Growing up in the church, I fell prey to the notion that there was only one right way to pronounce those difficult Bible names, and we white Anglo-Saxon Americans had it nailed.  I remember times when a Bible class teacher used a slightly different pronunciation and I wondered how a teacher could get it wrong.  Tell me you haven't thought the same thing at times.  Our intellectual snobbery continues in all sorts of ways.
            Finally, about 30 or so years ago, I was handed some VHS tapes (that tells you how long ago it was) to review for our children's Bible classes.  The live action films had a voice-over reading the Bible text as the action took place, with the characters themselves speaking the words.  All of the actors were from the Near East so that they would look and sound "authentic" and know how to pronounce words and names from that language.  Imagine my surprise when, in the first tape, one character looked at the other and called him, "Kah-een," and the other called the first one, "Ah-behl."  So much for our English "Cain" and Abel."
            Of course, it is perfectly fine to translate a name from one language to another.  John, Jean, Sean, Johann, Giovanni, and Ivan are all the same name, just in different languages.  On the other hand, some names we might think are the same are not.  The apostle Paul had two names, one Hebrew and the other Latin (since he was a Roman citizen).  "Saul" means "prayed for" and "Paul" or more properly in Latin, "Paulus", means small or humble.  Luke calls him Saul when he is primarily dealing with Jews and Paul when he begins to travel among and focus on Gentiles.  But they are not the same name in the sense that John and Johann are.
            And I suppose we could also bring up the new way of pronouncing God's name that has sprung up, first among scholars and lately among the rest of us in the church.  "Yahweh" is the new "Jehovah."  To me it's a little bit like demanding someone say "John" even when they are standing next to the Eiffel Tower.  "But there is no J in Hebrew!" I keep hearing.  So why do the same people keep saying "Jesus" when it more likely was pronounced "Yeshua," or something similar?  I am afraid that I grew up with Jehovah, I speak English and English does have Js in it, so I don't see the problem.  I am told that "Jehovah" actually came from a German translator, and Germans do not pronounce Js either, hence Johann!  The larger problem is those who insist on the correct pronunciation without the same sort of vigilance in their reverence for that name.
            We all know the third commandment, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain."  Usually we limit that to cursing, but the word translated "In vain" actually means "for falsehood."  We have already spoken about other ways to take God's name in vain ("Three Ways to Profane God's Name").  It would do well for all of us to review that post because we are not quite as careful as we ought to be when we claim Him as our God and then live in a way He hates.  But today, even some of His people are careless with His name.  OMG comes to mind.  When even our children are spouting that with every other sentence, we have lost our respect for the Name of God and we certainly haven't taught them to honor it. 
            I found a website with this statement at the top:  "This page contains the Name of God.  If you print it out, please treat it with appropriate respect." (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)  I may not agree with their theology as a whole, but I wish we were that careful about using the name of God.
            Whether you pronounce it Jehovah or Yahweh, what really counts is how you "pronounce" it by your way of life.
 
Two things I ask of you; deny them not to me before I die: Remove far from me falsehood and lying; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that is needful for me, lest I be full and deny you and say, “Who is the LORD?” or lest I be poor and steal and profane the name of my God (Prov 30:7-9).
 
Dene Ward
 

After installing several new feeders recently, along with some new bluebird houses and a couple of small birdbaths, both the numbers of birds visiting us, as well as the varieties, increased proportionately.  The very first day we spied a new one.  It didn’t take long to find him in the bird books I have—a brown-headed cowbird.
            The cowbird is a member of the blackbird family, and it is easy to think him some sort of blackbird.  That brown head is not obvious at a distance.  He stretches 7 to 8 inches from head to tail, glossy black with a chocolate brown head and a pointed gray bill.  Cowbirds do, however, have a negative trait—they lay their eggs in the nests of other birds, then go off and expect that bird to raise their young.  Sometimes the host bird will destroy the unfamiliar eggs, but far more often, they will raise the cowbird nestlings, often neglecting their own.  Cowbird chicks are so much larger than the hosts’ chicks that they take most of the food and leave the others hungry.
            Do you know what they call birds that steal nests and abandon their young to others?  Parasite birds.  I had never thought of it that way, but it is a legitimate biological classification.  Cuckoos do it.  Wood ducks do it.  In fact, about 750 species of bird do it.
            Humans wouldn’t do that, would they?  We wouldn’t ignore the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman, breaking up a home at will just because “I want him now,” or “I don’t love her any more.”  Why can’t I steal someone else’s nest if I want it?
            I have things I want to do, a career that makes me important.  I’m not made for taking care of children--I shouldn’t be saddled with these kids.  Why can’t the government raise them for me?  Why can’t I hire someone to do the dirty work?  Why can’t I lay my eggs in someone else’s nest and expect them to be responsible for my children?
            Why do I have to work to support my family?  Why should I have to control my physical hungers?  Why can’t I live as I want and not have to bear the responsibility of what follows?  Why can’t I deposit my burdens in someone else’s lap to pay for and tend to?
            I wonder if biologists have a class of human called “parasitic.”  “Entitlement” comes to mind; “selfishness” as well, not to mention “irresponsibility.”  God holds us accountable for our lives, for our health, for our families, for all the privileges we claim, especially in the most blessed society in the world.  He expects us to exercise self-control.  He expects us to be mature in our choices and responsible for them.  He expects us to be considerate of others in those choices too.
            Now that I have about 95% of you agreeing with me, let’s take it one step farther.  What about Christians who deposit their children in Bible classes and expect the church to teach them?  Sometimes parents will see that the child does his lesson, but sometimes the teachers are lucky if a workbook accompanies a child at all, much less one that has been well-studied and filled out.  The Bible tells us that parents are to teach their children, not the church.  It is certainly commendable to take them to Bible classes, but the example they see many, many more hours a week at home is the one that they learn from.
            The brown headed cowbird is one of the most disapproved of birds in the avian world.  Why is that we think the same sort of behavior, in any of its manifestations, should be acceptable, even applauded, in ours?
 
But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without natural affection, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. 2 Timothy 3:1-5