The, so called, Name of God is transliterated from Hebrew with four capital consonants YHWH, presumably, although no one knows for sure, pronounced as Yahweh not Jehovah, which is the Latin form, or as scholars dubbed it the “Tetragrammaton” the four letter name. This doesn’t quite roll off the tongue however. The Israelites refused to say the Name out of reverence, except on the high holyday, so that no one would take the Name of the Lord in vain.

If we ask how the Name is pronounced today we get no definitive answer. Even if this is the correct spelling we are still at a loss to its full meaning. Without sound we are as deaf and dumb as the next guy. In Hebrew the vowels were supplied by the reader. Later vowels were added to the text as in our modern versions to facilitate comprehension; but then only other speakers of Hebrew could understand the writing. In English we do the same thing; for example, PRKWY means parkway, FRWY means freeway or BRKLYN means Brooklyn.

In ancient Judaism one needed a Rabbi to learn how to read and pronounce correctly. The people must take his word on faith that what he speaks is the word of God.

We find this priesthood in every religious hierarchy, especially prevalent in ancient Palestine, there where it took the resemblance of a Gnostic cult.

Israel resisted then succumbed to pagan rite and practices eventually. They embraced open religion as in the pagan Temple worship and prostitution. From Egypt down to Baal and Moloch who offered child sacrifices, to Apollo, Zeus and Caesarism, the Jews were tested. The people of God first fight against the idols then conform. The Maccabees restored the temple the last great Jewish victory over the Gentiles, then in a curve of history Rome takes control. This was the final end to Jewish independence until 1948.  

Intertestamental Judaism withdrew into itself and became as it must have been in the eyes of the Romans an exclusive club, impenetrable from the outside. They were baffled by it. The Romans could take their land, but not their faith, so resilient were the Jews that they were exempt from hailing Caesar because Rome hoped to avoid the very genocide that eventually came in 70 AD, with the destruction of the Temple.

As much as inclusivism or participation in pagan ritual was a sin, so exclusivism that says we are the chosen ones has always been the sin of Israel. They lose their holy standing when they conform to the religion of the day. Those who shut themselves down from the rest of the world by speaking a sacred language with a secret revelation must have appeared as another mystery cult to the Gentiles. The Sanhedrin the ruling bodies of Israel thought they had transcended the impurity of the Gentiles by having as little contact as possible with them, or the Samaritans or other Jews for that matter. They were the elect holy ones with a special line to God, the protectors of the Name.

Jesus broke with this tradition by speaking in the language of the people in simple stories and parables. He opened the kingdom of God to everyone. Later the entire New Testament was written in Greek, the common language of the Eastern portion of the Roman Empire. This disassociation between clergy and layman is not unlike, the old Latin Mass, or the reading of the Torah in Hebrew or the Koran in original Arabic, languages known only to a few elect. Jesus made the priests station in society superfluous. God does not speak in a holy language known only by the powerful.

Aristocracy controls the political climate and makes rebellion impossible. The people were torn between God and Emperor, should they obey God in good conscience and rise up or should they go with the flow of Jewish submission to the Romans, the religious aristocracy controlled the crowds. This was true when the leaders and elders stirred hostility to Jesus, swearing allegiance to Caesar, death to Jesus, wishing His blood on their own heads and the heads of their children and freeing Barabbas. The Romans had control of the high priest and the king. But the priests controlled the mob.

Jesus did not recognize this caste system but spoke openly in the streets and with authority not like the rabbis who spoke in quotations of other rabbis, like typical lawyers.

Sound is necessary in order to establish common meaning and definition. We can never know what a word means without the distinguishing sound associated with each letter and use in context. Pascal subtly tells us that the ear is the organ of perception not the eye. We grasp meaning by hearing. We speak what we hear.

How does their, there and they’re differ in meaning as to sound? They all sound alike, but spelled differently. We know one from the other by the context. With each word we associate meaning and feelings towards. One sound is visualized with three distinct words or images. Without the sound behind the text we will never know the meaning of any given word. Sight and sound must correlate to gain understanding. When one is silenced or blinded we cannot know the precise meaning.

Without sound YHWH becomes a dead letter spelling the name of a deceased God; it’s an epitaph on a headstone in the graveyard of Judaism. “Here lies the god who claimed to be I am.” Another failed deity in the Pantheon of gods forsaken by His people. Left to pine away in silence.  Words on paper can never compare to hearing the sound of His Name. The spoken word has the final say.

     The chosen ones of old failed to keep God’s Name. The One Name that will save all people from their sin vanished in the destruction of the temple 70 AD. The Name that cannot be named was silenced forever. The high priest was tasked with pronouncing it once a year on the Day of Atonement, but never spoke of it afterwards. When YHWH was encountered in the text the reader would simply substitute Adonai translated as LORD. The Name was so holy that only one man could speak it. To this day Jews will not utter the Name, or fully spell the word “God” instead they put a dash in the middle, such as G-d, to avoid saying the Name. When the temple fell and the high priest was killed the Name disappeared with him.. Therefore the Name of God was lost to history.

     What are we to make of this fiasco? The ancients were not careful enough to preserve the Name. What about today? What should we make of an alleged Name to God? I can only answer this question with another question, I know rhetorical error, laws of Aristotelian logic dictate we cannot answer a question with another question. But in this case, I can make an exception: In the Name of God how do you lose the Name of God?

     The ancient Israelites were given the glory to speak the Name of God to the Gentiles. This was their stated mission. Yahweh did not want His people to be silent about His Name but to declare it to the world. When God revealed His Name to Moses as, I AM WHO IAM, He expected it to be shouted from the house tops and proclaimed aloud. God appears very peculiar about His Name. He said to Moses that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Living God, the Great I AM, tell them I AM hath sent you. “This is my name forever, and this is my title for all generations” (Exodus 3:15 NRSV).

The religious jealousy over the Name of God denied the world salvation. We are only saved when we call on the Name of God. “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:13).

The Tetragrammaton does not appear in the New Testament, except in quotations translated by the generic Greek theos or kyrios, usually translated into English as God or Lord. In this vein Paul goes on to say, how can they call on Him in whom they have not believed and how are they to believe if they never heard His Name? How shall they hear without a preacher and how can one preach without being sent (Romans 10:14-15)? Salvation begins by saying the Name of God.

Those who are saved by the Name of the Lord were given a special or holy calling to announce the good news to the world. This was Israel’s mandate; instead of rising to the challenge of that call, they hid the Name of God under a bushel basket. They kept it to themselves presuming it was too holy to pronounce up unto the point where they lost it. This was one thing they were charged to do, that is, speak the Name of God to the world. They forfeited this right by not speaking it. In their zeal to save the purity of the Name they forgot how to say it. We must speak the Name of God so it will not be forgotten. They silenced God among the nations. This was the opposite of what Yahweh had intended. Jewish tradition put God in that coffin. They chose the traditions of men over the Word of God. God wants His Name proclaimed to all people. In order to keep from blasphemy they cut God offer from the Gentiles, so that no one knew His Name.

We are not to fear. What is the Name of God is a moot question.  Although, absent from the New Testament, the Name of God takes on a new meaning despite the silence. Jesus identifies himself as I am (John 8:58). Before Abraham lived Jesus existed eternally. Jesus becomes the incarnated Yahweh, the Name made flesh, so that only in His Name do we find salvation (Acts 4:12). So when I’m asked about the Name of God, I simply reference a human name, Jesus, the Messiah, the Great I AM, the Name above every name that is named, so that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow and every tongue confess Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:9). God’s purpose is never frustrated.

         The idea that the Jews would follow a Gentile, even hail him as Caesar, seems a bit far off. Yet this is exactly how the Left Behind series has presented him. The Antichrist must be Italian because he arises from old Rome. Some will say the Roman Empire must be rebuilt in order for this to happen. In Left Behind the Antichrist was a blonde headed Italian smooth talking politician from Romania. Why would the Jews follow someone like this? Because he offers peace for land and settles the Arab-Israeli conflict? Maybe he will offer to rebuild the temple? But he’s not Jewish. Jewish legend said Antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan.

        It appears remarkable to me that the Jews will suddenly lose their identity with Father Abraham. The Antichrist must be Jewish because he must embody all that is holy, pious and good; then he suddenly turns into a mad idolater.

        The identity of the beast with a Jewish politician is not Anti-Semitic. Jesus was Jewish, the Second Adam, how can we expect anything less from Antichrist? By saying, however, “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15 KJV), the Jews were essentially swearing allegiance to his divinity. They embraced the Antichrist as represented in Pontius Pilate or the Roman Emperor instead of the true Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords. Wait! Maybe the Antichrist is Italian after all?

     Modern people find the end of the world fascinating, strange because such ancient belief was supposed to disappear as technology improved society. In fact, the world has ended several times already since the late twentieth century until now. 1988, 1997, 2000, 2001 and 2012 have all been predicated dates for the end of the world. What drives our obsession with the end times? People are looking for a meaning to history because in doing so it gives their lives purpose. Prophecy buffs search for a coherent philosophy of history. Something that tells them life is not a random series of events, but has real meaning and going somewhere. The search for the end then represents only the beginning. We are not looking so much for the end itself as the new start we believe will follow. We look for a better place, an improved world. The preoccupation with the end has a bright side. It gives us hope that things will change, regardless of how bad they seem now. We can expect a new world after this one.

     Some locate this new age beyond history in the new heaven and new earth mentioned at the end of Revelation or in the millennium, the thousand year reign of Christ over the earth. History will be brought to an abrupt end as God intervenes to save humanity. Once the present order of sin dissolves God will bring us safely home to our eternal resting place. A new order of peace, justice and righteousness will reign over the world. Others find this new age in history in the current ebb and flow of events; as history progresses a better world will arise on the ashes of the old. The contemporary age will give way to a better one if we work for it. This has been called by theologians and philosophers millennialism. The belief that the present will give way to a period of time in the future that will bring in a golden age for humanity, an age of peace, harmony and prosperity for all, an age without out war and strife between nations.

     Modern thought finds itself steeped in millennialism.  The idea of progress, humanism, technicism, futurism, communism and postmillennialism amongst others expect a better tomorrow through social reform, evangelism, technology and human cooperation. These many isms aren’t looking for an end to time. The end has already happened in the past and is slowly receding away from us in the end of the old order of things. They look to the future for meaning and purpose. Technological progress will prove triumphant over the old regressive forces from the past, such as superstitious religion, tyranny, inequality, famine, disease and war. The future remains unbounded and we are witnessing the emergence of a utopian society.

     However, this positive vision of the future has stalled with the advent of many existential threats to human survival, such as nuclear war, world war, pandemics, genocide, climate change, autonomous technology and many others. All these problems are the result of the very progress we thought would save us from disaster. Our optimism for the future has waned and turned into bitter pessimism. Now history only brings finality. We have difficulty seeing beyond the horizon of our present landscape. We search beyond history to the end of the world and thus a new beginning.

     Prophecy leaves two paths open to us, put bluntly, repent or die life or death. This was the same choice Yahweh gave to the Israelites; worship the one true God or suffer terrible calamity. If we choose life God will spare us and bless the earth, if we refuse to walk in His ways sudden destruction will surely fall on us. Prophecy is not about predicting the future, but changing it. Prophecy says if we take the path of disobedience here is what will happen. We will surely perish. If we obey in faith God will bless the world and judgment will be avoided. The purpose of prophecy prevents future judgment by calling us to repentance.

     A happy future still remains open to us, if we replace our technologically centered world (idolatry) with a God centered one. If we do not repent God will wait for the last possible moment before He wreaks His vengeance on a disobedient world. I believe God will end the world right before mankind destroys itself as in the days of Noah. Until then He waits patiently for all to turn to Him. Jesus said, “if those days had not been cut short no one would be saved” (Matthew 24:22). God will intervene to save mankind from extinction. How this will happen we do not know; but until that time if we live in disobedience we can expect fearful events to dominate our world as we grow worse and worse. “People will faint from fear of what is coming upon the world” (Luke 21:26). The future appears contingent on us. What path will we take life or death?

     As postscript we need to mention premillennialism which has driven much of our preoccupation with the end. This belief asserts that the end comes before the golden age that progressives hope for. It is not located in past history but future history. Premillennialism proves pessimistic. Destruction persists as a foregone conclusion things will only get worse before they get better. But this handicaps bible prophecy. No matter what we do we can’t change the outcome. Maybe this represents the realistic view, the inescapable fact that we can’t change human nature and we know human nature is self-destructive. Premillennialism describes humanity left to its own devices. But God would not have given us a choice between life and death if there wasn’t a real possibility of turning things around.

Surprisingly enough the term “Modern Times” or just “Modern” as discussed in a previous blog has become obsolete. Now the buzz word is “Postmodernism.” An oxymoronic description of contemporary times that became popular in the 1990’s with the rejection of metanarratives and the embrace of historical relativism. A metanarrative is a grand story or theory that undergirds a civilization and provides it a superstructure (ideas) for the development of its infrastructure (technology). For example, during Modern Times that idea was the notion of progress. The world improves itself with each new technological advance leading history to culmination point in the creation of an ideal society or utopia. A society of equality, freedom and material prosperity for all that knows no war and lives in perpetual peace with itself, as it establishes a technological kingdom over the earth. Nature is subdued. Diseases are cured. Traditional societal differences vanish in the melting pot of technological amalgamation into a new race of people. Likewise the metanarrative of the Middle Ages was the advancement of the City of God across the earth bringing all people into the fold of the Mother Church. To say the least, Modernity proves to be secularized version of the City of God. Thus Christian stains of thought may be seen in modernity, such as universal peace and brotherhood of mankind reaching the Omega Point or the materialization of the kingdom of God on earth. Theologically speaking this is known as Postmillennialism the prevailing eschatological system of the nineteenth century.

     Postmodernism attempts to throw a monkey wrench into the engine of modernity by attacking its philosophical basis in the idea of progress. Progress, like every other metanarrative, is an illusion. Progress represents a fancifully explanation to rationalize the abuses of civilization, such as racism, slavery, war and the rape of nature. Take racism for example. The ideal society creates the ideal person or global citizen as well as a global society in the image of Western technological hegemony. Modernity is the Westernization of the world. Europe and America hold the standards the rest of the world must live up to. This involves rapid industrialization, urbanization and flattening of traditional values and distinctions in favor of globalism. Lest we forget the legacy of modern slavery and racial prejudice haunts modern society more than even the ancient world. The greatest expression of racial progress was the Nazi belief in the superiority of the Aryan race. In America this became the white race. Through technological power the ideal race would subjugate the rest of the world for its own benefit. This became true of both Eastern and Western expressions during the Cold War in their struggle to win over the Third World peoples. Today progress continues to race toward the ideal “person,” not “man” notice the blurring of distinctions between genders, in the creation of technological humanity sometimes called posthumanism or Humanity +. The Western world along with every other racial distinction is transcending itself into something new. Posthumanism then becomes the ideal Caucasian conquering the rest of the world by shaping it into its own technological image.  

In dispelling the idea of progress postmodernism hopes to loosen the stranglehold modern racism has over the world. It abandons the notion of a grand purpose in history, such as the search for the ideal person, progress or Christianity is based on in favor of a relativism which simply cannot define itself. Thus it aims to restore power to local stories, myths and cultures. Because every metanarrative is an illusion people will turn inward toward themselves and their given traditions for meaning and purpose in the world.

I was once asked if postmodernism means we must return to the horse and buggy. The answer is no. Although postmodernism attacks the superstructure of progress it offers no help in the growth of technological infrastructure. One would think that the results of progress or the technological society would begin to crumble without its ideological support. The exact opposite is happening, without a norm or purpose to guide it technological growth takes on a life of its own. It transcends the need for theoretical defense. The idea of progress is now passé along with every other metanarrative that might offer guidance. Technology moves according to its own internal logic without the need of a higher purpose to guide it. Postmodernism has failed. It has only made the problem worse by removing the grand story, now nothing restrains the Machine’s conquest of the planet. It seems fair to say that the idea of progress moves according to a latent inevitable path that would include the jettisoning or moral values and philosophical virtue. We alluded to earlier that modernism or humanism as we may also call it morphs into its end result posthumanism or the transcendence of humanity into a higher species. Modern technological racism has finally accomplished its goal. Posthuman separation of a higher and lower species will make modern slavery look like child’s play. Strangely enough humanism ends with the end of humanity.

     Postmodernism fails because it does not provide an adequate substitute to the idea of progress. Through its hermeneutic of suspicion it brings all teleological possibilities into question. Nothing will serve as a guiding light to technology. Along with postmodernism’s method of doubt we need to bring a new higher purpose to progress that entails directing it toward the good of humanity instead of our extinction and isn’t that the real goal of progress?  

We have guest blogger my daughter the writer Victoria Terlizzese.

Vatican exorcist, Gabriele Amorth, claims that “behind Harry Potter is the signature of the devil.” This is suggesting that Harry Potter has themes of Satanism due to its focus on witchcraft and wizardry. If you belong to any religion that opposes witchcraft;  you will have heard this at some point in your life. 

Upon reading the series and understanding the characters you will realize that this is not what J.K. Rowling intended when she wrote the Harry Potter series. One of the most basic themes in the Harry Potter series is good versus evil. This is portrayed in the sense that good is moral and evil is immoral. In the series, good is defined through character traits, actions and the overall practicing of high moral standards. Evil pertains to the exact opposite. This is a mirror reflection of the way our society functions and classifies the difference between what is right and what is wrong. 

The key difference in the world of Harry Potter and our own is that magic is highly regarded as a basic life skill that the entire world revolves around. That is the fun and fantasy of the series. It is what captivates us, because we know it is not real and we wish that it was. It is a form of escape for the creative mind. As a Christian, I would not chase after evil with the hope that I would turn out as courageous and trustworthy as Harry Potter and his friends. This is basic commonsense among Christians and other devout followers of any religion who understand the difference between spiritual integrity and the innocent joys of life. 

The importance they place on magic is similar to the importance we, ourselves, place on education in the fields of math, science, technology, basic writing skills and history. This is how their society functions. It has nothing to do with their religion or how they view the world. One can choose to use their education to achieve great things and change the world or one could choose to use their knowledge against others.