Wow! I can hardly believe my eyes. An article about the 12 most popular biblical names that provides relevant and interesting background information about 12 great names likely to be a plus for boys. There’s not a weird or off-putting name in the bunch! I strongly recommend this article to you. I found it on Huffington Post, but I’m sure it’s on Nameberry.com, too.
Has Pamela Redmond Satran gotten tired of reading my recent (critical) blog posts? Has she made a late resolution (one month into the new year)? It’s too soon to tell. So, I’ll restrain my celebration until I read her next few articles—to see if she focuses on charming, appealing names or goes back to recommending what she calls “unusual,” “never heard of” or “forgotten” names likely to annoy, embarrass, or subject children to teasing.
(I could never figure out how recommending weird, off-putting names could possibly be a successful strategy for her or Nameberry. Eventually her readers are going to turn elsewhere for better advice; and media like Huffington Post and daily newspapers will turn elsewhere for content that’s beneficial rather than harmful to children.)
Here’s a quick list of the biblical boys’ names she discusses in detail in her article: Jacob, Ethan, Noah, Michael, Daniel, Matthew, Elijah, James, Benjamin, Joshua, Andrew and David.
I hope you”ll click on the link I’ve provided to read her article. I also hope you will strongly consider these time-tested names for your baby. Keep in mind that biblical names provide positive role models for children and create the impression that they have strong values.
If Satran is going to be recommending great names (instead of questionable names), I’ll switch from criticizing her work to praising it. (I hope you realize that my criticism has always been focused on the questionable value of most of her recommendations.) I admire the books Satran and Rosenkrantz have written and assumed I would love their articles. I tend to like most of Rosenkrantz’s articles, but how wrong I was about Satran’s articles.
Satran seemed to be under the impression that she could search for “rarely used” or “abandoned” names and than announce to expecting parents that they were suddenly “cool” or “worth considering” because she had mentioned them in an article. When you think about it, if she didn’t give the unwanted, abandoned names a “makeover” by changing their spelling, they would still have all the unattractive qualities that had caused 99.9% of American parents to reject them.
Writing about Satran’s attempts at “alchemy” has turned out to be both enlightening and entertaining for my readers–if not for hers. So if Pamela Redmond Satran has really “turned over a new leaf,” I’ll be happy to praise and promote the wonderful new articles she’ll be writing.