Romans 10:9, 13 Identifying Jesus as Jehovah?

by Daniel Michaels 11 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Daniel Michaels
    Daniel Michaels

    The use of the Divine Name in the NWTCGS

    Romans 10:9, 13

    Identifying Jesus as Jehovah

    The NWT translation 237 times in the Greek Scriptures, adds the Divine Name to its text in places that the greek text has the substantives ?theos? and ?kurios.? Many bible commentators and translators have objected to this practice, saying that we must translated what the greek text says, not what our theology dictates

    that the bible should of said. While I do agree with the use of the Divine name in the OT in the places where HWHY does occur, I do not agree with the NWT translators adding of the name, ?Jehovah? to the CGS, especially where the referent as Lord is to Christ, since all the textual proof tells us that the NT always uses ?kurios? meaning ?Lord.? Also, imagine the outcry of the Witnesses if any committee of Translators decided that in the OT, the name ?Jehovah? was to be replaced by ?Jesus? since He is the ?Lord? of the NT, and printed such a bible? Why then, should the NT ?Lord? be replaced by ?Jehovah? in the NWTCGS since he was ?Lord? in the OT? Would the Witnesses not rightfully claim that to do such was ?robbing Jehovah of his position?? Why then, cannot Witnesses understand it when Christians say that about some of the passages where the NWTCGS replace ?Lord? with ?Jehovah? in places where it is obvious that the referent is the Lord Jesus Christ, and all the more so since the Witnesses demand that others translated according to the underlying ancient text?

    Since none, not even one, of the thousands of ancient Greek texts of the NT of the early centuries have the name ?Jehovah? in any form found in them, the NWT translators have taken great and radically irresponsible positions on the Inspired text. In fact, neither does the early Latin, Aramaic, or Hebrew text of the early centuries have the Name found either. The earliest Hebrew Text of the CGS that the Watchtower Society list in its NWT is from the 14 th century, and many from the 17 th and 19 th . You would have to hold to a conspiracy ?black helicopter? theory to explain how all of the NT manuscripts were taken in all the regions of the world, and yet all of them divinely protected by Jehovah Himself to insure the accuracy of the manuscripts, for mankind who was going to need the Truth for salvation, that is, everything except for His own name! Yet, even though the OT that we know contained God?s name has been preserved, somehow we are supposed to believe that the NT, which He also inspired, was not protected by God, and that the WBTS has now done what God himself for 2000 years did not do, despite many christians who lived during those 2000 years who somehow received Christ as Savior without a greek text that had Gods name in it. Since we do know that earlier copies of the LXX did have a form of the Name in it, why did God not preserve it in the thousands of NT manuscripts? Could it be that the LXX is not inspired, but is a translation, but the NT was an inspired text, and that God was now ?exalting the name? of His beloved Son, so that ?just as they honor the Father, they will honor the Son?? Or could it be that Christians are now adopted ?sons of God? and as sons, they cry out ?abba? that is ?father?? After all, who, having a father that they truly love, would ever call him by his personal name? Would that not be disrespectful?

    Now to me it would seem that if you either add or take away from the text, you are committing the same violation that God forbids. You cannot add to the biblical text and at the same time condemn those who have taken away from the Text, especially if you?re adding to the Text distorts the meaning of the text, as done in several places by the NWT adding of the Divine name in the CGS where the underlying Greek gives no warrant to it.

    One such example, that many watchtower organizationalists are somewhat oblivious to the NWT implications of, is the well known text of Paul?s in Romans chapter 10.

    *** Rbi8 Romans 10:9-14 ***

    9 For if you publicly declare that ?word in your own mouth,? that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.

    11 For the Scripture says: ?None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.? 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. 13 For ?everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.? 14 However, how will they call on him in whom they have not put faith?

    According to a natural reading of the text, the ?Lord? that with the mouth a Christian is to ?call upon? is the ?Lord Jesus? according to verse 9. However, in verse 13, Paul quotes exactly the text of the LXX of Joel 2:32, a text which, in the Hebrew original, the Divine Name, HWHY, or ?Jehovah? is found, and the ?Lord Jehovah? is the Lord whom Joel is saying that should be ?called upon.? The LXX, however, from which Paul evidently translated, must not have the term HWHY, or ?Iao? or any other Paleo-Hebraic letters, or if it did, since a few manuscripts at that time did, Paul wrote the substantive ?kurios? in its place, thus applying a OT verse that was originally applied to the Lord Jehovah to the highly exalted Lord Jesus, of whom Paul wrote elsewhere,

    ? *** Rbi8 Philippians 2:9-11 ***

    9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

    Note how the NWT has to add the term ?other? to this Christological text, thus making it agree with their theology. The Koine Greek language has a term for the adjective ?other? which is ?allos.? If Paul wanted to us it, he could of, especially since he is making a very big claim, and if he wanted to say that ?other? than God?s name Jehovah, Christ Jesus is the most highly exalted name, he certainly could have. Thus, even though the NWT claims to be a literal word for word translation, we can see that where the bible does not agree with Watchtower theology, the text of the bible must be altered.

    Note, for example, the claim made in the NWT introduction?

    *** Rbi8 p. 7 Introduction ***

    Paraphrases of the Scriptures are not offered. Rather, an effort has been made to give as literal a translation as possible where the modern-English idiom allows and where a literal rendition does not, by any awkwardness, hide the thought. In that way the desire of those who are scrupulous for getting an almost word-for-word statement of the original is met. It is realized that even such a seemingly insignificant matter as the use or omission of a comma or of a definite or an indefinite article may at times alter the correct sense of the original passage.

    Taking liberties with the texts for the mere sake of brevity, and substituting some modern parallel when a literal rendering of the original makes good sense, has been avoided.

    End quote

    However, the translators who claim to be even worried about the adding or omission of an articles use the important christological text of Philippians 2:9 proves that claim to be false about their ?scrupulous desire? for a word for word statement is not in fact met. It in fact does, ?by awkwardness, hide the thought.? Since Jesus Christ has now been given ?the name, which, as the BBE states, ? is greater than every name,? (not every other name) one does not have to look outside the bible itself to find out that ?the name? that is great and above every name is the name ?Jehovah? itself. For example?

    *** Rbi8 2 Samuel

    And let your own name become great to time indefinite, saying, ?Jehovah of armies is God over

    *** Rbi8 1 Chronicles ***

    24 And let your name prove faithful and become great to time indefinite, saying, ?Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, is God to ,

    *** Rbi8 Jeremiah 44:26 ***

    Here I myself have sworn by my great name,? Jehovah has said

    *** Rbi8 Psalm 102:15 ***

    And the nations will fear the name of Jehovah,

    And all the kings of the earth your glory.

    *** Rbi8 Ezekiel 36:23 ***

    And I shall certainly sanctify my great name, which was being profaned among the nations, which YOU profaned in the midst of them; and the nations will have to know that I am Jehovah

    *** Rbi8 Malachi ***

    11 ?For from the sun?s rising even to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place sacrificial smoke will be made, a presentation will be made to my name, even a clean gift; because my name will be great among the nations,? Jehovah of armies has said.

    *** Rbi8 Psalm 148:13 ***

    Let them praise the name of Jehovah, For his name alone is unreachably high.

    Thus, Christ is given the name ?Jehovah? which is ?the name that is above every name.? It is not the name ?above every {other} name,? as the NWT misleadingly implies, for who?s name is above that of Jehovah? It?s interesting that the very organization that claims to represent the name ?Jehovah? more than all other organizations on earth, would miss this obvious point. Perhaps altering the text to meet predisposed theology wasn?t such a great idea after all. Since it is also very likely that the pre-human Jesus was also the messenger that God sent before the nation of Israel after the Exodus, it is all the more fitting that Christ would be given this name, since He already had ?the name? in Him, the Name of God, which would have been HWHY, as seen in Exodus 23:21. In my research, not one article in the Watchtower explains why Paul would make use of ?calling on the name of Jehovah? in a context that clearly talks about ?calling on the Lord Jesus.? Or why Paul would use the Joel quote as applicable to Christ as the Lord!

    Thus, the issue of the NWT adding the name of ?Jehovah? to the text of Romans 10:13 to try to in some way modify the meaning actually only gives leverage to the fact that the Inspired apostle Paul himself understood that the Lord Christ Jesus has been given that name, ?the name? that is above EVERY name, the name Jehovah.

    The unambiguous reading of the text of Romans 10:9-13 identifies Christ as Jehovah, although the NWT translators no doubt did not have this in mind, since the Watchtower was adding it to the text to try to not allow the Joel Septuagint quote from being directly applied and understood to be toward Christ.

    Few, if any, Witnesses that I have talked to understand Paul?s words in Romans 10 to mean that Christ is now recognized as the ?Lord? whose name we are to ?call upon? for salvation. The NWT?s adding of the name Jehovah only proves conclusively that Jesus has been given the name Jehovah, since the context makes it clear, the natural and only understanding possible of the reading is that Paul was identified the Lord Jesus as Jehovah by quoting the verse in a clear context concerning ?calling on the Lord,? for salvation.

    9 For if you publicly declare that ?word in your own mouth,? that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.

    11 For the Scripture says: ?None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.? 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. 13 For ?everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.? 14 However, how will they call on him in whom they have not put faith?

    Thus, Paul tells us, that if you declare that Christ is Lord, you will be saved, for ?everyone calling on the name of Jehovah? will be saved! Thus you have a semantic equivalency between calling on ?Jesus? and ?Jehovah.? To do one, is to do the other, since Christ has been given the name of Jehovah. It would be nice had the NWT and its commentary the Watchtower been more honest about this, and would of lead to less confusion and bad translation practices of adding to the greek text and inserting words that aren?t there to make the bible agree with the watchtower had the NWT translation committee only understand the ramifications of what they were doing when they decided to add the Divine Name Jehovah to the English translation of the CGS. Instead of having to say that Christ had been given ?the name above every {other} name,? they might have understood that Christ had been given the name Jehovah, as many NT passages that refer to Jehovah and are applied to Christ show, that is above every name, and that name is and will forever be Jehovah.

    Free in Christ

    Daniel

    [email protected]

  • Narkissos
  • Vanderhoven7
    Vanderhoven7

    Regarding Jesus using the divine name, David Chord writes:

    Unless you apply simple minded thinking and suspend obvious reality, it’s impossible to prove that Jesus ever spoke out God’s Holy name.

    Let’s review… for thousands of years the Jews, out of fear, refused to speak or write God’s name. In all that time, God sent prophet after prophet, to correct the Jews attitudes, beliefs and actions but not once did any of those prophets tell the Jews to use and write His name…. (Ooops silly God). Irrespective, what JWs would have us believe is that suddenly one day, Jesus turns up and starts using God’s name! …but that’s not the most incredible thing. Despite using God’s name that the Jews have fearfully avoided for centuries, the Jews aren’t even mildly shocked and make not a single objection! The reality is that they would have been extremely angry and reacted strongly had Christ used God’s name!

    Understanding this means looking at the very scriptures that JWs and other simple minded folk from a different realistic and truthfilled perspective….

    “I have made your name known to them and will make it known, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them.” Jo 17:26

    MADE YOUR NAME KNOWN.. is the key phrase that the simple minded latch onto ignoring the obvious problems like Jewish history, culture and reactions. They seem to ignore the previous verse…”Righteous Father, the world has, indeed, not come to know you, but I know you, and these have come to know that you sent me.”

    Hmm so in response to the world not knowing the Father (v25), Jesus simply makes the Father’s name known (v26)? That doesn’t even make sense!

    The truth is that the term “name” or “onoma” does not always refer to the label a thing is known by and it’s pretty obvious if we study the bible. In these examples the word “name” does NOT mean the label of something but rather the authority or character… but don’t take my word for it, look at these four examples of the word in biblical usage…

    Luke 13:35 “Behold your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’” We’re not waiting for someone to come inside a label but rather someone to come with the authority of the Lord.

    Luke 9:49 John answered, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he does not follow with us.” We don’t cast out demons with the label of the Lord but rather the authority of the Lord.

    Luke 10:17 “The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord even the demons are subject to us in your name!” Demons aren’t subject to a label but rather to the authority of the Lord.

    Luke 9:48 “and said to them, “Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me” Whoever receives a child in the label of the Lord receives God? Nope, we must receive a child in the authority or character of the Lord!

    So when we consider the Jews, their fear of using the name of the Lord and their reaction when Jesus made God’s NAME known to them, we have to conclude that the bible isn’t actually saying that Jesus used God’s name at all. In context Jo 17:25 makes it clear Jesus wasn’t making God’s name known but was making God’s character and authority known.

    THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

    (note that this also applies to the Lord’s prayer… Hallowed be thy name. It’s not the label of God that is to be hallowed but rather His character and His authority, that His name represents)

  • Ding
    Ding

    The other side of the coin is that if the WT teaching were correct, we would also expect to read about Jesus rebuking the Pharisees for their superstitious refusal to speak the divine name.

    That appears nowhere in the Bible.

  • Vanderhoven7
    Vanderhoven7

    Good point Ding!

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    Really, if you understand the origin of the god Yahweh, all this discussion is pointless, or worse in fact, rather silly.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Jesus is clearly distinguished from God in the passage, as he is elsewhere in the New Testament. When Paul says, “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved” in verse 13, he has God in mind because he said in verse 9 that “God raised him up”. The focus is on the miracle that God performed in raising Jesus from the dead. It is on that basis that one has faith, will not be disappointed, and in that sense that Jehovah is “Lord over all”. See the commentary on Romans by John Ziesler on this point.

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    Just to put across the WT view of this verse.. Romans 10 : 13 “ For’ everyone that calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved’” NWT

    They say that the writer is here quoting Isaiah 28: 16.

    The problem I have with that is that Is. 28:16 does not contain the sacred name anyway, at least not as I can see ……

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    It’s Joel 2:32 in verse 13, you’ve followed the cross reference to verse 11 instead.

  • waton
    waton

    "making known the name" does not mean plastering it all over the landscape, and using it at as an adjective, rather , since Jesus never used the name, but "Father", even "Eli" instead, it must mean explaining, making manifest, all what the name stands for.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit