The Divine Name in the NT: Some Reflections

by Let go of fear 54 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  R. Jerome Harris

  There is no divine name. Jesus NEVER addressed his God by a personal name. He primarily addressed him as "Father."

  Neither did his disciples address The Most High God by a personal name.

  It was his Fathers REPUTATION (Good name) that Jesus focused upon, not a PERSONAL name.

  Names such as Jehovah or Yahweh are not in the Bible and Jesus never spoke such names. They were added.

  In the three languages of the Bible: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek there is no letter J.

  There is no letter J in Latin either.

  In fact, if one looks at the original King James Bible of 1611 you will not see the letter J in any name.

  At Psalms 83:18 for example you see:

  That men may knowe, that thou, whose name alone is IEHOVAH: art the most High ouer all the earth.

  And this is not fully correct because their are no vowels in the Hebrew language. Thus it would be IHVH.

  With regards Jesus his name is wrong to. He would not have been called Jesus but something like Iesus (Isis). See John 1:17 in the same Bible.

  The bottom line is that Jesus (Iesus) NEVER used a personal name. The WTBTS added the name to the Greek Scriptures because THEY felt it should be their. THEY decided for everyone else that the name would be Jehovah. (Again no J in the Hebrew language).

  Like ancient Israel, we do not know God's personal name. Why? Because it is a PERFECT name and we are IMPERFECT creatures.

  All we know is that he is a good God. He has a good reputation (name).

  His name has not been revealed to us yet.

  At Revelation 3:12 Jesus even says that he WILL THEN "write upon him the name of my God ..."

  When that name is revealed, what a name it will be! It will be a "proven" and tested name. No one will be able to deny that it is God's name. What a glorious name it will be!

  Sadly, the WTBTS and others have move presumptuously and gave us a name. It is a false name!

  The WTBTS and others have not allowed God to reveal himself to us.

  When God said to Adam when he was hiding from him, "Who told you that you were naked?" He would say to the many, "Who told you that my name is Jehovah? I have not revealed my perfect name to you and neither has my son."
• 

  Phizzy

  "the early Christian congregations most likely did not pronounce it as liberally as the Watchtower believes that they did".

  Surely the rendering of the name in the form of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton in the LXX was as a warning NOT to pronounce/enunciate it, but to substitute an appropriate word in Greek ?

  Hence, if the custom was used in the N.T writings, which it may well have been if quoting from the LXX, then the Christian reader would have uttered Kyrios or a synonym ????

  If not, then surely some discussion as to correct pronunciation would have gone on then, as only the High Priest knew the correct pronunciation.
• 

  Let go of fear

  @Jerome: Again, I am not interested in debating the original pronunciation of God's name or any other biblical names. I'm a bit taken back by your statement "Names such as Jehovah or Yahweh are not in the Bible and Jesus never spoke such names. They were added." They were not "added." Those names are English translations of the Hebrew Tetragram, and the the tetragram appears some 6,000+ times in the original Hebrew manuscripts (plus some Greek translations), more than any other name in the entire Bible. If you are going to be fixated on things such as the fact that there is no "J" in Hebrew, then there are hundreds of names in the Bible (Joshua, Jeremiah, Jehosophat, etc, etc.) that we are going to have to get rid of. Finally, regarding your statement that Jesus did not ever pronounce God's name: Jesus, as well as his apostles, quoted from many OT scriptures that used YHWH. The Greek manuscripts substitute the name with "Kyrios" as there was no equivalent in the Greek language (the Jewish scribes having refused to translate the name), NOT because Jesus and his followers didn't believe that God had a personal name.

  @Phizzy: That is exactly my point. I don't want to be dogmatic about this, its just my theory, but if the custom in the 1st century LXX was to leave YHWH untranslated, and the NT writers made great use of that same LXX, then they probably followed the same custom of using YHWH in OT quotations. It also stands to reason then that, due to their Jewish upbringing as well as their not being a real Greek equivalent of the name, they also follow the custom of pronouncing the Hebrew YHWH when read in a Greek text as "Kyrios (sometimes "Theos"). Then again, I am also open to the possibility that the NT originals DID use Kyrios to represent God's name. But then this opens a can of worms: how did one distinguish between the two "lords" (God and Christ)? If the early Jewish Christians were asked by a Gentile what the name of their God was, what would they tell them? That their God has no name?? That would be outright false, as the name WAS still known (even if not commonly pronounced) by Jewish Christians in the 1st century.
• 

  jhine

  Maybe , the NT writers deliberately left.no clear distinction between Jesus and Yahweh . Perhaps when quoting , particularly prophecies , from the OT they were applying them to Jesus .His name is the name above all names .Not ,as the WT wrongly put it , above all other names .

  This is another example of them changing Jesus' status so to speak by altering the original wording of the NT . They have to put Jehovah in there to stop any thought that perhaps the writers were equating Jesus with Yahweh .

  Can I say that this seems to be a possibility that even ex Witnesses do not seem to recognise because WT indoctrination on this subject is so powerful . I don't say this to cause offence ,just in my observation as an outsider it appears that it is an area where WT thinking lingers on .

  Jan
• 

  Let go of fear

  @jhine: I partially agree with you. There are undoubtedly a number of NT passages that quote an OT prophecy that contains the divine name but applied to the context of Jesus. A good example would be John the Baptist (or, excuse me, "baptizer" lol) quoting Isaiah's prophecy stating "make way for the path of the LORD". The original scripture John quoted contained YHWH, yet he is clearly applying this to the "coming" of Jesus. But he is most certainly not saying that Jesus and Jehovah are the same person/entity/being/whatever. A more reasonable conclusion would be that Jesus is God's chief representative, and therefore John's application of the original divine name containing prophecy is appropriate. By the way, although I'm sure "Watchtower thinking" does still linger with many ex-JWs, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Most Bible scholars I have researched (who are neither JW nor have any particular doctrinal investment) seem to agree with this understanding of the relationship between God and Christ (as opposed to the belief that Jehovah/Yahweh is the "Old Testament" name of God and Jesus is the "New Testament" name of God, a belief that I always found extremely bizarre even before I ever learned anything about what JW's believe).
• 

  jhine

  Let go of fear , when once people realise that the WT lies and decieves it does not seem to occur to them to question why the WT does so much lying and deceiving about Jesus . Why are they so determined to negate Christendom's teaching , especially about the Trinity .

  This whole combined campaign of partial and misquotes in the " Should you believe ........." booklet , the insistence of the removal of the Tetragrammatom from the NT .Putting Jehovah in there ,not even just in quotes from the OT .Adding the word other to demote Jesus and make Him SEEM like a created being when the writer is at pains to make the opposite point "All things that were created were created by Him " so He is not created .

  Why this huge effort of lies and deceit to "disprove " the Trinity ? They themselves have said that if you start reading the Bible without the "aid " of Watchtower literature you will fall into the apostate teaching of belief in the Trinity !. Sorry , what ! The Bible actually leads to a belief in the Trinity ,who'd a thought it ? Well the WTdoes , unless they save you from it .

  Jan
• 

  Let go of fear

  @jhine: While I am not interested in debating the Trinity, I have to completely disagree with you. If anything, the Bible, regardless of what translation you are using (even one that has removed YHWH from the OT), makes it quite clear that there is a difference between the Father and the Son (not to mention the holy spirit). But I understand where you are coming from, I have similar concerns about WTBTS. But trust me, as someone who was part of both Evangelical and Catholic churches growing up (long story, not enough time to explain here! lol), I can tell you that the churches of "Christendom" are equally obnoxious in their determination to assure themselves and others that their doctrines are "the truth." Although I am no longer a witness (nor do I believe any longer in the infallibility/inerrancy/inspiration/whatever of the Bible), I still believe that JW's, despite all their problems, have a much more reasonable and accurate understanding of the Bible overall. Believe me, the explanations they provided for 99% of questions I had, while not COMPLETELY satisfying, were night and day compared to the mumbo jumbo, confused and mystifying explanations I would always get from various priests, pastors and others. Just my opinion, I understand if others come to different conclusions.
• 

  Driving Force

  Let go of fear.

  I like what you say. As for myself my mind was a complete blank when it came to religion and the bible, so JWs could just fill everything in for me, and when it came to doctrines I had nothing to compare it with.

  Now I have woken up and realized that I have been lied and cheated, it puts everything I have ever learned form them into question.
  
• 

  FayeDunaway

  Lgof, I don't want to argue the trinity either, but it is something that I studied very deeply when I was fading. people who otherwise have problems with jw's seem to hang on to being anti trinity. I have discovered how the witnesses changed their bible from the greek to 'prove' what they wanted to believe. I completely agree with jan. The trinity teaches that the father and the son are completely different persons. I don't think you ever gave this subject the attention it deserves. Do I believe that Jesus is God? Yes. Do I believe the father is God? Yes, and he is given more respect, as a father naturally receives. Do I believe the Holy Spirit is God? Not quite, but he is linked with the father and son very often. He is the only one of we speak against, that is an unforgiveable sin. I don't believe it is offensive to link him very closely to God. I do not think of myself as a strict trinitarian, but I believe the trinity comes closer to the truth than the witnesses interpretation. Study into it using your kingdom interlinear and a multitude of websites on the subject. Having been a catholic and evangelical once is not enough. It takes time to study but the evidence has helped me move on from the deceptions of the WT.
• 

  Alan Forbes

  I personally would not have a problem if Yahweh or Jehovah was used in the NT when quoting directly from the OT. For Example, when Paul refers to Joel 2:32; notice LORD is used rather than Lord, indicating it may be legitimate to use God's name in the passage. The NKJV is possibly the only modern translation which does this.
  

  For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." Romans 10:13 NKJV