New website www.christian-calendar.org

The Name of 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

At no point in history has THEOS authorized or commanded us to translate His holy name, and to enter into endless discussions which name now to adapt, while very often not even knowing the Paleo-Hebrew term (the earliest form of Hebrew) for it. The Greek Old and New Testament is the Scripture delivered to us and it contains absolutely everything we need, including His holy name we have no reason for to translate it.

We can also not give THEOS a name such as 'G-d', which is a relatively new European invention with a vague etymology, and go as far as to translate this name in different ways in different languages. This name 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 does include it, no apostle or early church father ever mentioned it, 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 much worse, the term 'G-d' may now signify any monotheistic conception of G-d, including the translations of the Arabic Al**h, Persian Kh**a, Indic Ish**ra and the Maasai N**i.

THEOS gave Himself many names and 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.

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 OT + 1313x NT = 4434 occurrences including 'gods') and 'ΚΥΡΙΟϹ' (Strong's G2962; 7350x OT + 721x NT = 8071 references including the vocative use as 'Sir'; usually translated with 'Lord', 'Master') and I urge the church to go back to His name.

.

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

  • The person who introduced this title to Arianism / Gothic Christianity, was Wulfila, 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 Wulf' and we do not need much Bible knowledge to know the implications of this name.
  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.
  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.
  4. Constantius II, the Roman emperor and successor of Constantine, described Wulfila as the era's Moses and he was also compared to the prophet Elija.
  5. Jerome's (Secretary of the Roman Pope Damasus) 'Commentary on Isaiah' contained also a copy of Wulfilas  Bible translation, affirming once again that the Roman Catholic Church highly respected and praised Wulfila.
  6. Wulfila attended several councils organized by the Roman Catholic Church. [for a complete discernment of Wulfila and the respective sources on the previous points: www.fitforfaith.ca/discernment-historical-figures/]
  7. Knowing now that Wulfila was closely connected to the Roman Catholic Church, we should abstain from using the name 'G-d'! The fact alone, that a mother-goddess religion (as the RCC unquestionably is through its predominant adoration of the mother over the Son) is comfortable with using the name 'G-d', should make us ponder.

  • But the problem is much greater than Wulfila and his particular associations:

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

  • 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):

What does the term 'G-d ' mean?

  • The word 'G-d' is synonymous with the word 'Goth' itself !

* Most of the letters of the Gothic alphabet have been taken over directly from the Greek alphabet, though a few have been created or modified from Latin. Regarding the letters' numeric values, most correspond also to those of the Greek numerals. Gothic 𐌵 takes the place of Ϝ (6), 𐌾 takes the place of ξ (60), 𐌿 that of Ο (70), and 𐍈 that of ψ (700). Source: www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_alphabet

  • 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'.
  • 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 is most probably named after one of their gods.

What else do we know about the 'g-d ' 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!).
  • 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). 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.

'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'."
  • 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.
  • 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."

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'.

* 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 with 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) . . .

> 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! <

BACK TO TOP ↑