Thou Shalt Not Take The Name Of The Lord In Vain

[Steven]

At least by my understanding, while the Old Testament acknowledges the existence of other gods, I think it only means in the context of other people worshiping gods that don't truly exist. It never goes so far as to describe any actions by those gods, right?

Action by said gods, no.

Calling certain pagan gods by name, yes. For example, Dagon of the Philistine nation.

Accounting for situations surrounding the way these god's were worshipped (like human sacrifice) yes.

exemplifiying how these other nations also knew of the Hebrew God and feared it, yes as well.

interesting stuff.

[Steven]

They usually called them by name, or used the generalized meaning that i was referencing 2 posts up. God meaning "the" God vs god as in any random worshiped thing.

The king james version of the bible in particular really did a disservice to the orignial wiritings. The most common term is YHWH or something aproximating it. That is "jehovah" or "yawhew" giving god an actual "name" rather than this catch-all term "God" which has come into favor in the last 5 centuries or so. (due to various reasons, a lot to due with jewish traditon)

But a lot of this really is a frustrating exersize in symantics, can go round and round on it forever. I'd rather go round and round on some actual ethcial/moral/spirtual point rather than the terms. =D

.... this was the best posts yet.

We tend to argue that which has little bread and butter impact on the identity as a whole.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

.... this was the best posts yet.

We tend to argue that which has little bread and butter impact on the identity as a whole.

[Mikielikesit]

Some ancient hebrew is still considered to be "acurately passed down" to us through the ages. There was a superstition that using God's actual proper name would cause/create/bring >insert various negative things here< and thus over time it was lost and not passed down from generation to generation.

And yeah, ancient hebrew, like a lot of the early languages assumed that the readers already basicly knew the stories they were recording and its generally thought that the idea was that much of it was meant as a "memory jogger" for the people at the time and thus left little details out like VOWELS haha. But for us 2000 years later... it sucks. heh.

In my little investigation on the matter of GOD and its name according to i guess would be legend ....His name was not to be spoken or written down for fear that it would bring down very bad things upon you do to you being impure and not worthy of using it. also if the rulers of the time heard you use his name you could be put to death...or so is what I have heard. But in the real scheme of things the idea of one true GOD is a relatively new idea. Man as a whole has been worshipping many gods for eons and most of those were female in fact the oldest known religious relic found was a likeness of a fertility goddess I am not sure of the time period but can find that info .....a couple of semesters back I took a religion of the worlds class and it was incredible and if anyone has the operatunity to take a class on the religions of the world take it.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

In my little investigation on the matter of GOD and its name according to i guess would be legend ....His name was not to be spoken or written down for fear that it would bring down very bad things upon you do to you being impure and not worthy of using it. also if the rulers of the time heard you use his name you could be put to death...or so is what I have heard. But in the real scheme of things the idea of one true GOD is a relatively new idea. Man as a whole has been worshipping many gods for eons and most of those were female in fact the oldest known religious relic found was a likeness of a fertility goddess I am not sure of the time period but can find that info .....a couple of semesters back I took a religion of the worlds class and it was incredible and if anyone has the operatunity to take a class on the religions of the world take it.

Despite pockets of "paganism" since time indefinite...since around 8 A.D. onward monotheism has has a lock on the majority of worship. The total population of the planet was tiny in comparision the further you go back in time. The pre-christan romans controlled the city of new york (not even) in terms of the actual number of people. (just as a point of refrence)

The vast majority of "total worshipers" have been Muslim/Christian/Jewish in the scheme of recorded history in terms of the actual population. Big monotheism has "owned" mankind pretty much when you do a head count.

Prior to recorded history that its assumed various random animistic religions were in place but total guess as to the specifics. That far back into prehistory and the total population of the world was a joke even more than it was in pre-muslim times.

The age of a religion i think is less sigificant in terms of its "impact" as is the total number of practicioners. True there was a virtual zoo of various religious beliefs prior to the coming of the big monotheistic religions.

But , the tiny world population at the time not withstanding... these "religions" back that far in history actually could be viewed as sciences. People just didn't know, so they guessed. Who knew what that loud noise off in the distance was? No one. Maybe it was some powerful being that was angry at us? Sure, could be! Not enough info to go on, your guess is as good as mine.

The concept of "religion" didn't even really take its current form until more "real science" started to come into play and it could be contrasted with metaphysics. "Science" or "Religion" don't mean much when mans concept of such things was so foggy. They were one in the same in many cases, and the further you go back the more they become one.

[BrassFusion]

Insightful++ there, Troy =)

So science and religion, by definition, couldn't really exist without each other.