in spite of all God's names ,why he hasn't call himself a lover or something?
404751
You missed the part about "God is love", (John's gospel), huh?
392728
Without God, we are not capable of knowing what love is.  \n\nAre we supposed to read your name "Pastor Hatred"?\n\nYou still haven't told us what it is that you have against God.
386471
He's a jealous God in the way a husband is jealous for his wife or vice versa. He doesn't want to share his chosen people with other (false) Gods. In the OT, the jewish nation promised to be faithful to him only, in a covenant which is like a marriage. They kept being unfaithful.
736550
God is Not jealous.  Man wrote Him out to seem this way.  Think of it, a Mighty Creator jealous of what He Created?  \nnot likely...\n\n.
348340
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
1015396
Dont compare God to the foolishness of man. Sometimes you can find God in the most unlikely of places, and sometime those that say they are Godly men are the farthest from God of all men. This isnt Gods fault. Dont blame him for the way mankind may behave. :)
348812
Are you done quoting Psalm 14 and Psalm 53 . . . \n\nThere is no god . . . because if there is . . . who is he or it.\n\nTell me . . . what was his dream, his ideal, his plans for mankind . . . \n\nWhy would the faithful removed his name from his own word (supposedly his own word).  Because they never knew him . . . or even cared.  They were afraid to approach him and talk to him personally.  You refer to him as titles . . . an entity with no name . . . not only that . . . if he exist . . you confuse his existance with other creatures (notice I said creatures . . . because they were created (speaking for your Christ).\n\nThere is no god . . . because if I was god . . . I would make sure people would know that I exist . . . I would place undisputable proof.  There is none . . . a lot is still unexplained . . . .\n\nGuess what . . . I just heard that they just discovered a book written by Judas.  That would be interesting to read.\n\n- - - \n\nPlus don't you get tired of wasting everyones time by repeating your bloody questions.
638970
If there was a God, and there isn't. But if there was for the sake of your question. He would be a she and she would be a lesbian.\n\nMore:Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.\nIs he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.\nIs he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?\nIs he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
368521
I don't believe that God has a gender. In animals that reproduce sexually, the purpose of gender is procreation. If  you're Christian, you believe that God has a son, Jesus Christ. However, Jesus was supposed to have been the result of an immaculate conception.God didn't have sexual intercourse with Mary.God isn't human and He/She/It is beyond all human understanding.
448588
Probably because you call him G-D, call him by his name "Yah" short for Yahweh and he will answer. Calling him G-D could mean any God. He answers to his name, That why he tells it to us over 6,000 times. "whatever you ask in his name he will do"
272435
NO.\n\nDyer makes no Biblical references (I'm speaking of the Holy Bible) nor does he talk about God the Father, Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit.\n\nWhen referencing "God" he is talking about the "God concept of self" (new age jargon).\n\nHe does not proclaim to be a follower of Jesus Christ, nor does he profess Christ to be Lord and Savior.  Therefore, he is NOT a Christian.\n\nI hope this helps. :)
580266
God's name is not God that is his title.\n\nYou title may be Mr, Miss, Mrs or even Dr. but you still have a name.\n\nJehovah is God's name in english language like my name Peter is Pedro is Spain or Pierre in France all are valid.\nBut, knowing God’s name Jehovah means learning what that name represents and worshiping the God who possesses it - The True God. His name fittingly means, "He Causes to Become".\n\nJehovah in Psalms 83:18 proves how people really are blinded to bible facts they turn to the teachings of church leaders rather than the bible.\nIt is no different today than it was 2000 years ago.\n\nTo have a close relationship with a friend you use their name and call them by name. Thus if Jehovah God is your friend then use His name. Use God's name Jehovah in prayer in the same way you would use the name of a personal good friend of yours. All false gods have their names but only the True God can be called Jehovah because only Jehovah has the universal right to the name meaning, "He Causes to Become" when you call on Jehovah you are making the distinction.\n\nRomans 10:13 For everyone who calls on the name of God will be saved.
383707
I think that the word "Name", you may be taking too literally.  By name, I do believe it would mean God.  Like using your name, means you, not your name.  Your name is who you are, and we call God, GOD, even Christ or Jesus to some, and by those names, we mean God, or Jesus.
1185932
Well he obviously wished himself into non-existence, hence the lack of evidence of his existence although there were mountains of evidence in Biblical times.  Yet he still manages to exist in the imaginiations of little children and theists.
7910
Gods name is not in the bible in the English translation you have The Lord,THE LORD,God his name is not used. Everywhere where THE LORD is use it was once YHWH with vowels it's believe to be pronouce Yahweh, and where The Lord is used you have adoni which the hebrews change YHWH to adoni to prevent improper pronoucing of his name. With is why no one remember this name.
596593
To each follower, his God is always better. It is better to imbibe Godly qualities to the extent possible, than disputing about the better one.. One may spend / waste a lifetime trying to choose a better God !
944497
We are human and cannot possibly know what God knows.  Do I believe things he has done?  Yes.  Can I with certainty explain how it was done? No.  I don't necessarily think it's doubt, I just think it's being unaware.  The longer you have a relationship with God, the more you will come to understand.  He will make some things clearer so that His will can be done.  We are his servants.  So in some ways I agree with you but I don't like the use of the word doubt, that makes me think of being unfaithful.  I see it more as being in the dark, not able to understand.  He is God, our Creator.  We are merely human.