Names we use

[TheOneHeLoves]

Can I give you something to think about. The 3 Hebrew boys were given the names Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as those name honor YHWH (Yehweh) God. When they were taken captive by the pagan Babylonians they were given names to give honor to pagan gods those names were Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. Sure they are fun to say but the names are honoring false idols. Let not the devil fool you to use names that dishonor the ONE and ONLY God.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Can I give you something to think about. The 3 Hebrew boys were given the names Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as those name honor YHWH (Yehweh) God. When they were taken captive by the pagan Babylonians they were given names to give honor to pagan gods those names were Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. Sure they are fun to say but the names are honoring false idols. Let not the devil fool you to use names that dishonor the ONE and ONLY God.

Hello TheOneHeLoves, you did indeed give me something new to think about (and that from an OT Book that I am VERY familiar with), so thank you for that

This is the AMAZING story of four (probably teenage) Jewish boys whose Nation had just been overthrown, who had been separated from everything that they were familiar with (their homes and families, their friends, their people, and their way of life), and who were also in the process of being assimilated and groomed to live and serve in the court of their conquerors (which included giving them new names).

Nevertheless, these four boys chose to remain faithful/obedient to the God of their people, the one, true and living God, even though they knew that doing so would most likely end with all four of them being executed (which, in point of fact, is exactly what happened to them, with the interesting rub being that their executions did not result in them dying, or even being hurt ).

With that in mind, I began to wonder why they were so committed to carefully obeying God in everything that He had commanded them to do (even to the point of death), all but in this one area*, that is, that of embracing their new, Babylonian names (names that, as you pointed out, were given to them in honor of the false/fake gods of the Babylonians, and conversely, to perhaps dishonor the living God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as well).

Why would they choose to do that*

Then it occurred to me that the Bible, except in a VERY few number of cases (like Jesus and John the Baptist), is silent about the naming of our children, even when the parents are Jewish or Christian (and even though He is clearly concerned about many other things, like our obedience to His laws, commands, precepts, etc., as well what we do/say/think/believe, and ~Who~ we chose to trust in, believe and obey too, of course).

That said, I may have forgotten or misunderstood something that I read in the Bible about this, and if you think that I have, please point it out to me (a Biblical teaching, that is, either direct or even by insinuation, that restricts the parents' naming of their Jewish and/or Christian children to names that do not dishonor God).

Thanks :)

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hello again @TheOneHeLoves, it also occurs to me that there are many in the OT/NT who came to saving faith in the living God, but who also kept their given names when they did, even if they were named for a false deity. For instance, the Apostle Paul's brother in Christ, traveling companion and fellow worker (teacher and missionary), the devout, Hellenistic Jew named Apollos comes quickly to mind (a man who kept his name when he became a believer, even though he was named for the Greek and Roman false/mythological deity, Apollo).

It seems to me then that God is FAR more concerned with what we do than with what our name is and/or who we were named for (though again, if you can show me that I'm wrong about that, I'd appreciate it :)).

Thanks again!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[TheOneHeLoves]

Hello again @TheOneHeLoves, it also occurs to me that there are many in the OT/NT who came to saving faith in the living God, but who also kept their given names when they did, even if they were named for a false deity. For instance, the Apostle Paul's brother in Christ, traveling companion and fellow worker (teacher and missionary), the devout, Hellenistic Jew named Apollos comes quickly to mind (a man who kept his name when he became a believer, even though he was named for the Greek and Roman false/mythological deity, Apollo).

It seems to me then that God is FAR more concerned with what we do than with what our name is and/or who we were named for (though again, if you can show me that I'm wrong about that, I'd appreciate it :)).

Thanks again!!

--Papa Smurf

I think you are adding on to what my post is saying. These Hebrew boys' names were changed.
1. I don't believe today name are given much thought or intention as they were in these times
2. The application for us today. If your name is Daniel and you are a believer, surrendered to God and then you commit a sin, the world will now what you to be called sinner (giving power to the enemy). no Daniel may have committed a sin but that is not his identity- he is still a child of God.
3. There is a conviction from the Holy Spirit to not use the names that were assigned to intentionally mock God.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I think you are adding on to what my post is saying. These Hebrew boys' names were changed.
1. I don't believe today name are given much thought or intention as they were in these times
2. The application for us today. If your name is Daniel and you are a believer, surrendered to God and then you commit a sin, the world will now what you to be called sinner (giving power to the enemy). no Daniel may have committed a sin but that is not his identity- he is still a child of God.
3. There is a conviction from the Holy Spirit to not use the names that were assigned to intentionally mock God.

If you have a personal conviction to not use the names assigned to the four Hebrew boys, by all means do not use the foreign names.

But do not judge others by your personal conviction. whether they call Danile or Belshazzar, they know whom they are referring to. It is the heart that matters most and not the externals.

 

[TheOneHeLoves]

If you have a personal conviction to not use the names assigned to the four Hebrew boys, by all means do not use the foreign names.

But do not judge others by your personal conviction. whether they call Danile or Belshazzar, they know whom they are referring to. It is the heart that matters most and not the externals.

I find your reply judging me and rude for no reason and it seems like you have the issue. You are adding to what I wrote. I wrote I was giving something to think about. yet you want to think something other than what I wrote.
I believe you would try to shame or attack Jesus for all that He said and did. Maybe you need to check your heart.

 

[Papa Smurf]

I think you are adding on to what my post is saying. These Hebrew boys' names were changed.
1. I don't believe today name are given much thought or intention as they were in these times

Hello again TheOneHeLoves, I'm not sure that children in the 1st Century were named in much of a different than they are today (granted, I'm not sure how things were done in the Bronze age when Daniel lived). However, the custom (in the 1st Century) was to name a son after his father or a close relative, but in the case of John the Baptist, God sent the angel Gabriel to make sure that he was named "John" instead.

Below is a short excerpt about the birth of John the Baptist, but the beginning of the story, if you'd care to read it again (including the meeting between Zacharias and Gabriel) is also in Luke 1.

Luke 1​

57 Now the time had come for Elizabeth to give birth, and she gave birth to a son. ​

58 Her neighbors and her relatives heard that the Lord had displayed His great mercy toward her; and they were rejoicing with her. ​

59 And it happened that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to call him Zacharias, ~after his father.~​

60 But his mother answered and said, “No indeed; but he shall be called John.” ​

61 And they said to her, ~“There is no one among your relatives who is called by that name.”~ ​

62 And they made signs to his father, as to what he wanted him called. ​

63 And he asked for a tablet and wrote as follows, “His name is John.” And they were all astonished. ​

2. The application for us today. If your name is Daniel and you are a believer, surrendered to God and then you commit a sin, the world will now what you to be called sinner (giving power to the enemy). no Daniel may have committed a sin but that is not his identity- he is still a child of God.

Actually, I believe that Daniel is the one person in the Bible that nothing bad is said about. No doubt he was a sinner, of course, as all of us with two human parents are.

I'm not understanding what you mean in sentences 1 & 2 above, incl. how it is that we "give power to the enemy" in some way, so if you could elaborate on that a bit, I'd appreciate it. Thanks :)

3. There is a conviction from the Holy Spirit to not use the names that were assigned to intentionally mock God.

I don't believe that that was the Babylonians intention in this case, rather, as I mentioned in my last post, I believe that they, as the conquering nation, were doing what needed to be done to assimilate certain members of the conquered nation (Israel) into their culture. If assimilation was, in fact, their goal (and I believe that it was), then intentionally mocking the God of the devout young men from Israel who they hoped to assimilate would have made the task of assimilation far more difficult, and therefore counterproductive.

Finally, while the Holy Spirit may have convicted you concerning what to name your sons and/or daughters, how can you possibly know what He has done in this regard in other peoples' families? If this was a command that is meant for all to obey, rather than for particular individuals, it would have been a simple thing to have included it in the Holy Writ ... but it was not.

Therefore, I believe that it should be considered adiaphora.

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I find your reply judging me and rude for no reason and it seems like you have the issue. You are adding to what I wrote. I wrote I was giving something to think about. yet you want to think something other than what I wrote.
I believe you would try to shame or attack Jesus for all that He said and did. Maybe you need to check your heart.

Take a chill pill and a deep breath! I was in no way judging you nor even trying to be rude in teh least. You gave us something to think about. I did! I have a different conclusion.

Believe it or not people can think thoughts different than yours and not judge you or be rude to you.

I love the Lord and love His Word. If you wish to think I would attack Him , that is your issue and not mine. I know myself better than you and I know my motives better than you.