Talk:Yahweh

Why is this message composed in past tense? Yahweh is still worshiped today. I think it should be changed something along the lines of "Yahweh is a diety, worshiped in Abrahamic religions, coming from the Levantine region." KeymasterOne (talk) 16:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yahweh is not worshipped today. There are no Yahwists who worship a storm god. There are merely religions with derivative symbolism and mythology. The tetragrammaton continues to hold residual significance in Judaism and Christianity, but in its patchy usage in the old testament it is not even rendered into a name, while Christians later rendered it as "Jehovah" – both mere homages to the earlier Yahwist cult. Iskandar323 (talk) 00:08, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure I agree that the change should be made to a different tense (although the sentence in general I don't think reads well for a concept like a deity rather than a historical person). But, Yahweh was still used in many contexts far after 332BC; for example in popular catholic hymns (Yahweh, I know you are near; I will bless Yahweh; Rise, O Yahweh; ect. https://www.archbalt.org/no-yahweh-in-songs-prayers-at-catholic-masses-vatican-rules/) until a papal letter in 2008 ('Letter to the Bishops' Conferences on "The Name of God"') discussing the tetragrammaton. Its a bit hard to reconcile with your assertion and the article which seems to suggest no one referred to Yahweh post-332BC. And it is certainly inaccurate to suggest Christianity only used 'Jehovah'. 128.249.96.51 (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

There is rare and sporadic usage yes, but it is not used as a liturgical standard in any faith. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just stopping by to say I also agree with the past tense, as I think it is fair to say the concept has evolved a fair bit in the past three or so millennia. But Iskandar323, I confess you have piqued my curiosity! What do you mean the tetragrammaton is not 'rendered into a name'? Do you mean it doesn't have masoretic vowels attached? Or do you mean the tradition of "Ketiv/Qere"? Inquiring minds want to know! Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 19:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wasn't familiar with the terms, but yes, the name of God was only written down as YHWH out of respect, with the pronunciation only preserved in oral tradition, and in time that too was forgotten.[1] The upshot of this is that no one actually knows how to pronounce YHWH, and "Yahweh" is just a guess that has served well enough for academic purposes when discussing the ancient deity. But anyone worshipping Yahweh, per se, knows not the name of their god. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

So, forgive my nitpickery--you are largely correct, though the timeline is a bit off. When the Torah was written down, it was entirely vowel-less (aside from matres lectionis). It was not until the 10th century or so that the masoretic vowels were added (and they are still not printed on Torah scrolls). So, sure, while the tetragrammaton does not have vowels (or is voiced with the vowels from adonai), that's simply the original form of the language, and much of ancient pronunciation is similarly on a bit of an unsteady footing. Cheers. 19:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC) Dumuzid (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

It was commonly used in English language Catholic hymns (at least in the United States; I am not sure there are any statistical studies done on hymn usage in Catholic mass but 'Yahweh, I know you are near' was particularly common) prior to 2008, which is why sources do exist discussing its discontinuation as a spoken phrase. This is also discussed in the tetragrammaton page. I think an argument could be made for merging the two pages or providing a final paragraph with more context for the link between the two, but I am very open to hearing opposing arguments. 128.249.96.51 (talk) 19:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This page is about the god as an archaeological and anthropological curiosity: the other page is about the name/acronym. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure, but the similar article on the anthropological and archaeological curiosity of Yahwism for example includes a section on the transition to modern Judaism. It feels disjointed that the only reference in this article to the modern usage is in the disambiguation. 128.249.96.51 (talk) 19:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The name YHWH is used over 6,800 times in the Old Testament, of which numerous instances are phrases akin to “I am YHWH”, “YHWH is His name”, “my god is YHWH”, etc. I fail to see how this could be considered “patchy”, let alone not a name. Likewise, while I understand and agree that much has changed in the interpretation of the deity in the intervening millennia, your assertion that Yahweh is somehow not the god invoked by modern Abrahamic religions is just patently false - I can’t speak for Christianity and Islam as confidently, but I can tell you that all major Jewish liturgies invoke the name YHWH in practically every prayer, and YHWH has always been held as the utmost sacred name of God. This is hardly “residual significance” so much as it is a direct continuation of the ancient practice, albeit with some obvious theological changes and amendments. Sinclairian (talk) 22:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

You're sort of missing the point, which is that the statement "YHWH = Yahweh" is not strictly known to be true. The "Yahweh" vowelization is an academic reconstruction based on Greek texts, and there is consensus that it is probably correct, but also that it is ultimately unknown. This might appear to be a subtle or rather academic distinction, but it still echoes through scholarship to this day. The 2021 Brill work The “God of Israel” in History and Tradition, for example, expressly introduces the "God of Israel" as "YHWH" (without even mentioning "Yahweh"), and continues to refer to the deity in the un-vowelled format precisely for this reason. By contrast, academic literature about the Canaanite pantheon and the emergence of ancient Israelite religion far more routinely throws around "Yahweh" as the default go-to because the acronym is awkward and could convey a sense of partiality or undue respect. The deity is the same in the sense that modern Abrahamic monotheists believe it the same, and in so much as a deity exists in the first place depending on people's beliefs, but the acronym and the vowelled name have different literary uses and applications – hence the divergent subjects and pages here. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is why I insisted on a change. Just by reading the first few sentences of the article, one can probably conclude that Yahweh was a God that was worshiped thousands of years ago and is no longer relevant in modern Abrahamic religions, though I know. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all believe that YHWH is the same God that created the universe and still exists to this present day. I don't believe using the past tense is correct as for a God that is still worshiped. It could be argued that this is an insult to these religions. We also have the fact that across different languages, people have a different name for God. This doesn't mean that it isn't the same God. Even through a Trinitarian perspective, Christians believe that God the Father is the "maker of Heavan and Earth before all ages" according to the Nicene Creed. KeymasterOne (talk) 06:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mooters 1563, you say "Yahweh is the God of Judaism, Christianity." Yahweh had these characteristics (among others):

*He was a god of storms and wars

*He had a wife, named Asherah

*He was the chief god of a pantheon that included several other gods

*He did not create the world from nothing, but made an existing world habitable

*He lived in a palace located directly above Jerusalem

And much more. In short, he wasn't very like the modern gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Nor are these three gods very like each other. For this reason he has a separate article that doesn't trace his story beyond the fall of Jerusalem, which is when he started to turn into the god of Judaism.PiCo (talk) 10:44, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Quoted by tgeorgescu (talk) 06:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

He also sometimes lived in a tent ... for weekend trips I suppose. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Technically speaking, Islam says God's name is Allah, and that Jews and Christians have erred and been misled somewhat, though not critically so, and retain enough of a kernel of some primal faith that they qualify as people of the book. Islam doesn't say anything Yahweh or storm god-related is correct. Some scholarly readings coincidentally (or not) suggest that El, not Yahweh, was the original Israelite god, which is not surprising given El's role as the head of the local pantheon and presumptive arch deity, and as the eponymous god of the Israelite name – Isra-El. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Iskandar -- totally agree with this, but can't resist adding a slight bit of trivia--Hosea 8:6 is traditionally a tricky verse. The way it has come down to us, it looks like an ungrammatical "for from Israel, it was made..." But, as many scholars have pointed out just by breaking up the letters differently (mysrael becomes my sr el) we get, "For who is the bull El? He was made..." Now, that's not a definitive etymology for the name Israel, but it is suggestive. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yahweh isnt a storm god. Stop spreading misinformation 70.58.179.30 (talk) 01:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Any WP:RS to that extent? Written by WP:CHOPSY scholars. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

In fairness, there's some evidence that he started off with different traits, as a god of volcanoes and metallurgy - so as a Hephaestus or Vulcan if you will - and only took on the storm god traits in flattering later theological depictions - notably in the stories in which he bests Baal, the Canaanite-Phoenician storm god, at his own game with lightning. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yup, the idea that Israelites were preponderantly monotheists since Abraham or Moses, is just a story, it is not historically true. tgeorgescu (talk) 19:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

There is an inaccuracy which points to the topic of palestine and naming the land the israelites inhabited as such. In the time that it is being referenced the name would have been more appropriately the Land of Canaan. So I would like to suggest editing it to that to avoid confusion as well as political debate. The term Palestine did not come about for well over a 1000 years after the time period of which this topic came about. 2604:AF80:1C47:F870:1067:CFA9:8D46:840B (talk) 04:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

You are asking whether the name Palestine was existed at that time? It has started with the Roman Empire after the Jewish revolt was crushed.... I thought it's obvious!Meni111 (talk) 11:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

you are totally right, but it seems the editors do nothing about it Meni111 (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The jihadists around the world try, and succeed to change the history to falsely show Jews are not from Israel. they change the name Judea and Sameria/Cannan to Palestine, even though Palestine is not the area that this article and others is there more Jewish that that?? are about, nor was that name invented at those times. the username "keep crying" is used by the Jihadists on line in respect to the 7/10 genocide. Wikipedia has become a victim to the jihadists in Arabic language long time ago, but it is licking into the civilized English these days. Help to keep the savages out and Wikipedia professional. Meni111 (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The jihadists around the world try, and succeed to change the history to falsely show Jews are not from Israel. they change the name Judea and Samaria/Canaan to Palestine, even though Palestine is not the area that this article and others (Midianite pottery) are about, nor was that name invented at those times. the username "keep crying" is used by the Jihadists on line in respect to the 7/10 genocide. Wikipedia has become a victim to the jihadists in Arabic language long time ago, but it is leaking into the civilized English these days. Help to keep the savages out and Wikipedia professional. Meni111 (talk) 11:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply