Genesis 17 1: “I am Almighty God*; walk before Me and be blameless "*
In Hebrew, the name for God in this verse is 'El Shaddai'.
The Bible says this means God Almighty, but Shaddai in Hebrew means 'destroyer'.
Was Abraham a God destroyer, or was it a God of destruction who is talking to Abraham?
I don't understand it.
Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Genesis
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Re: Genesis 17 1
by jimwalton » Sun May 28, 2023 4:05 pm
El Shaddai means, "God Almighty; the All-Powerful One; God who is Sufficient; stressing his omnipotence; mountain; the irresistible one." The context here is that of covenant, so it means to convey both kingship and relationship.
John Walton, in his commentary on Genesis, writes,
Ephraim Speiser, in the Anchor Bible commentary series, writes,
I don't know where you got the idea that it means "destroyer," but that doesn't seem to be the case in the Bible.
John Walton, in his commentary on Genesis, writes,
"El Shaddai ('God Almighty') in v.1 is a relatively common name used for the Lord in the OT (48x), though the conventional translations are little more than guesses. It appears only once outside the OT in the name 'Shaddai-Ammi' on an Egyptian statue from the Judges period, though there may be a reference to Shaddai-beings in the Deir Allah inscription. One of the most frequent suggestions understands Shaddai as related to the Babylonian shadu, 'steppe, mountain,' but evidence is sparse."
Ephraim Speiser, in the Anchor Bible commentary series, writes,
"The traditional translation of Shaddai as 'Almighty' goes back to an early rabbinic etymology ('Self-sufficient'). Modern scholarship leans towards Albright’s derivation from Akkadian shadu ('mountain') employed as a divine epithet; in Akkadian itself the epithet was but one of hundreds like it. A truly satisfactory explanation of the term is yet to be proposed, just as is that of YHWH."
I don't know where you got the idea that it means "destroyer," but that doesn't seem to be the case in the Bible.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9111
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Genesis 17 1
by Etymologist » Mon May 29, 2023 10:25 am
It's on Wiki
Shaddai meaning destroyer
The root word "shadad" (שדד) means to plunder, overpower, or make desolate. This would give Shaddai the meaning of "destroyer", representing one of the aspects of God, and in this context it is essentially an epithet.
It literally fulfils the the name God destroyer not long after.
Genesis 19:29: “So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived.”
I find it ironic the descendants of this God destroyed Jesus.
Shaddai meaning destroyer
The root word "shadad" (שדד) means to plunder, overpower, or make desolate. This would give Shaddai the meaning of "destroyer", representing one of the aspects of God, and in this context it is essentially an epithet.
It literally fulfils the the name God destroyer not long after.
Genesis 19:29: “So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived.”
I find it ironic the descendants of this God destroyed Jesus.
- Etymologist
Re: Genesis 17 1
by jimwalton » Mon May 29, 2023 10:49 am
Thank you for the explanation. It allows us to track down the problem. "Shadad" is a different word than "shaddai," just as "read" and "real" are different words. "Shaddai" doesn't mean "destroyer."
> It literally fulfils the the name God destroyer not long after.
Therefore this is incorrect.
> Genesis 19.29
The verb here is completely different. It's beshacheth, from the root shachath. It has nothing in common with Shaddai. Now, your point is that God here is a destroyer, and that's true, but it has nothing to do with Genesis 17.1 and God's name of El Shaddai.
> I find it ironic the descendants of this God destroyed Jesus.
It is ironic, but their hatred of Jesus has nothing to do with the nature or characteristics of God.
> It literally fulfils the the name God destroyer not long after.
Therefore this is incorrect.
> Genesis 19.29
The verb here is completely different. It's beshacheth, from the root shachath. It has nothing in common with Shaddai. Now, your point is that God here is a destroyer, and that's true, but it has nothing to do with Genesis 17.1 and God's name of El Shaddai.
> I find it ironic the descendants of this God destroyed Jesus.
It is ironic, but their hatred of Jesus has nothing to do with the nature or characteristics of God.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9111
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Genesis 17 1
by Etymologist » Mon May 29, 2023 12:03 pm
Why are you trying to justify the horrendous acts of this Lord God 'named' el shaddai? It says in the same scripture it destroyed cities. Can you imagine your government today, coming to your house and telling you your new born baby's foreskin needs to be sliced off because their Lord told them to. You have no choice, they force it upon you. Do they believe in the same God as you?
Why do you justify this?
You're trying to sweeten the name Shaddai by putting yourself in the perspective of those who believed it. Although it destroyed cities, you don't call it a destroyer, you just justify it as almighty.
What would Jesus say to you if you tried destroying cities in His name?
Why do you justify this?
You're trying to sweeten the name Shaddai by putting yourself in the perspective of those who believed it. Although it destroyed cities, you don't call it a destroyer, you just justify it as almighty.
What would Jesus say to you if you tried destroying cities in His name?
- Etymologist
Re: Genesis 17 1
by jimwalton » Mon May 29, 2023 12:04 pm
Why are you trying to justify the horrendous acts of this Lord God
That's a different conversation than the one we've been having. If you want to discuss that, you'd need to specify what text or "horrendous acts" you're talking about.
Our conversation at hand is about shaddai and shadad—two different words, and so your point doesn't carry.
It says in the same scripture it destroyed cities.
God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah pertained to their comprehensive moral turpitude. There's no connection between "Shaddai" and his judgment of the cities. No judge worth his salt turns a blind eye to evil.
> Can you imagine your government today, coming to your house and telling you your new born baby's foreskin needs to be sliced off because their Lord told them to.
Well, first of all, our society practices abortion, which is a far greater "horrendous act" than circumcision. I'm curious: are you an advocate of abortion, viz., pro-choice? In the ancient world, circumcision was widely practiced by many different cultures (not just Israel). No one knows the origin or the purpose of the ritual; one scholar suggests it was ritual scarring pertaining to fertility or purity. Ancient Israel adopted the practice as a sign of the covenant. As rituals go, it is fairly harmless.
> Why do you justify this?
Again, a curiosity of mine: Do you justify abortion? Do you justify transgender surgical mutilation?
> You're trying to sweeten the name Shaddai
No, I'm giving you the linguistics, the history, and the culture. No emotions, just fact.
> Although it destroyed cities, you don't call it a destroyer, you just justify it as almighty.
In the Bible, God never has a name of "destroyer." He is a judge of evil, as any moral God would be.
> What would Jesus say to you if you tried destroying cities in His name?
Neither God nor Jesus has asked us to destroy cities in His name, so it's accurate to say Jesus would be greatly displeased if I destroyed cities and falsely said Jesus asked me to do so.
That's a different conversation than the one we've been having. If you want to discuss that, you'd need to specify what text or "horrendous acts" you're talking about.
Our conversation at hand is about shaddai and shadad—two different words, and so your point doesn't carry.
It says in the same scripture it destroyed cities.
God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah pertained to their comprehensive moral turpitude. There's no connection between "Shaddai" and his judgment of the cities. No judge worth his salt turns a blind eye to evil.
> Can you imagine your government today, coming to your house and telling you your new born baby's foreskin needs to be sliced off because their Lord told them to.
Well, first of all, our society practices abortion, which is a far greater "horrendous act" than circumcision. I'm curious: are you an advocate of abortion, viz., pro-choice? In the ancient world, circumcision was widely practiced by many different cultures (not just Israel). No one knows the origin or the purpose of the ritual; one scholar suggests it was ritual scarring pertaining to fertility or purity. Ancient Israel adopted the practice as a sign of the covenant. As rituals go, it is fairly harmless.
> Why do you justify this?
Again, a curiosity of mine: Do you justify abortion? Do you justify transgender surgical mutilation?
> You're trying to sweeten the name Shaddai
No, I'm giving you the linguistics, the history, and the culture. No emotions, just fact.
> Although it destroyed cities, you don't call it a destroyer, you just justify it as almighty.
In the Bible, God never has a name of "destroyer." He is a judge of evil, as any moral God would be.
> What would Jesus say to you if you tried destroying cities in His name?
Neither God nor Jesus has asked us to destroy cities in His name, so it's accurate to say Jesus would be greatly displeased if I destroyed cities and falsely said Jesus asked me to do so.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9111
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Genesis 17 1
by Etymologist » Mon May 29, 2023 12:44 pm
Me: Why are you trying to justify the horrendous acts of this Lord God
You: That's a different conversation than the one we've been having. If you want to discuss that, you'd need to specify what text or "horrendous acts" you're talking about.
Me: No it isn't. The whole Bible ties together. It is knitted together by Truth. There is a moral to the story for the entire Bible. The moral of the story isn't each section's subject, but a part of the whole Truth.
Quote: Genesis 19:27-29 New American Standard Bible - NASB 1995 (NASB1995)
Now Abraham arose early in the morning and went to the place where he had stood before the LORD*; and he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the valley, and he saw, and behold, the smoke of the land ascended like the smoke of a furnace.*
Thus it came about, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot lived.
Me: It says in the same scripture it destroyed cities.
You: God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah pertained to their comprehensive moral turpitude. There's no connection between "Shaddai" and his judgment of the cities. No judge worth his salt turns a blind eye to evil.
Me: How do you know that for a fact? There is no way of knowing who these people were. Did we hear their side of the story?
The accuser of moral turpitude ADMITS they themselves destroyed cities. PROVING they did something evil. It is an absolute 100% FACT they destroyed cities because those who did it, admitted it in writing.
This is why we have this 'one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist'. Two separate narratives. One of Truth, God, and one of judgement, the Lord.
El Shaddia was the God of the first and last terrorist in the narrative of our Bible.
You: Again, a curiosity of mine: Do you justify abortion? Do you justify transgender surgical mutilation?
Me: I do not want to see anyone suffer. The evil in the world which leads to abortion was created by a false idol. It threw everyone out of sync with what is True and good. The outcome of this evil is why our world exists the way it exists.
It is too complicated for me to know what is right or wrong for that question. The best person to know the answer to the question is the Mother herself, ideally it should be both Mother and Father, but it depends on context. She /parents know the circumstances better than I do. It is between her and God, it is none of my business.
You: No, I'm giving you the linguistics, the history, and the culture. No emotions, just fact.
Me: There is nothing more cringy than someone thinking they know a fact when they don't know the Truth.
Why not include your emotions? Are your emotions against your God?
You: In the Bible, God never has a name of "destroyer." He is a judge of evil, as any moral God would be.
Me:
Matthew 7 First line
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
You: Neither God nor Jesus has asked us to destroy cities in His name, so it's accurate to say Jesus would be greatly displeased if I destroyed cities and falsely said Jesus asked me to do so.
So you are saying El Shaddai is God, but he's not your God? Glad we can agree, finally.
You: That's a different conversation than the one we've been having. If you want to discuss that, you'd need to specify what text or "horrendous acts" you're talking about.
Me: No it isn't. The whole Bible ties together. It is knitted together by Truth. There is a moral to the story for the entire Bible. The moral of the story isn't each section's subject, but a part of the whole Truth.
Quote: Genesis 19:27-29 New American Standard Bible - NASB 1995 (NASB1995)
Now Abraham arose early in the morning and went to the place where he had stood before the LORD*; and he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the valley, and he saw, and behold, the smoke of the land ascended like the smoke of a furnace.*
Thus it came about, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot lived.
Me: It says in the same scripture it destroyed cities.
You: God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah pertained to their comprehensive moral turpitude. There's no connection between "Shaddai" and his judgment of the cities. No judge worth his salt turns a blind eye to evil.
Me: How do you know that for a fact? There is no way of knowing who these people were. Did we hear their side of the story?
The accuser of moral turpitude ADMITS they themselves destroyed cities. PROVING they did something evil. It is an absolute 100% FACT they destroyed cities because those who did it, admitted it in writing.
This is why we have this 'one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist'. Two separate narratives. One of Truth, God, and one of judgement, the Lord.
El Shaddia was the God of the first and last terrorist in the narrative of our Bible.
You: Again, a curiosity of mine: Do you justify abortion? Do you justify transgender surgical mutilation?
Me: I do not want to see anyone suffer. The evil in the world which leads to abortion was created by a false idol. It threw everyone out of sync with what is True and good. The outcome of this evil is why our world exists the way it exists.
It is too complicated for me to know what is right or wrong for that question. The best person to know the answer to the question is the Mother herself, ideally it should be both Mother and Father, but it depends on context. She /parents know the circumstances better than I do. It is between her and God, it is none of my business.
You: No, I'm giving you the linguistics, the history, and the culture. No emotions, just fact.
Me: There is nothing more cringy than someone thinking they know a fact when they don't know the Truth.
Why not include your emotions? Are your emotions against your God?
You: In the Bible, God never has a name of "destroyer." He is a judge of evil, as any moral God would be.
Me:
Matthew 7 First line
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
You: Neither God nor Jesus has asked us to destroy cities in His name, so it's accurate to say Jesus would be greatly displeased if I destroyed cities and falsely said Jesus asked me to do so.
So you are saying El Shaddai is God, but he's not your God? Glad we can agree, finally.
- Etymologist
Re: Genesis 17 1
by jimwalton » Sun Jun 11, 2023 8:43 pm
So what "horrendous act" would you like to discuss first? Speaking in generalities isn't getting us anywhere in discussion.
It seems you want to talk about Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 13.13 says "Now the people of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the Lord." So we know they are singled out for the greatness of their immorality. All indications is that they were people of moral decadence. The phrase "wicked and sinning greatly" is a hendiadys designating a wide range of behaviors, perceptions, conditions, and circumstances, saying that from every angle they were morally abominable people.
Since we know that immorality is never bound in box, but it always influences others, and since we know that sin that involves entire cities affects others, it is justifiable that these cities deserved judgment, or else their sin could be ruinous to many, many others. It is best to stop cancer and pandemics to contain them, rather than ignore them to wreak havoc in a widening circle of suffering.
It is not evil to stop evil. Instead, a good person has a moral compulsion and justification to stop evil. That's the whole point. Evil will proliferate if good people do nothing to stop it.
> I do not want to see anyone suffer. The evil in the world which leads to abortion was created by a false idol. It threw everyone out of sync with what is True and good. The outcome of this evil is why our world exists the way it exists.
That sounds like a huge circle to me. Do you justify abortion or don't you? It sounds like you think it's a necessary evil, but then you justify killing to stop suffering, which sounds evil to me. You need to give me a more clear answer.
> The best person to know the answer to the question is the Mother herself
I asked if YOU were pro-choice. It's like you're dodging the question. And, if so, you are plenty willing to condemn God for judging morally reprehensible people, but you don't condemn yourself for playing God and killing innocent babies. You'll need to give me a more clear answer.
> There is nothing more cringy than someone thinking they know a fact when they don't know the Truth.
If this were true, you'd be right to cringe. But I've given you the facts that ARE the truth.
> Matthew 7.1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged"
What Jesus is condemning is an attitude of hypocritical censoriousness.
[list][*] It is OK to judge in terms of what Christ wants or what is taught in His Word.
[*] It is proper to evaluate truth or error
[*] It is OK if we are perceiving others as persons of value
[*] It is OK if we are looking for the good/list]
He didn't mean we are not to form opinions or others, or that we shouldn't condemn what we know to be wrong. What he is condemning is a spirit of faultfinding and hypocritical indifference to evil.
> So you are saying El Shaddai is God, but he's not your God? Glad we can agree, finally.
This is absurd. I didn't say this at all. El Shaddai is God, and He is my God. He is both almighty and righteous in all of His ways.
It seems you want to talk about Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 13.13 says "Now the people of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the Lord." So we know they are singled out for the greatness of their immorality. All indications is that they were people of moral decadence. The phrase "wicked and sinning greatly" is a hendiadys designating a wide range of behaviors, perceptions, conditions, and circumstances, saying that from every angle they were morally abominable people.
Since we know that immorality is never bound in box, but it always influences others, and since we know that sin that involves entire cities affects others, it is justifiable that these cities deserved judgment, or else their sin could be ruinous to many, many others. It is best to stop cancer and pandemics to contain them, rather than ignore them to wreak havoc in a widening circle of suffering.
It is not evil to stop evil. Instead, a good person has a moral compulsion and justification to stop evil. That's the whole point. Evil will proliferate if good people do nothing to stop it.
> I do not want to see anyone suffer. The evil in the world which leads to abortion was created by a false idol. It threw everyone out of sync with what is True and good. The outcome of this evil is why our world exists the way it exists.
That sounds like a huge circle to me. Do you justify abortion or don't you? It sounds like you think it's a necessary evil, but then you justify killing to stop suffering, which sounds evil to me. You need to give me a more clear answer.
> The best person to know the answer to the question is the Mother herself
I asked if YOU were pro-choice. It's like you're dodging the question. And, if so, you are plenty willing to condemn God for judging morally reprehensible people, but you don't condemn yourself for playing God and killing innocent babies. You'll need to give me a more clear answer.
> There is nothing more cringy than someone thinking they know a fact when they don't know the Truth.
If this were true, you'd be right to cringe. But I've given you the facts that ARE the truth.
> Matthew 7.1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged"
What Jesus is condemning is an attitude of hypocritical censoriousness.
[list][*] It is OK to judge in terms of what Christ wants or what is taught in His Word.
[*] It is proper to evaluate truth or error
[*] It is OK if we are perceiving others as persons of value
[*] It is OK if we are looking for the good/list]
He didn't mean we are not to form opinions or others, or that we shouldn't condemn what we know to be wrong. What he is condemning is a spirit of faultfinding and hypocritical indifference to evil.
> So you are saying El Shaddai is God, but he's not your God? Glad we can agree, finally.
This is absurd. I didn't say this at all. El Shaddai is God, and He is my God. He is both almighty and righteous in all of His ways.
Last bumped by Anonymous on Sun Jun 11, 2023 8:43 pm.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9111
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest