado seja o Teu nome. I agree with Nanon's post about direct communication with God.

Jazyk


----------



## Nanon

Jazyk, I could not agree more, but of course we will not discuss theology here. 
What I should have added to my former post is that the Latin form is / was "tu", rendered in Spanish as "tú", and it is respectful. But it appears that in French and Portuguese, the Roman Catholic Church used to consider or still considers the "tu" form as "too familiar". 
I found this (see last paragraph) about the use of "tú" to address God in Spanish.


----------



## ghoti

In English we use the familiar "thou" in the Lord's Prayer, Catholics and Protestants alike. Even though modern translations of the Bible don't use "thou" anymore, it's still used liturgically, since people have become so used to it that changing it would seem like sacrilege. Interesting that when the Catholic Church went almost always completely to the vernacular after Vatican II, there does not seem to have been an attempt to modernize the language of the Lord's Prayer.


----------



## conquer

Here, the common misunderstanding about using god's name in vain is that people believe that the Judeo-Christian name god's name is actually "god", but it isn't.

If these forums are close related to what language and translations -including transliterations- are about, it is very important to do it the right way.

The commandment in Exodus is very clear: "*You shall not take the Name of YHWH, your god, in vain, for YHWH will not absolve anyone who takes his name in vain."*

His name is not "God", his name is not "Dio" and similar titles, his name is YHWH (the pronunciation probable is Yah-hoo-eh).

You are not comdemned if you use the word title God in vain, because that word is not the personal name of the deity of the bible.

The first step in a religious person is to know the name of his god, because ignorance is causing lots of vain arguments or ideas as it is observed in this topic.

Lets say, a new law punishes anyone who use in vain the name of President Bush. Then, you are scared to death because you have used in vain the word title "president". 

Funny eh? Maybe ridiculous...I don't know...


----------



## Poetic Device

conquer said:


> _How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal? If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively?_
> 
> I think that *first you must know the name of your god,* and *second you must repeat the question again.*
> 
> *The word god is not a personal name but a title.*
> 
> According to the bible, as an example, the *name of the god mentioned in it is YHWH (possibly pronounced as Yah-hoo-eh)*
> 
> Then, if you use this name YHWH in vain, it should view it as negatively according to the biblical statements.
> 
> *If you use the title god in vain, well, that is not the name of any deity but of Gott an ancient pagan idol, and from the biblical point it won't matter at all.*
> 
> The Hebrew narration of the Torah specifies clearly that it is the name and not the title the one to be used in vain in order to receive a "punishment" by violating a commandment.
> 
> What is the translation back into Hebrew of the title *god*? In Hebrew the word is *elohim*, in Greek is *Theous or Dyos*, in Spanish is *Dios*, in other languages is *Deu*, *and so forth*. All of these words are titles and not names.


 

Actually, it says in the Bible that no man will know the _true_ name of the LORD, least pronounce it.  It is not possible for our mortal tongues to say HIS name.


----------



## conquer

_*Poetic Device said:* Actually, it says in the Bible that no man will know the true name of the LORD, least pronounce it. It is not possible for our mortal tongues to say HIS name._

Actually, I really want to know where in the bible says that His true name shouldn't be known. I read the Hebrew version and I find something which is totally the contrary of what you said.

Would you please show me the biblical verses or phrases supporting your reply? I think I have missed them and I should like to make a review.


----------



## danielfranco

Actually, I think the concept of a proper name may not even apply to God. I have always believed that when He talked to Moses and told him "I am that I am" was his name, it was a way to tell Moses to quit dragging his feet and whining... 
Moses says, "but, who will I tell them sent me, so that they believe me? No one will believe a word I say!", and God says, "lookee here, Moses, it's me, alright? It's the Almighty, see? Just do what I say, son! Just GO!"

But, of course, it's just my interpretation...


----------



## conquer

danielfranco said:


> Actually, I think the concept of a proper name may not even apply to God. I have always believed that when He talked to Moses and told him "I am that I am" was his name, it was a way to tell Moses to quit dragging his feet and whining...
> Moses says, "but, who will I tell them sent me, so that they believe me? No one will believe a word I say!", and God says, "lookee here, Moses, it's me, alright? It's the Almighty, see? Just do what I say, son! Just GO!"
> 
> But, of course, it's just my interpretation...


 
Well, if you ask to an American native what is the name of his god, he might answered it without doubts saying: Manitou!

Why Judeo-Christians cannot know or say the name of their god? This doesn't make any sense.

In the entire Hebrew bible (Old Testament) the name YHWH is written without problems. Why people don't want to find out how to pronounce it is the point here because the commandment says that "His" name should not be used in vain.

But you can use "his" name as a reference to study, in your prayers, and more. 

But, saying "god" alone you are not going anywhere, because the word god is a title word and not a name. No place in the bible says that you are allowed to replace the name of this biblical god by a title.

On the contrary, there are lots of verses where the god of the bible wants his name to be known. 

Hello?...


----------



## ghoti

Conquer: it may not “make sense” in your opinion, but not knowing or saying the name of God has a very long tradition. Many, if not most Biblical scholars believe that by the time of Jesus, if _anyone_ knew how to pronounce what we usually see written as YHWH (more on that later), it was probably only the High Priest in Jerusalem. It was considered that holy and that powerful. Once the Second Temple was destroyed, even that possibility was lost.
 
There were traditions in the Ancient Near East, as well as elsewhere, that equated knowing a person’s name with having some power over him (and it usually was a “him”). So we read the story in Genesis 32:22-32 that is often called “Jacob Wrestling with the Angel,” although in many modern translations what was once called an angel is now called “a man.” The man asks Jacob his name and then tells him he will no longer be called Jacob but Israel. Jacob then asks him for his name, but the man won’t say. Was the angel/man actually God? Jacob seems to think so, since he named the place Peniel because he had seen the “face of God.” All that naming and refusing to reveal a name speak to the power of naming. And it’s hard not to draw the conclusion that knowing God’s name would mean having some power over God, which would be clearly unacceptable to the final editors/formers of the Torah.
 
So the name of God: El (what you call the title of “God”), Elohim (a strange word that looks plural), YHWH. Biblical Hebrew was written basically without vowels. So a reader needed to rely on context to figure if SLM (or ShLM) was shalom or Salem or some other word. When the pointing system came about to indicate vowel sounds, YHWH was deliberately made unintelligible. It *cannot* be pronounced. It has the consonants for YHWH but the vowels for “Adonai” (“Lord,” or “my Lord”). (That’s the background of the misguided but surely sincere efforts that gave us the back-formation “Jehovah.”)
 
Moving along to present times, there are many observant Jews who won’t even write or say the word “God” even though they are completely aware that the word is not God’s actual name. They will write “G-d” or say or write “Hashem,” “the name.”
 
Finally, as to the God of the Bible wanting his name to be known, the expression means more along the line of knowing about God, knowing who God is.  This is not “Cheers,” where everybody knows your name. The name of God is so holy and powerful that nobody knows it.
 
That does not mean an intimate, even familial relationship with God is impossible. But it does emphasize something that many of us seem to have lost sight of. God is God. We’re not. God isn’t a warm fuzzy we can tame. Take off your shoes. This is holy ground.
 
Happy Easter.


----------



## panjabigator

Very interesting!  So how about when you _personally_ address God.  What do you do then?


----------



## conquer

ghoti said:


> Conquer: it may not “make sense” in your opinion, but not knowing or saying the name of God has a very long tradition. Many, if not most Biblical scholars believe that by the time of Jesus, if _anyone_ knew how to pronounce what we usually see written as YHWH (more on that later), it was probably only the High Priest in Jerusalem. It was considered that holy and that powerful. Once the Second Temple was destroyed, even that possibility was lost.


 
This is weird, because if you read the prayer made in John 17, you can read that the Christ said that he mentioned the name of his Father to his disciples. 




ghoti said:


> There were traditions in the Ancient Near East, as well as elsewhere, that equated knowing a person’s name with having some power over him (and it usually was a “him”). So we read the story in Genesis 32:22-32 that is often called “Jacob Wrestling with the Angel,” although in many modern translations what was once called an angel is now called “a man.” The man asks Jacob his name and then tells him he will no longer be called Jacob but Israel. Jacob then asks him for his name, but the man won’t say.



We are familiar with the art paint of a man wrestling with a being with wings as Jacob wrestling with an angel. In reality the word *angel* simple means *a messenger.* A messenger could be any person without the need of to be a supernatural being.
And, about Jacob wrestling with the messenger, the art pain is totally wrong. If you read this part of the bible, Jacob was practically imploring to the messenger to stay until he blessed him. This is to say, a more accurate art paint should show Jacob -practically flat on the floor and as a child pulling the clothes of the messenger- begging to the messenger to stay. By mercy the messenger acceded and the "victory" of Jacob and the change of his name appears to be a reward to his obstinance.




ghoti said:


> Was the angel/man actually God? Jacob seems to think so, since he named the place Peniel because he had seen the “face of God.” All that naming and refusing to reveal a name speak to the power of naming. And it’s hard not to draw the conclusion that knowing God’s name would mean having some power over God, which would be clearly unacceptable to the final editors/formers of the Torah.


 
You must know that the word "elohim" simply means in English "a powerful one, or poweful ones" something which is simplify with the word "god". For this reason there is in the bible that even "spirits" are mentioned as "gods", people are mentioned as gods, etc. To say that you saw "YHWH" could mean that you saw a god (read mesenger) who cames from YHWH. This is to say, a representative individual.




ghoti said:


> So the name of God: El (what you call the title of “God”), Elohim (a strange word that looks plural), YHWH. Biblical Hebrew was written basically without vowels. So a reader needed to rely on context to figure if SLM (or ShLM) was shalom or Salem or some other word. When the pointing system came about to indicate vowel sounds, YHWH was deliberately made unintelligible. It *cannot* be pronounced. It has the consonants for YHWH but the vowels for “Adonai” (“Lord,” or “my Lord”). (That’s the background of the misguided but surely sincere efforts that gave us the back-formation “Jehovah.”)


 
That is correct, the correct pronunciation was hidden, but this is the duty of a believer to find it out and know it. This is the same than looking for your parents name. You have been in a foster home for years until you are an adult. You desire to know who are or were your parents.

To say, "my parents" is not enough, your love for them guides you to look for their names until you find them. This is the duty of a believer, if you love your god...of course.




ghoti said:


> Moving along to present times, there are many observant Jews who won’t even write or say the word “God” even though they are completely aware that the word is not God’s actual name. They will write “G-d” or say or write “Hashem,” “the name.”


 
Two wrongs won't make it right.




ghoti said:


> Finally, as to the God of the Bible wanting his name to be known, the expression means more along the line of knowing about God, knowing who God is. This is not “Cheers,” where everybody knows your name. The name of God is so holy and powerful that nobody knows it.


 
Your point is false, if people knew the name of their god before, the name of this god can be known today as well.




ghoti said:


> That does not mean an intimate, even familial relationship with God is impossible. But it does emphasize something that many of us seem to have lost sight of. God is God. We’re not. God isn’t a warm fuzzy we can tame. Take off your shoes. This is holy ground.


 
The same bible says the gods are many but there is only one who is real and His name is YHWH. How hard for you is to understand so simple statement?

Best wishes.


----------



## ghoti

panjabigator said:


> Very interesting! So how about when you _personally_ address God. What do you do then?


 
A lot of Christians call God "Father" or "Lord," and a lot of Jews use "Adonai," but especially in private personal prayer the possibilities are pretty much endless.


----------



## Etcetera

panjabigator said:


> Very interesting!  So how about when you _personally_ address God.  What do you do then?


I normally use "Father" or "Lord".


----------



## maxiogee

In the latter days of my belief I never used any title. I knew to whom I was speaking and I trusted that he knew it was him I was addressing. He didn't need titles or names. Prayers don't need envelopes, do they?


----------



## conquer

_In the latter days of my belief I never used any title. I knew to whom I was speaking and I trusted that he knew it was him I was addressing. He didn't need titles or names. Prayers don't need envelopes, do they?_

Yes, it is a good thing that religion is not official business and beliefs enjoy such kind of freedom to call your god as you please.

However, in the bible its god stated that his name is holy, that his name this and that. That there is not salvation but in his name and stuff like that.

If you believe in the god of the bible you might be in trouble with this god already, because apparently this god wants you to praise him correctly.

Then, your personal opinion might not be in accord to what this religion requires from you to do.


----------



## mrbilal87

For me, the name God is acceptable when addressing God, but Allah is preferred. In Islam, we believe He has 99 attributes, but the three most common are Allah, Arrahman and Arraheem. In prayer when addressing Allah we usually just say Allah, but in conversation among Muslims you may hear Allah Subhanahu wa ta'ala (SWT), which is a phrase of respect meaning "May he be praised and glorified."

We also have a phrase of respect for the prophets as well: peace be upon him (PBUH).

I personally don't like to use God's or Jesus' name in vain. When others use God's name in vain I seldom catch it, but a loud and resounding "Jesus Christ!" always gets my attention. I don't know why.


----------



## conquer

mrbilal87 said:


> I personally don't like to use God's or Jesus' name in vain. When others use God's name in vain I seldom catch it, but a loud and resounding "Jesus Christ!" always gets my attention. I don't know why.


 
That is an interesting point.

The title Christ is incorrectly used as a "_*last name"*_ by many. The translations from the Greek might have the error in the Greek source first and in the translations later.

The correct way to refer the name and tilte is Christ Jesus, this is the proper order. Lets say it differently: President Bush. (President the title, Bush the name).

With the expression Jesus Christ, you have the title Christ as a last name, and this is incorrect, as incorrect is to say Bush President.

The correct way is to say Jesus the Christ, or Bush the President.

I'm not very familiar with Greek, but if the fault is found in the Greek source, then the Greek scribes were ignorants of their own language or there must be another reason unknown by us of why they commited such an error.

The same applies to the current translators who were asumed to correct such a mistake providing the proper explanation as a footnote or similar.

By the way, help me with this. I thought that Allah was the Arabic way to pronounce the Hebrew Eloah, or El, and that Allah wasn't a name but a title as well. (Eloah, El, Elohim are titles implying the meaning "powerful one" or "almighty")

Having both, the Arabic and Hebrew cultures inheriting the same religion but with different branches after Abraham, I thought that for you the name of your god was as well YHWH.

If not, can you please tell me where this word Allah is coming from using the primeval religious writings as the source?


----------



## winklepicker

I really don't get this. How can saying God's name be offensive? In any case, do you think 'God' is the name he calls himself by? If we all agreed to call him 'Fred' instead would 'By Fred' then become offensive?

Blasphemy has to be the most imaginary crime going. I try not to offend others, and try to fit my register to theirs, but there is a degree of silliness beyond which I can't go. We had to drop some friends of ours: we liked the husband, but the wife was so prissy and Christian, and took issue with me one day over my blasphemous language. That was it - they came off our Xmas card list. Sorry, honey, there's no right not to be offended.


----------



## conquer

winklepicker said:


> I really don't get this. How can saying God's name be offensive? In any case, do you think 'God' is the name he calls himself by? If we all agreed to call him 'Fred' instead would 'By Fred' then become offensive?
> 
> Blasphemy has to be the most imaginary crime going. I try not to offend others, and try to fit my register to theirs, but there is a degree of silliness beyond which I can't go. We had to drop some friends of ours: we liked the husband, but the wife was so prissy and Christian, and took issue with me one day over my blasphemous language. That was it - they came off our Xmas card list. Sorry, honey, there's no right not to be offended.


 
Take it the easy way to understand it.

Lets say a guy mention your name in a crime. Your name has ben used incorrectly, in vain, with mischievous intentions to discredit you. Police arrested you because you are the one holding the name pronounced by the guy.

About the god of he bible, apparently this god doesn't want his name to be used in vain.

As you said it, you and others can call him any name you want to, but this god wants his people to call him by his name, not so the one you decided to use.

This is complicated when people has been wrongly taught that his name is "god" or "lord". For the ones who understand the difference, we can perceive that the request made by the god of the bible makes sense.


----------



## mrbilal87

conquer said:


> By the way, help me with this. I thought that Allah was the Arabic way to pronounce the Hebrew Eloah, or El, and that Allah wasn't a name but a title as well. (Eloah, El, Elohim are titles implying the meaning "powerful one" or "almighty")
> 
> Having both, the Arabic and Hebrew cultures inheriting the same religion but with different branches after Abraham, I thought that for you the name of your god was as well YHWH.
> 
> If not, can you please tell me where this word Allah is coming from using the primeval religious writings as the source?



Well, Allah is a contraction of the Arabic words Al, meaning "the," and Ilah, meaning "a god," so it means "The God" or "God" - implying there is no other god of such high status; the One and Only. It is a title rather than a name, as you said. That was my mistake! 

Allah is generally believed to be derived from Eloah, El, or Elohim in Hebrew, so there is believed to be a connection - although there is some disagreement about this. There also may connection between Allah and YHWH, but it may be a bit abstract. In the Qur'an I believe the YHWH is mentioned among the 99 titles of Allah, though not in that exact form, as you may never see YHWH/Yahweh written explicitly in the Qur'an. Instead you may see "he is the Self-Sufficient, the Ever Living, the Giver of Life, the First, the Last, etc." I think some the attributes of Allah share some similarities with the significance of YHWH from a standpoint of "He who lives/He who is/He who is Self-Sufficient."

I'm not an expert on scriptural comparisons though, so you might not want to take what I'm saying too seriously.

We should be careful not to get off topic though. I don't think the original poster wants us to get too religion-specific.

Cheers!


----------



## .   1

winklepicker said:


> Blasphemy has to be the most imaginary crime going.


So imaginery that it is not a crime in Australia.

God must be pretty puny if I can give him the irrits by calling him Howard or Hewie.

.,,


----------



## cherine

*Mod note:*

*I can't deny that this thread has many interesting posts.*
*The problem is that among those many interesting posts, there are many off-topic ones.*

*So, here's a little reminder of the topic of this thread:*



panjabigator said:


> How is God addressed in your various languages? Are you formal or informal? If you use God's name in vain, is it viewed negatively? I don't want to tread to far into religious waters


 
*further drifting from the topic will -very unfortunately- get the thread closed.*

*Thank you all for your understanding.*


----------



## Frank78

gaer said:


> German uses "du" to refer to God, which normally is reserved for family members, close friends, etc., so address is "informal". This, I believe, was set in motion by Luther. Our German members can give you more information, but I believe what I just told you is essentially correct.
> 
> Gaer





It would simply sound too distant if you address God with the formal "Sie" in German.

I´m not sure if Luther is the origin but it suits his view that no one should stand between YOU and God, no pope, no cardinal, no priest.

On the other hand German catholics also address God with the informal "du".


----------



## Erick404

jazyk said:


> That's always struck me as odd. The occasions I've had to visit the Catholic Church have shown me that Catholics say the Lord's Prayer differently from Protestants. We say _Pai nosso que estás_ nos céus, santificado seja o Teu nome. I agree with Nanon's post about direct communication with God.
> 
> Jazyk



In fact, I didnt even know that "tu" forms were used in any Portuguese prayers. I don't understand why the Catholic version still uses "vós", since in the Bible itself the Lord's Prayer, as taught by Jesus, uses "tu".


----------



## franknagy

Good is invoked in Hungarian prayers as 2nd person Singular Thou = Te.
Lord's Prayer: "Mi Atyánk ki *vagy* a mennyekben .... Jöjjön el a *Te* országod ...".
Hymn: "Isten *áldd* meg a magyart..."  [Good *bless* the Hungarian.]
 He is mentioned in cursing in 3rd Person:
"Az Isten *verjen* meg!" [Let Good *strike you*.]
--------------------------------
The Spanish custom, Jesus as First name is very strange for us.  
Another pecuniosity of Spanish names, not present in Hungarian ones is the usage of attributes of Mary as standalone female given names: Pilar, Carmen, Concepción.
--------------------------------
One more strange example where Jesus and Chist are used as two different persons:
"Se Jézus, se Krisztus, Mária is elbácsúzott." literally "Neither Jesus nor Christ, Mary has said farewell" means that our pantry and fridge are empty.

Let me don't forget the Holy Spirit.
"A Szentlélek tartja" means that something is very unstable.


----------

