what is in a name?

Isis the QueenOne of the ideas of modern liberal theologies is that the names of God are really not that important. Names, in fact, are commonly used to exclude people socially and theologically. Thus references to Christianity, God, Jesus can be used to exclude those people such as Hindus, Jews, and Moslems to whom these religious labels, persons and symbols mean little. In other words the names of God can be used to say “We worship the true one God and you worship false gods.”

However, names do matter. The name of Yahweh,  God the Father, and  Allah while they do have much in common also have much in the form of  differing theologies, devotional traditions, and historical communities that differentiate them. For those such as myself who am interested in what is often called in Christianity the “Divine Feminine” or in Modern Paganism the “Goddess” names also matter. The ancient goddesses Cybele, Inanna, Athena, and Isis for example are all were connected to very different theological conceptions and traditions. They were radically different goddesses if one wishes to see them as different divine beings. Or from a more  monotheistic way of thinking they all represent differing visions, aspects and ways of the Goddess. Their names can not be used interchangeably. The use of the generic divine title the Goddess itself is indicative of this reality.

I was first introduced to the Goddess by writers such as Merlyn Stone a radical feminist writer and Starhawk a priestess  of Wicca in the early 1980s. At that time in my life the Goddess represented to me nature, wiccan worship, and an ancient matriarchal egalitarian civilization that supposedly existed prior to the origins of patriarchy. I assume that perhaps most pagans still believe in this Goddess. However this Goddess  certainly does not resemble the classical goddesses such as Isis, Hear, or Demeter. Neither does she resemble the Hindu goddesses Durga, Parvati, or Laksmi. The traditions that they represent are quite different. This is not to say that similarities do not exist between these goddesses. However the differences are as important as are the similarities. Thus Isis  is the goddess who makes the power of women to be equal to men. She is mistress of the elements. Yet in many way she  differs from the Goddess of the old radical Feminist Spirituality movement.

I have just changed the name of this blog to reflect my own devotion to the Goddess Isis. Her Name is important because it reflect a particular theological vision and tradition of goddess which in many ways differs from other goddess traditions.  This  Isis as envisioned during the Greco Roman period is  the creatress of all reality. She  is central to my religious being.

Another aspect of Isis that she is the Name behind the names of the other  goddesses. Thus she can be Isis Demeter or Isis Hathor or …?
I will resume my discussion of  Mary in another post.



2 thoughts on “what is in a name?

  1. So I’m curious, you identify with the Graeco-Roman version who is Isis, yet you use Her Kemetic name. The Kemetic version of Aset is very different to Isis of the Graeco-Roman world. I can see Isis and Maryam being compared, but Aset and Maryam is an interesting view. Not one I think I can marry together but it’s your path. I hope you find it a joyous one.

    I used to follow Isis for a while before becoming Kemetic. I found from experience and study that Aset and Isis are very different deities. Isis-Hathor is quite a good syncretisation.

    Of course this is just my experience and 0.02 🙂


  2. MeritAset, thanks for the comment. I am sorry for the delay in posting it. The fact is that I am new to blogging and only became aware that your comment was on a pending list this evening. I am aware of the differences between the Isis of the Greco Roman period and Isis /Aset as she was envisioned during the purely Kemetic period. Conceptions of deities change and it is the latter Isis who holds fascination for me. Why do I use the purely kemetic name of Aset when combining her name with Mary? It is purely an issue of aesthetics. I think that Aset in general combines much more beautifully with other names than does Isis. On the other hand when the name of Isis stands alone I think that Name is more pleasing to the ear than is Aset. Since both names are for me theologically interchangeable I have no qualms about using alternative versions of Isis’ names in ways that work for me. Again thanks for the response.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s