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' (without vowels)?

When we look back at the century when CHRISTOS came as the man IESOUS, 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?

* Original file: 'Ulfilas - Fragments of the Gothic version of the Old and New Testaments which survive according to the codex, edited, Latinized, and provided with critical annotations, with a glossary and grammar of the Gothic language, combined with care. by Hans Conon von der Gabelentz; see https://archive.org/details/ulfilas00unkngoog

• The person who introduced this title to Arianism / Gothic 'Christianity' (which is not true Christianity), was bishop Wulfila (Ulfilas), the creator of the Gothic (Proto-Germanic) alphabet and of a Bible written in that language, containing the first mention of the name 'G‑d' as shown in the previous image. When we employ proper discernment on Wulfila, we notice that:

1. Wulfila worshipped the Queen (of heaven), as explicitly stated in the obituary written by his foster son Auxentius of Durostorum (who became bishop of Milan): "Following this and similar doctrines for 40 years flourishing splendidly in the bishopric through apostolic grace, he preached in the Greek, Latin, and Gothic tongues without ceasing in the one and only Church of Christ; because the Church of the Living G‑d is one, the pillar and column of Truth; and he affirmed and witnessed that the flock of Christ, our Lord and G‑d, was one, one the worship and one the house; one the Virgin, and one Spouse, one the Queen [Latin text of the letter: "unam reginam"; accusative singular of rēgīna; meaning queen, princess; unique identifier for the 'Regina Ca*li', the Queen of heaven (Mary) worshipped in Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy]; that there was only one vine, temple, congregation of the Christians; that all other places of congregation were not churches of G‑d, but synagogues of satan." > It is crystal clear from the context, that this 'reginam' cannot refer to an earthly queen Wulfila would have been subjected to. This statement therefore makes Wulfila (and his foster-son) false teachers of the worst kind. But in all the books and writings about Wulfila (e.g. by Presbyterians like Charles Anderson Scott or Lutherans such as Georg Waitz who blindly adore him as super-saint), this striking passage is never being addressed, although the letter is always given utmost priority and credibility, and although much energy is invested in the question if Wulfila was now more Catholic or more Arian in his beliefs! [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
2. 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 require 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 (author's)  name in a constructive context in the Bible. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
3. Wulfila manipulated the Bible. Instead of translating that a new year starts with spring and a new month with a new moon, he transposed the method of reckoning to what he thought his people would be more familiar with, and translated that a new year starts in winter and a new month with a full moon. He e.g. translated Luk 2:42 as following: Gothic: "ïairusalem at dulþ paska. jah biþe varþ tvalib vintruns. usgaggandam þan ïm" English: "~And when twelve winters were fulfilled, they went up to Jerusalem according to the custom of the feast."  It is a grievous sin to teach traditions of men e.g. in a church service or in own writings. But it is a terrible abomination to manipulate THEOS' Word and to overwrite it with traditions of man. [1] [2]
4. He had originally held the ~faith~ in full accordance with the Roman (Catholic) church (as it is widely agreed upon; see also separate discernment about the RCC) , and was made a 'Confessor of the Faith' . After he transitioned into Arianism, he never renounced Catholicism, nor had he been excommunicated by the Catholic church, which is highly unsual for those days when a different religion usually caused drastic measures. He remained closely connected to Catholics and went as far as to attend several councils organized by the RCC. He was also called Pontifex and Primas (pontifex ispeque primas Vulla; which is a title closely associated with the Roman Pope). Catholic writers such as Socrates and Sozomenus remembered him with honor. [1] [2] [3] [4]
5. Eusebius of Nicomedia, who was close to both Arianism -and- Catholicism, showed his great influence by bringing Wulfila into the Arian priesthood (shortly before Eusebius' death in 341 AD). Eusebius was on the one hand close to Catholicism and is even venerated in the Roman Catholic Church, because he pieced together the Apostolic Succession from the Apostle Peter to the first Pope of Rome, and even 'baptized' in 337 AD the Roman Emperor Constantine who significantly empowered Roman Catholicism. On the other hand, Eusebius was the primary supporter of Arius and embraced the false teaching of Arianism while studying in Antioch. After Eusebius had baptized Constantine, his son Constantius II also followed Arianism and even installed Eusebius as Constantinople's bishop. The later Roman Emperor Valens continued to spread the false teaching of Arianism, who in turn brought it to the Goths. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]
6. 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 (no matter how undiscerned and even normalized this office is by many of today's scholars). The famous opening of the Creed of Antioch (341 AD; the council where Wulfila was probably made bishop) declared: "We have neither become followers of Arius - for how should we who are bishops follow a presbyter?" [1] [2] [3]
7. Constantius II the Roman emperor from 337 - 361 AD, held Wulfila in such high honour, that he described him repeatedly as the era's Moses (he was also compared to the prophet Elijah, with authors such as Auxentius (foster-son of Wulfila and bishop of Milan) and or the Presbyterian Charles Anderson Scott claiming that he was taken up into heaven before a great crowd in Constantinople after he had died ...). [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
8. 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]
9. 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'). In Tolkien's and J. K. Rowling's works of darkness we find also a strong focus on Runic letters which are also part of Wulfilas predominantly Greek alphabet (the famous Nazi insignia consisted also Runes). [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
10. 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). We only know from Spain that Arian literature had been collected in 589 AD (in the year the Visigoths converted to Catholicism) and burned together with the house in which these were heaped up, and thus not a single Gothic text has survived in Spain. 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. [1]
11. [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 CHRISTOS. He taught that the SPIRIT's actions are proper to THEOS, but that these actions are no proof of His divinity (meaning He is not divine in his eyes). Even more problematically, he taught that CHRISTOS is divine, but not deity. Wulfila was therefore clearly a false teacher, sadly having been polluted by the Roman Emperor Valens, who sent them teachers of Arius's dogma. The Goths clung to the rudiments of this, the first faith they had received and later disseminated by Wulfila. [1] [2] [3] [4]
12. For a complete discernment of Wulfila and the respective sources: www.fitforfaith.ca/discernment-historical-figures/

• Knowing that Wulfila was closely connected to Arianism and the Roman Catholic Church (he opposed it only to the degree the Catholic Church conflicted with Arianism, but had generally close ties with them) and His explicit denial of the deity of CHRISTOS and 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, and 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):

• Another proof is the former Middle English use of the the third letter of the Word G‑d / Goth, also called the Thorn' Letter 'Þ' as to commonly express 'th'. The King James Version used in 1611 AD the word '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 constitutes the four-fold proof (1. the Numerals 3/70/9,  2. CHRISTOS' name in Greek 'ΧΡΙϹΤOϹ' and in Gothic 'c𐍇𐍂𐌹𐍃𐍄𐌿𐍃' re-confirms the second letter of '𐌲𐌿𐌸 / guþ', 3. Exchange of 'Þ' in Middle English for 'TH', 4. German equation of 'Goth' with 'G‑tt' see below) that the term which Wulfila chose for the Christian deity, the name G‑d, is identical with 'Goth' (the German linguist Jacob Grimm also supported this concept) . It is clear that there is no justification in using this title, which even includes a three-pronged spear 𐌸 , for THEOS. This title, previously used exclusively to describe a tribe, should have never found its way into the Christian Bible and into the vernacular use.

• Wulfila changed the letter sign of Θ -pronounced 'th'- (which is the initial letter of ΘΕΟϹ = THEOS; the only letter swap he employed in his alphabet!) and changed it for the three-pronged spear 𐌸 -phonetic reassignment: now in turn pronounced 'th'-, associated with Satan*, sea gods such as Posei**n and military emblems. That not being enough, he employed the abbreviation (Nomina Sacra) and put this letter symbolizing evil in the prominent centre of what should now supposedly stand for the name of THEOS. This is a blatant blasphemy of His name!

* 1. In Christian iconography, the trident is an attribute of the devil , who holds it as a weapon. 2. We further note that Wulfila chose an extreme form of the Psi-letter, which was usually only graphed as a cross with horizontal or slightly 'raised arms', but rarely with arms raised to such an extreme as to display a trident! See also 'Comparative Greek Fonts and Keyboard Mapping', by Kris J. Udd., or 'Greek and Latin Palaeography' by Edward Thompson, with the writing of the letter compared throughout the centuries. 3. It is also 'interesting' that pagans do recognize today the evil nature of the trident in the USB symbol of our modern cellphones, but that Christian scholars have apparently never recognized that very same symbol in the name of G‑d . . .

• 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:

• 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! (While the third letter of G‑d / Goth is literally called the 'Thorn' letter which could be a coincidence or not). Inscriptions in Denmark, Iceland and Norway show the office to be opposed to magic, but 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 another 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 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 for the worship of (a) mysterious 'G-th(s)' 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 had been 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 same year they burned all Arian literature in Spain). 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 Photius with their mythical ancestor or national g‑d called 'Ga*t' and / or 'Gautr'; 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 . . .

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(l)

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 IESOUS CHRISTOS to an artificial word we find more suitable. Mat 1:16 reads "of Mary, from out of whom was born IESOUS, the One being called CHRISTOS." 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 (as we do not know with certainty how to pronounce nor write the Tetragrammaton).

Greek is the world's oldest recorded living language, first spoken in the Balkan peninsula since the 3rd millenium BC or earlier (which can only mean that Greek was one of the languages with the Tower of Babel in ~2841 BC (line of Japeth)). The Greek alphabet is also the oldest written alphabet still in continuous use today (at least since 800 BC) and is the first writing system to have included vowels.

The earliest examples of written Paleo-Hebrew date only back to the 10th century BC and the Hebrew of today's Bibles has little to do with Paleo-Hebrew and the Aramaic / Hebrew of the original Bible).

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.

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').

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