The Name G-d

.

"...O KYRIOS THEOS of Israel, 

that dwellest over the cherubs, 

thou art the only THEOS in 

all the kingdoms of the earth; 

thou hast made heaven and earth." 

2Kin 19:15

The name 'G-d' is not even closely related to any biblical inspiration and is

• Not found in Scripture, neither in Paleo-Hebrew, nor Aramaic, nor Greek, nor in Modern Hebrew,
• Not a single manuscript or any of the mega-codices (written in Greek) does include it, 
• No apostle or early church father ever mentioned it before the 4c. AD, 
• No prophet or teacher of the Word received a special revelation authorizing its use . . .

. . . but suddenly after thousands of years a new name was brought up and is to our surprise as widely spread today as it could be.

To make matters worse, the term 'G-d' may now signify any monotheistic conception of G-d, including the translations of the Arabic Al**h, Indic Ish**ra, Maasai N**i and Persian Kh**a. Should we not ponder why even religions such as Roman Catholicism are perfectly comfortable using this particular name, while stricly avoiding the names 'THEOS' and 'KYRIOS', and even employing directives against the use of the tetragrammaton 'יהוה' - 'YHWH'?

When we look back at the century when JESUS CHRIST came as man, we find writers such as Josephus (~37 - 100 AD; Jewish Historian; writing from Rome) still using the name 'THEOS' in its original form more than 1300x in his work 'Antiquitates Judaicae' (originally written in Greek) alone.

Justin Martyr (~100 - 165 AD; Apologist; writing from Rome) used in all of his works 595x THEOS (Singular, 289x ΘΕΟϹ nominative, 306x ΘΕΟΥ genitive; excluding 42 plural forms of ΘΕΟΙ, ΘΕⲰΝ and ΘΕΟ) and 304x KYRIOS (ΚΥΡΙΟϹ, ΚΥΡΙΟΥ or ΚΥΡΙΕ including the use as 'master', excluding 3 plural forms of ΚΥΡΙⲰΝ).

>>  So what went wrong in between the 1c. AD and the 4c. AD, when the name 'G-d' was first used? <<

Where did the name 'G-d' ' first appear?

• The person who introduced this title to Arianism / Gothic Christianity, was bishop Wulfila (Ulfilas), the creator of the Gothic (Proto-Germanic) language and of a Bible written in that language, containing the first mention of the name 'G-d' shown in the image. When we employ proper discernment on Wulfila, we notice that:

1. His name was literally 'Little Wolf' (𐍅𐌿𐌻𐍆𐌹𐌻𐌰 • *wulfila, a male given name, Wulfila, "Little Wolf"; cf. German: "Wölflein") and his official seal even carried a handle with a wolf depiction. Sadly many writers and historians eliminate the 'W' from his name (for obvious reasons), although the Gothic writing '𐍅𐌿𐌻𐍆𐌹𐌻𐌰' (wulfila) clearly includes the additional letter before the 'U' (which is both transliterated and pronounced as 'W'). We do not need much Bible knowledge to know the implications of this name in a spiritual context. While a Christian should not judge anyone by his or her name, it would on the other hand be an oddity that our Creator would precisely chose someone with this name to be the provider of His ~new~ name. It is impossible to picture this name in a constructive context in the Bible. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
2. He was closely connected to the Roman (Catholic) Church. He was called Pontifex and Primas (pontifex ispeque primas Vulla; which is a title closely associated with the Roman Pope). Wulfila believed himself to be Catholic and was made a 'Confessor of the Faith'. Catholic writers such as Socrates and Sozomenus remembered him with honor. [1] [2] [3]
3. Eusebius of Nicomedia (who pieced together an Apostolic Succession until the first Pope of Rome and is therefore venerated in the Roman Catholic Church; he also 'baptized' Constantine in 337 AD) showed his great influence by bringing Wulfila into the Arian priesthood. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
4. The fact that Wulfila became a bishop, in itself disqualifies him already from any spiritual authority. A person who places himself in the seat of CHRISTOS as the only head of the church, is an abomination to the Word of THEOS, which considers only Overseers and Deacons as valid positions within the church. The famous opening of the Creed of Antioch (341 AD) declared: "We have neither become followers of Arius - for how should we who are bishops follow a presbyter?" [1] [2] [3]
5. Constantius II, the Roman emperor and successor of Constantine, held Wulfila in such high honour, that he described him repeatedly as the era's Moses (he was also compared to the prophet Elija). [1] [2] [3]
6. Jerome's (Secretary of the Roman Pope Damasus) 'Commentary on Isaiah' contained also a copy of Wulfila's Bible translation, affirming once again that the Roman Catholic Church highly respected and praised Wulfila. [1] [2]
7. Wulfila attended several councils organized by the Roman Catholic Church. 
8. Wulfila inspired the highly problematic and ultra-conservative Catholic teacher J.R.R. Tolkien to study Gothic as his first foreign language (!), which in turn motivated him to invent 12 own languages and to even change his signature to Ruginwaldus Dwalakōneis (gothicized 'Ronald Tolkien'). [1] [2] [3] [4]
9. While we have usually many documents and letters from important Christians preceding and following the time of Wulfila, we know today that the vast majority of Wulfilas works are 'lost', without finding an explanation for this (he wrote several treatises and translations in Gothic, Greek and Latin). Jerome also excluded him from his 'De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men)' with biographies of 135 important figures, which is clearly intentional given Wulfila's enormous importance and Jerome's previous inclusion of Wulfila's translation. This rather points to an intentional removal of his works, which could eventually go hand-in-hand with his mysterious death at the Council of Constantinople.
10. [Arianism] Wulfila (as well as his successor, the Gotho-Phrygian bishop Selenas) opposed Trinitarian Christianity, denied both the deity and the divinity of the HOLY SPIRIT, and reduced Him to a minister of / created by CHRIST. He taught that the SPIRIT's actions are proper to THEOS, but that these actions are no proof of His divinity. [1] [2] [3]
11. For a complete discernment of Wulfila and the respective sources: www.fitforfaith.ca/discernment-historical-figures/

• Knowing that Wulfila was closely connected to the Roman Catholic Church (although he possibly also opposed it at least in some regards) and His denial of the divinity of the HOLY SPIRIT should make us already seriously question the legitimacy of his man-made designation 'G-d' for our CREATOR! 
• But the problem is much greater than Wulfila, his particular associations and doctrines:

Where does the Name 'G-d ' come from?

• The English word 'G-d' comes from . . . 
• The Middle / Old English 'G-d', which itself is derived from . . . 
• The Proto-Germanic 'gudą' and ultimately from . . . 
• The Gothic '𐌲𐌿𐌸' (guþ), which is conjugated as following:

• Wulfila's Silver Bible uses in Matthew 5:34 the Genitive Singular of this word (while the word was prior to its appropriation for Arian / Gothic Christianity used in the plural, based on the polytheism of the Goths):

• We gain this most important knowledge by comparing the letters of the Gothic Alphabet with those of the Greek Alphabet Wulfila's language is mainly based upon. Not only is it very clear which letters are identical but also which letters have been modified. This on the other hand is clearly affirmed by the Gothic Numeric Values which Wulfila thankfully did not change from the Greek Numeric Values. The Greek equivalent to the Gothic Numeric Values reveals '𐌲𐌿𐌸' (guþ) to be synonymous with 'Goth'.

• Another proof, which is much more obvious for the layman, is the former Middle English use of the 'Thorn' Letter 'Þ' (the third letter of the Word G-d / Goth), as to commonly express 'th'. The first printing of the King James Version of the Bible in 1611 used 'Þe' (printed as 'ye' because not all printers supported 'Þ') for 'the' in places such as Job 1:9, John 15:1, and Romans 15:29. It also used 'Þt / yt' as an abbreviation for 'that' in places such as 2Cor 13:7. All were replaced in later printings by 'the' or 'that', respectively, after the digraph 'th' reappeared, gradually superseding these letters in Middle English.

• This shows us that the term Wulfila used for the Christian deity, the name G-d, is identical with 'Goth' (the German linguist Jacob Grimm also supported this concept) . While we still do not know at this point the etymology of the word, it is clear that there is no justification in using this title for THEOS, a title used to describe a tribe (which in turn could be named after one (or even a plurality) of their gods).

• When we look at the German term for 'G-d', which is 'G-tt', and compare it with the Greek declension of the term 'Goth', the accordance becomes even more obvious. At this point we have to ask ourselves if scholarship really did not see this obvious accordance for more than 1000 years, or if we had been intentionally deceived. The truth is probably found somewhere in between, with some scholars having noticed this obvious accordance, but having either lacked spiritual boldness, or feared a negative impact on Christianity, or simply having been silenced when trying to publish this as it occured to my person on Wikipedia when sharing this very information). It should be obvious that it is far more problematic when millions of believers use a totally wrong name for their daily prayers and in their spiritual journey, than some unbelievers potentially being hindered from becoming Christians.

• Meanwhile, we find in the English (G-d) and German (G-tt) articles on Wikipedia some 'adventurous' assumptions about the etymology of this term, often done with good intentions, but missing the very obvious and much rather distracting and confusing the reader.

What else do we know about the 'g-d (s)' of the 'Goths'?

• The word and its cognates were initially neutral, which makes it clear that this name does not have any spiritual or divine authority. Only when their speakers, the Goths converted to Christianity, the word was adapted by them to be masculine (while the neuter endured!).

• The word likely had a general, predominantly plural or collective sense (in this case being a clear pointer to polytheism!) prior to its adaptation to Christianity. After conversion, the word was commonly used in the singular to refer to the Christian deity, and also took on characteristics of a name:

• The Gothic '𐌲𐌿𐌸' (guþ) -presumably- relates to a pagan idol, a wooden statue of the kind paraded by Winguric on a chariot when he challenged the recently converted Gothic Christians to worship the tribal gods. It became the word for the Christian God in the Gothic Bible with its grammatical gender changed from neuter to masculine only in the new sense.

• A 'Gothi' (or goði; plural goðar, fem. gyðja; Old Norse: guþi) was a position identical or similar to a pagan priest (mostly male; inherited; usually one priest for each of the g-ds). Remarkably, the Norse g-d 'Th*r' (the weekday Thursday derives from this g-d of thunder 'Th*r'; see also Norwegian 'T*rsdag, German 'Donnerstag' = day of thunder) was also described in the Ynglinga saga as having been such a Gothi! Inscriptions in Denmark, Iceland and Norway show the office to be opposed to magic. Those priests were to offer up sacrifices (blót), and in times of war sacrifices were made to images of O**n. The title disappeared in Iceland after 1000 AD, when the Christian conversion occurred. So why was one title not suitable anymore, but one other title (which is G-th' with one letter less) is still so today in the eyes of many people?

• We find strong connotations of a divine use of the term 'Goth' in culture. In Spain, a man acting with arrogance would be said to be "haciéndose los godos" ("making himself to act like the Goths / act like the gods").

• Ostrogoths (one of the two great Gothic kingdoms within the Western Roman Empire) most probably means "Goths of the rising sun" or "Goths glorified by the rising sun" !!! Here the we find a literal use of a 'Little gods theology' blatantly assigned to an entire tribe of peoples, who considered themselves as very special because of the spiritual origin of 'Goth', and had also been considered so by many others as we notice over and over again when reading through the historical accounts. While we are not aware what spiritual entity or entities the term 'G-th' exactly refers to prior to its use by Arian / Gothic Christianity, we unmistakably see an unholy awe about all those individuals and tribes carrying, and many others being keen to carry such name. This term was at no point just an ordinary designation of a tribe, it was in its very essence the synonym of the worship of a mysterious 'G-th' and to a strong degree of a worship of self by those carrying this name based on ancestry and their features as tall, blonde and blue-eyed arians:

'Goth' has a problematic background.

• The Goths were warriors also known as Barbarians, who most probably originated in a yet small group in Götaland (also Gothia / Gothland / Gothenland; Southern part of Sweden), where we still find today the city of Gothenburg. 

• While many groups / scholars try to question this origin (probably based on religious reasons and / or in order to distract from a rather painful history related to their invasions), there is one anecdote which clearly affirms the Goths descending from Scandinavia. In 1434 AD, at the catholic Council of Basel / Florence, a serious dispute arose between the Swedish delegation, which claimed that their Goths successfully invaded the Roman Empire, and the Spanish delegation which claimed that only the most heroic Goths had left Sweden and are now part of their land. This episode unquestionably proves what many voices try to suppress, that the Goths mainly originated from Götaland. Royal titles in Sweden further affirm(ed) the Goths having originated in (and later subjugated by) modern Sweden: In 1278, when Magnus III of Sweden ascended to the throne, a reference to Gothic origins was included in the title of the king of Sweden: 'We N.N. by the Grace of G-d King of the Swedes, the Goths and the Vends'. A look at the physical appearance eliminates any remaining doubt: "In ancient sources, the Goths are always described as tall and athletic, with light skin, blonde hair and blue eyes. The 4th-century Greek historian Eunapius described their characteristic powerful musculature in a pejorative way: 'Their bodies provoked contempt in all who saw them, for they were far too big and far too heavy for their feet to carry them'."

• Gothic religion was purely tribal in which polytheism, nature worship, and ancestor worship (to which the name 'Goth' could point to - that they in essence worshipped their founder / patriarch and individually their ancestors) were one and the same. Mother goddess worship played also a significant role in Scandinavia.

• The Goths worshipped a G-d of War (among many other g-ds). But it is unclear if there is a direct correlation between this g-d and the 'Goth(s)' of the Goths.

• The term 'Gothic' stands still today for works of darkness (dark Gothic architecture, music, black clothing and eyeliners . . .) and Gothic fiction, sometimes called Gothic horror, is a loose literary aesthetic of fear and haunting. Common themes of Southern Gothic (Subgenre of fiction, music, film, theatre, and television) include storytelling of deeply flawed, disturbing, or eccentric characters sometimes suffering from physical deformities or insanity; decayed or derelict settings and grotesque situations; and sinister events bred from poverty, alienation, crime, violence, forbidden sexuality, or hoodoo magic.

• Some Anglican churches in England still hold today so-called 'Goth eucharistic gatherings' in the form of a biweekly service in the evenings for people who identify themselves as Goth. "The service is candlelit with a specially written liturgy and uses a variety of modern rock and as well as classical music. The structure of the service revolves around the baptismal candle and reflects a serious engagement with the depressing and darker sides of our lives before moving towards a position of hope and happiness found in the empathy of the Lord Jesus Christ."

• For the highly problematic Catholic teacher J.R.R. Tolkien, Gothic was the first language that he studied for his own pleasure, which in turn motivated him to invent 12 own languages while propelling the consequences of the Tower of Babel even further. He even signed as Ruginwaldus Dwalakōneis (gothicized 'Ronald Tolkien') and included Gothic names, elements and language in his works.

How was it possible that this name became common use in the world today?

• It was originally an appropriation of this name for the use in Arianism, and is today extensively being used by religions who translate the name of their deity in English with 'G-d'.

• The greatest contribution to its spread were most certainly the military invasions of the Roman Empire through the different (sub-)groups of the Goths:

• Wulfilas close association with the rising Roman Catholic Church was also a main driver for the spread of the name 'G-d'.

• One decisive factor was certainly also the use of Gothic as church language until Latin replaced it in Europe. In Spain, which has a significant history related to the Goths (especially in Catalunya and in general amongst Spanish nobility), the Gothic language was used as church language until the Visigoths converted to Catholicism in 589 AD. The Gothic language then survived as a domestic language in the Iberian peninsula (modern Spain and Portugal) as late as the 8th century. The Visi-Goths also built many churches in Hispania, some of which are still in existence today.

* Much more could be said and was read by this author in preparation for this study, but only the essential facts are included above. All information, which is either uncertain or does rather distract from the purpose of this short study - to show that there is no inspiration in this name and that we should abstain from its use- has rather been excluded. 

This includes 1. the possible precursor of the Goths, the Geats according to Photiuswith their mythical ancestor or national g-d called 'Ga*t' and / or 'Gautr' which eventually could be the deity implied behind the name 'Goth'; 2. the possible connection between 'gudą' and the Proto-Indo-European / Sanskrit 'gutom' / 'gautam' in turn derived from a root 'gew' / 'gaw' (meaning to pour, libate / to call, invoke); and 3. the possible connection between the Goths and the biblical Gog or Magog with claims from several (non-Christian) chroniclers that Gog, one of Magog's sons became the first king of the Goths (Geats) in Gothaland (and further assuming that after invading what is modern Europe their and one other people group's descendants much later ~conquered~ and colonialized the world; which could result in the 4 biblical corners of the earth (Job 37:2-3; Isa 11:12, Eze 7:2, Rev 7:1) being 1. Europe (NW) 2. Africa (SW) 3. North-America / Greenland (NE) and 4. South-America (SE) when being considered through a Pacific-Centered Map connected at Bering which is most certainly the map the Bible has in mind and not the arbitrary Atlantic-Centered Map we use today) . . .

What about the term 'G-spel'?

• The word 'G-spel' is composed of the word 'Goth' (see above) and 'Spell'! It was glossed 'godspel' in the Old English era and the letter 'd' dropped out easily in speech. "From Old English the word passed, in adapted forms, into the languages of the Germanic peoples evangelized from England: Old Saxon godspell, Old High German gotspell, Old Norse guð-, goðspiall; in each case the form of the first element shows unequivocally that it was identified with G-d, not with good." Source

• The noun 'Spell' originates from the Proto-Germanic 'spellą' (speech, account, tale) and implies words or a formula supposed to have magical powers. The verb 'Spell' implies 'to put under the influence of a spell; to affect by a spell; to bewitch; to fascinate; to charm.'

• No matter how used we are to this term today, we should strictly avoid it and use either the term 'Good Message' or 'Good News' (Strong's 2098, ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙⲰ, euaggelio; German translation 'Evangelium'; Spanish translation 'Evangelio'). It is a mystery why the English translation deviated from other languages in such a dramatic and heretical way, and why not simply the term 'Evangelium' is being used in the English language, which would go hand-in-hand with the use e.g. of the term 'Evangelist').

Afrikaans evangelie

Amharic ወንጌል [wenigēli]

Bosnian jevanđelje

Bulgarian евангелие [evangelie]

Catalan evangeli

Cebuano ebanghelyo

Corsican Vangelu

Czech evangelium

Danish evangelium

Dutch Evangelie

Esperanto evangelio

Filipino ebanghelyo

Finnish evankeliumi

Galician Evanxeo

German Evangelium

Greek Ευαγγέλιο [Evangélio]

Haitian Creole levanjil

Hawaiian euanelio

Hungarian evangélium

Italian vangelo

Latin evangelium

Latvian evaņģēlijs

Lithuanian Evangelija

Luxembourgish Evangelium

Maltese Evanġelju

Myanmar (Burmese) ဧဝံဂေလိတရား [ ewangaylitararr]

Norwegian evangelium

Polish ewangelia

Portuguese Evangelho

Romanian evangheliei

Russian евангелие [Yevangeliye]

Sesotho evangeli

Slovak evanjelium

Slovenian evangelij

Spanish evangelio

Swedish evangelium

Ukrainian євангеліє [yevanheliye]

Welsh efengyl

Zulu ivangeli

arathi गॉस्पेल [gŏspēla]

Bengali গসপেল [gasapēla]

Croatian / Serbian Gospel

English Go(d)spel

French gospel

Frisian gospel

Gujarati ગોસ્પેલ [gōspēla]

See also www.indifferentlanguages.com/words/gospel

What Name has been delivered to us?

THEOS / KYRIOS gave Himself many names or rather adjectives in the biblical context, but this beautiful and often descriptive variety does not generate an allowance for humans to add a name completely foreign to the Bible, such as the one seen above.

We would also never imagine changing the name of JESUS CHRIST to an artificial word we find more suitable. Mat 1:16 reads "of Mary, from out of whom was born JESUS, the One being called CHRIST." Greek "… ΜΑΡΙΑϹ, ΕΞ ΗϹ ΕΓΕΝΝΗΘΗ ΙΗϹΟΥϹ [IESOUS] Ο ΛΕΓΟΜΕΝΟϹ ΧΡΙϹΤΟϹ [CHRISTOS]"

His name is predominantly

• 'THEOS' (Strong's Greek G2316; 3121x Old Testament + 1313x New Testament = 4434 occurrences including 'gods') and

• 'ΚΥΡΙΟϹ' (Strong's G2962; 7350x Old Testament + 721x New Testament = 8071 references including the vocative use as 'Sir'; usually translated with 'Lord', 'Master')

and I urge the church to go back to His name.

The Greek Old and New Testament is the Scripture delivered to us, and although not considered as such by most scholars, divinely inspired (as unquestionably proven in the study below). The Greek OT was predominantly used as source-, translation- and church text from the 3/2c. BC until the early 5c. AD, when Pope Damasus ordered his secretary Jerome to create a new translation which was the first to use the Proto-Masoretic / Modern Hebrew text as basis and broke with 6-7 centuries of Greek tradition. This Greek OT & NT now contains absolutely everything we need, including His holy name we have no justifiable reason for to translate it.

The name 'THEOS' can be easily spoken in any language, but has to our surprise not even a Wikipedia article (!!) and is today rather used for restaurants and male names. Where have we gone?

> We should only trust in the name of

ΘΕΟC (pronounced 'THEOS', instead of the man-made term G-d),

ΚΥΡΙΟC (pronounced 'KYRIOS', adapted to the term Lord) and

ΙΗCΟΥC ΧΡΙCΤΟC (pronounced 'IESOUS CHRISTOS', translated with JESUS CHRIST).

We must not call ourselves disciples or followers of any other name! <