G-D isn't any quicker to right than GOD, why not write it correctly.\n\nIs it something like X-mas,  meaning that they didn't like the word Christ so they tood it out.
209156
Writing "G_d" is a practice based on the 3rd commandment ("You shall not take the name of YHWH [probably to be pronounced 'Yahweh,' traditionally ' translated as 'the LORD'] your God in vain.") But why and how did this PARTICULAR way of trying to keep the commandment come about?\n\n(In its original context the command likely had, first of all, to not dishonoring God by such behavior as lightly taking OATHS in his name and not keeping them, by extension to speaking or acting "in his name," whether claiming to speak for him, as his representative, or by claiming to follow him, but living in a way that brings dishonor to\nhim.)\n\nBut one significant expression of attempting to guard and honor the sanctity of the divine name (sometimes called the "tetragrammaton" after its four letters: Y-H-W-H) that we find many expressions of after the Babylonian Exile (6th century BC) is in special treatment of the spoken and written name(s) of God, beginning with "YHWH", and at times extending to other names and titles.\n\nWe see it in how the name was written in the scrolls of the Hebrew Bible, as well as in their early Greek translations. After the Babylonian Exile the Jews adopted the Aramaic letter forms in place of their own earlier forms. But among the Dead Sea Scrolls we find Scriptures written in the Aramaic letters, but with the divine name (which in English may be rendered YHWH) written in the older "paleo-Hebrew" script. Many early Greek translations (some as late as the 4th century AD) have the divine name written either in the Hebrew letters, or using Greek letters that LOOK like the Hebrew word. (If read as Greek one would say "Pipi", but there is no evidence such a pronunciation was ever intended.)\n\nAnother way of honoring the name YHWH that grew up at the same time was to avoid SAYING the name by substituting another Hebrew word (for Greek speakers it might be the Greek equivalent). For example, we find references to "the Name". This was at times extended to other divine names. So, for instance, in place of "God" one might say "heaven". We find some reflections of this in the NT, esp. in the gospel of Matthew, who (writing chiefly to JEWISH Christians) ordinarily speaks of the "kingdom of heaven" where other gospels use "kingdom of God".\n\nThe most important substitute was that of the word for "Lord" in place of the name YHWH. The Hebrew word was "ADONAI", Greek speakers used their equivalent, "KYRIOS". In fact, the NT throughout uses "Lord" (kyrios) when quoting OT passages that use the divine name YHWH. (This is important in connection with the claim of Christians that Jesus is divine -- calling him "Lord" was not just honoring him as "Master" but applying the divine name to him.) This practice has continued to be followed in most Scripture translations from the Hebrew, including the use of "the LORD" in most English translations. (Usually small caps are used to indicate that the original used "YHWH" not "Adonay".)\n\nEvidence for the Jewish practice is found in the customs of the Masoretes -- Hebrew scribes who carefully preserved the Hebrew text of Scripture, and added a system of markings, including accents and vowel-markings, to preserve the traditional understanding of the text. In the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible the name YHWH is marked with an unusual set of vowels, which if we tried to pronounce them would yield "Yehowah' [in later English, Jehovah"]. But that is not what they intended. Rather they marked the word with the vowels from "Adonay" to indicate that THIS was the word to be spoken when you came to the divine name.\n\nThe form "G_d" imitates this scribal practice of leaving out the original vowel sounds (to indicate what one is NOT s
279721
I'm seeing this a lot lately. People mistake an issue of semantics for an issue of faith.\n\nThe fact is that "god," "God," "G-d," "GOD," or however you want to spell it has an agreed upon definition as a supernatural entity. Money is not "god," or "a god." Neither is pride, the big bang, luck, stars, or the Earth.\n\nNow, all atheists and agnostics have things that are important to them, but these things are not their "gods."\n\nUnderstand?
44387
It's short for "May God speed you on your journey."  Good-bye is also a shortening, some even say corruption, of "God be with you."
532210
Sounds like the translators made an a*s of this.\nOr should it be a 'gadha'? LOL.
567452
Another paradox of the English language.\n\nWith love in Christ.
480706
Its gibberish. Its used in graphic design or typesitting. Its "dummy" text. \n\nSee http://www.lipsum.com/
128996
Dont listen to those things. MEN wrote them. They have many fabrications. Dont listen to the other answerers who are giving you grief either. I know why you spelled G-d. It's because G-d's name is not to be used casually as if he is a regular person. Also because things that may be erased, are not allowed to have G-d's name because it is not meant to be erased(a Jewish friend told me)\nSomeone also told me it was because it is Dog spelled backwards(that was pretty dumb)
629331
These aren't exactly arguments for keeping these words in place,\n\n--"people dont have anything better to do. god in the US is part of the history so why change it "\n\n--"they want to be a cry baby and say there rights are being violated they need to thank God they were born in a free country \n\nThese words "Under God" are relative late comers to the Pledge as has been already pointed out.  They apparently bother some people in this country substantially which at least warrants a dialog.  While I personally find no objection for these words to remain in the Pledge, I do see the logic proposed by those who do oppose.  That logic brings forth issues of social dysfunction by means of alienating non-believers, an argument which i don't totally buy, but is a much more sound argument than 'That's the way we've always done it, so we should continue'- Not exactly an argument of a society that knows why it developed certain values.
650610
You're confusing two different words. The offensive word has 2 "g"s.
184764
I asked this question too because I am Muslim and have JEwish friend who I saw doing that. They told me that it is out of respect because once you write God's name you cannot erase it, so if it is spelled G-d and it gets erased or destroyed it will be no disrespect to God. Also you dont use God's name casually as if He is a regular person Someone also told me that it is because it spells dog backwards..I found it funny
11056
Xmas (or X-mas) is an abbreviation for Christmas. It is derived from the word ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ, transliterated as Christos, which is Greek for Christ. Greek is the language in which the whole New Testament was written. \n\nOriginally, in "Xmas", X represented the Greek letter χ. It was pronounced with a hard [kh], which is the first letter of Christ's name in Greek. However, because of the modern interpretations of the letter X, many people do not know this and assume that this abbreviation is meant to drop Christ from Christmas as a means of secularization or a vehicle for political correctness. \n\nThe occasionally seen belief that the X represents the cross Christ was crucified on has no basis in fact; St Andrew's Cross is X-shaped, but Christ's cross was probably shaped like a T or a †. Indeed, X-as-chi was associated with Christ long before X-as-cross could be. The use of X as an abbreviation for cross in modern abbreviated writing (e.g. "Kings X" for "Kings Cross") may have reinforced this assumption. \n\nIn ancient Christian art χ and χρ (Chi Ro--the first two letters in Greek of Christos) are abbreviations for Christ's name. In many manuscripts of the New Testament and icons, X is an abbreviation for Christos, as is XC (the first and last letters in Greek, using the lunate sigma); compare IC for Jesus in Greek. The Oxford English Dictionary documents the use of this abbreviation back to 1551, 50 years before the first English colonists came to North America and 60 years before the King James Version of the Bible was completed. At the same time, Xian and Xianity were in frequent use as abbreviations of "Christian" and "Christianity". \n\nThe abbreviation is widely but not universally accepted; some view it as demeaning to Christ, whilst others find it helpful to use in text messages and emails to save space. Similarly, Xianity is sometimes used as the abbreviation for Christianity (although this usage is much less common than "Xmas"). This usage has extended to "xtal" for "crystal", and on florists' signs "xant" for "chrysanthemum" (though these words are not etymologically related to "Christ" — crystal comes from a Greek word meaning "ice", and chrysanthemum from a Greek word meaning "golden flower", while Christ comes from a Greek word meaning "anointed").
535365
It's not to be interpreted in the way anyone or everyone thinks. It means exactly what it says.\n\nThe builders rejected Jesus, the capstone. Therefore, they rejected salvation, because it is impossible to be saved any other way except through Jesus.
355849
Well, the reason is that people don't respect God...it's sad.  we just have to keep setting the example by capitalizing it :)
41448
In the translation of my copy of the Bible, they state flat-out that they do this out of respect for people (including the Jews, whose scripture they are translating) who might feel offended seeing the Name of God in print to potentially be abused.  They add that where the proper name of God is used, they translated it to LORD, all caps, while "The Lord" was translated to a normal proper noun.
467135
Hi - I can't speak for all Christians, but if my car were stuck in the mud, and you came along and offered to help me out of the mud, I really don't think I'd care what belief system you have.  \n\nAs for the 'God Bless' - I might say that to you, simply because it is how I speak.  If you sneezed, I'd say 'God bless you' - but I would not say it to be offensive to you.  Some Christians say it as a matter of course.  If you truly do not believe in God, translate it in your mind to thank you.\n\nBy the way, thank you.  I am anti-abortion and anti-death penalty.
611900
Exclaiming something like “Jesus Christ! Get the hell out of my way!” while driving on a highway has nothing whatsoever to do with the admonishment in the Bible about taking God’s name in vain. First of all, the name of God was lost many centuries ago because of the prohibition against speaking it aloud and writing it down. We know many substitutes for it today, but do not know the actual name. Even if we did know the name today, using it as a word of profanity still would not be the admonishment in question. What the Bible does caution against is, after learning the name, not calling upon that name in everything you say or do. That would be taking the name in vain (or for nothing).
275472
Because it doesn't make sense.\n\nRock on!\n\nHave a great godless day!  Contact me with your questions, comments, or concerns.