My Name: Is It Pagan?
There is a great deal of confusion over the personal names used or given to Christians in India. Are these names, such as, for example, my own, which is Prakash, pagan, Hindu names?
Both Indian Christians and Hindus largely believe this to be so. This is also largely true, it seems, of foreigners.
Most of the names used in India, whether by Hindus or Christians, or by others, are names that have their origins in the Indian languages. They are Indian names, not Hindu names, for the simple reason that names do not usually belong to religions but have their roots in languages.
On the other hands, on examining names used by Christians overseas, we notice that there are names based both on Hebrew and on other languages. John, for example, as Jesus, has its roots in Hebrew. Other names, such as Julius or Augustus have their roots in other languages. Most European - and by extension, American and other Christian people, have names whose roots are either in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, the ancient Gaelic and Teutonic languages, etc.
There have been people with these names in these ethnic communities long before they adopted Christianity. In short, if names such as 'Prakash,' 'Avinash,' 'Ajay,' etc. are 'Pagan' names, names such as 'Julius,' 'Augustus,' etc. are also pagan.
There are of course names that, while having their roots in particular languages, nevertheless, still have significant meanings that can only be truly described as 'Pagan.' This is true both of Indian and foreign names.
Nevertheless, if persons bearing such names adopted Christianity, they were not required to change their names. Such names become problems only if their bearers accept the superstitious, i.e. religious value that the originating pagan religion had given it.
As a matter of fact, many of the early Christians bore such names, most famously the Evangelists Mark and Luke, whose names 'remembered' the pagan gods Mars and Appolo.
In India, such names as ending in -esh, -ish, ishwar, -nath, -dev, etc., have truly Pagan meanings.
But while names such as Mark, Luke, etc. are acceptable for Christians to give their offsprings, it is not acceptable to give such Indian names as above, because they are truly pagan. This is because the originating paganism of those cultures that produced 'Mark,' 'Luke,' etc., are dead, and pose no danger to the faith of Christians, the purely Hindu names do pose a danger, as Hinduism is not yet dead.
Below I have reproduced a part of a letter I wrote, which also has a bearing on this subject.
Thus when they went out to the peoples of the world they spoke and preached in the local languages. Thus it is that all the ancient liturgies are in different local, though now ancient languages.
Thus when the name of our Lord was given as Jesus Christ instead of Yahowah-shua (or Yeshua) Ha'Massiah. Likewise, Kepha became Peter, etc.
Christians are obliged to avoid paganism and superstitions. A Christian cannot reasonably give his child a purely pagan name - and by pagan, I mean, the name, as it were, of some pagan deity or a name having such relations or significance. However, a convert is not obliged to abandon his pagan name, even if it were of such a kind.
Many of the first Christians had such names: people such as Saints Luke and Mark the evangelists, who bore names related to the pagan gods of light and war.
If we must be intelligent to our neighbours and our audience, we must necessarily speak in their language, in the language that they understand. We must become mediators of Christ to them. This includes having names according to their cultures. That does not require, of course, that we avoid or exclude names that are from other cultures; only that pre-eminence must be given to the local culture.
Necessarily this involves having their names and following their customs, excluding all paganistic and other un-Christian influences, which we must avoid and work to purge.
In the history of Christianity, there were many who converted from paganism and who bore the names of pagan deities. They were not required to change their names and indeed, as a matter of fact, there were many of these who went so far as to refuse to succumb to pagan persecutors and instead give up their lives for Christ.
What do we understand of a person's name? We know that whether a person's name is Christian or otherwise, and whether he changes it or not, God knows each of us personally, and name changing does not confuse Him. We know that even if a child is named "Satan" or "Devil" by a vicious parent, still he is beloved of God and God desires his salvation. Of course, if a person had been given a vicious name (such as "Satan" or "Devil" or of such vicious and evil persons as Cromwell, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc) it is better that his name be changed to something more sober and Christian.
Therefore, I believe that for us in India and as Indians with a special responsibility of being the witnesses of Christ unto our fellow Indians, while it is not wrong to keep Biblical names or the names of the Exemplar Christians (Saints) that have gone before us, it is more right and pressing that we have Indian names. Even if we keep Biblical and Saint names, we must necessarily Indianize them to make them intelligible to our fellow compatriots.
However, you have told me that in the sect that follows the antipope John-Paul 2, and knowing the ideology of this sect, I believe your report credible, some of them have begun to keep the names, as do their pagan neighbours, of the Indian pagan deities. That is entirely unacceptable.
I have such friend whose parents have named him Rajesh, which unfortunately is the 'king-god' while my own mother's brother has named his son and my cousin Suresh, which is the 'god of gods!' In themselves, these names may be innocuous enough, although, given the ideology of this sect, I greatly doubt it, but even if innocuous, they are wrong for they, in opposition to Christian Law, encourage the pagans in thinking their errors as being legitimate. Thus those guilty of such wrongdoing become guilty of the blood of those who might have been saved by their witness but instead were lost because of their false witness…