I have always wondered this.  Shouldn't Jack be short for Jackson and John short for Johnathon?
204496
Jack is a nickname for John because toilet was taken.
440852
i think its spelled john madden. lol
247932
i think its stupid when they merge the celebrities names together!! TOMKAT!!! BENNIFER!!! that;s really stupid!! wut if i merged my name with my ex boyfriends name it would turn out like this: Pedianna,or Bredo,or some other stupid shit!!
285822
yes..\n\njose is joe\njosue is joshua
662886
No, that would show possessive use.  The s after the name is just fine, and actually grammatically correct.
426788
This isnt a bad question... ive wondered this too. The name is in reference to Abraham Lincolon who was the first republican president and supposedly born in a log cabin. Maybe "gay republicans" was too straight forward.
621571
Katie/karen/helen/laura/clare/\nniamh/grace/alana/gayle/janet/\njenna/gemma/julie?\n\nIt could be a thousand things... could you not give us the first letter? lol
434343
Here's the accepted syntax...\n\nMr. William R. Smith, Jr.\nMr. William R. Smith III\n\nSince "Jr." and "III" both modify the name in front of them, I don't know why there is a difference in the acceptable format for using them in written form. I just know this is the way I was taught. A century ago. Back when they used quill pens and ink wells to address letters to Mr. William R. Smith, Jr. \n\nOr Mr. William R. Smith III.
178330
Joe was born on an airplane flying east across the international dateline on March 1 of a non leap year.  John was then born on the other side of the international dateline a few minutes later (February 28) and the year in question happens to be a leap year.\n';'
214241
A lot of their characters do have connections. Of course, they all run ins at the airport before take off. But also, Jack was a doc at the hospital where Shannon's dad died. The guy in the hatch met Jack one day while they were out jogging. Jin's dad was in the vidoeo in the hatch. Sayid was on tv when Kate visited her father. There are too many to list. I'm not really sure what the point is, though, with all of the connections.
365109
When a child is adopted by a non-blood related couple... does the child still call the new parents Father and Mother?\n\nWhen Jesus was a Child... I truly doubt that he would address Mary as ..." OI! Mary!" or Joseph as " Hey! Carpenter man!", he would address them both as their earth father and mother.\n\nIf calling Mary, "Mother" is good enough for Jesus, the very Prince of Heaven, why is it not good enough for others who follow his path? Unless of course they think they are better than Jesus Christ......
149858
Why do many Bible translations not use the personal name of God or use it only a few times?\n\nThe preface of the Revised Standard Version explains: “For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” (Thus their own view of what is appropriate has been relied on as the basis for removing from the Holy Bible the personal name of its Divine Author, whose name appears in the original Hebrew more often than any other name or any title. They admittedly follow the example of the adherents of Judaism, of whom Jesus said: “You have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.”—Matt. 15:6.)\n\nTranslators who have felt obligated to include the personal name of God at least once or perhaps a few times in the main text, though not doing so every time it appears in Hebrew, have evidently followed the example of William Tyndale, who included the divine name in his translation of the Pentateuch published in 1530, thus breaking with the practice of leaving the name out altogether.\n\nWas the name Jehovah used by the inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures?\n\nJerome, in the fourth century, wrote: “Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed.” (De viris inlustribus, chap. III) This Gospel includes 11 direct quotations of portions of the Hebrew Scriptures where the Tetragrammaton is found. There is no reason to believe that Matthew did not quote the passages as they were written in the Hebrew text from which he quoted.\n\nOther inspired writers who contributed to the contents of the Christian Greek Scriptures quoted hundreds of passages from the Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. Many of these passages included the Hebrew Tetragrammaton right in the Greek text of early copies of the Septuagint. In harmony with Jesus’ own attitude regarding his Father’s name, Jesus’ disciples would have retained that name in those quotations.—Compare John 17:6, 26.\n\nIn Journal of Biblical Literature, George Howard of the University of Georgia wrote: “We know for a fact that Greek-speaking Jews continued to write ???? within their Greek Scriptures. Moreover, it is most unlikely that early conservative Greek-speaking Jewish Christians varied from this practice. Although in secondary references to God they probably used the words [God] and [Lord], it would have been extremely unusual for them to have dismissed the Tetragram from the biblical text itself. . . . Since the Tetragram was still written in the copies of the Greek Bible which made up the Scriptures of the early church, it is reasonable to believe that the N[ew] T[estament] writers, when quoting from Scripture, preserved the Tetragram within the biblical text. . . . But when it was removed from the Greek O[ld] T[estament], it was also removed from the quotations of the O[ld] T[estament] in the N[ew] T[estament]. Thus somewhere around the beginning of the second century the use of surrogates [substitutes] must have crowded out the Tetragram in both Testaments.”—Vol. 96, No. 1, March 1977, pp. 76, 77.\n\nWhich form of the divine name is correct—Jehovah or Yahweh?\n\nNo human today can be certain how it was originally pronounced in Hebrew. Why not? Biblical Hebrew was originally written with only consonants, no vowels. When the language was in everyday use, readers easily provided the proper vowels. In time, however, the Jews came to have the super
501593
X-SAMPA: John [dZAn] Larsen [lOr&#92;`s@n]\nKirshenbaum: John [dz.An] Larsen [lOr.s@n]\n\nThat pays a bit of preference to my American accent. It should be fine tho.
552691
He's always referred to as Jack in the book and by the author of the book, but I don't think the movie ever comes out and says that.  The only reference is when he's reading those books that say, "I am Jack's (whatever)."\n\nEDIT:  Yeah, he was making reference to those books.  I'm saying that every time the AUTHOR (Chuck Palahniuk) makes a reference to that character, he just calls him Jack.  Whether or not that was the original intent is beyond me.  I figure I'll just listen to the guy that wrote the story when it comes to things like that.
379015
i also like jack,second runner up would be karen.are you a little hyper today,lol?
12213
Interesting.. i dont know.  But if Jack is dead who is going to save the world?
485152
It's too much. You have decide amongst the names you have listed there.  I like James Day personally.  James Austin Day.  That's a tight name.