THE NAME OF THE GOD
By Vern Manson.
I here attempt to use the Finny format. (This Article is an attempt at providing another key to peace.)
First. State the Doctrine.
Second. Some of the points to be considered.
Third. the sources of evidence.
Fourth. The amount of evidence to be expected, if the doctrine be true.
Fifth. Adduce the proof.
Sixth. Answer the objections.
First. There is one identifiable name for the God of the Christian, which is recognized and used universally.
1. God is one and he has one definitive name.
2. There are a plurality in the God head, but not a plurality of names.
3. The Bible makes a distinction between the persons of the Godhead with appropriate titles for each.
4. We are to approach God as a singular being having a singular name.
5. There is a name that is above every other name.
6. At the name of Jesus every knee should bow.
7. The name given Jesus at his birth (is relative to and), is in essence the same as "Jehovah is Salvation".
8. This designates him as being both the self existent one and of the self existent one.
Second. Some of the points to be considered.
1. This name is not pronounced the same in every language, but this does not keep its meaning from referring to the same root and to the same God when it is used in the Christian context.
2. Affirming there is one definitive name is not denying the unity, oneness, or the plurality of the Godhead.
3. We are only pointing to the necessity and the fact of there being one dominant name.
4. One dominant Name is conclusive or definitive.
5. One dominant Name is efficient.
6. The names, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not individually conclusive or inclusive.
7. Neither are they as a unit conclusive, or definitive.
The one dominant, singular, definitive name does not have any inherent power. It is not to be worshipped.
9. Many men are given this name at birth.
10. Though a common name it is still to be revered when used as the Name of God and only then.
11. This Name is to be respected in a religious sense as being the Name that is above every other name.
12. The knowledge of this Name is not to be thought of as being more important then the Word of God or moral law.
13. The Trinity doctrine is a fundamental doctrine, and has been shown to be an essential of the Godhead, however the understanding of it has not been shown to be essential to salvation.
14. The commandment to worship God as being one God is both a fundamental doctrine and essential to salvation and is not contradictory of the Trinity doctrine.
15. The overemphasis and the exclusiveness portrayed, by extremist Oneness and Trinity preachers, over their peculiar versions of the Godhead has increased confusion relative to who God is.
16. Their approach puts the emphasis on how God is, instead of who he is.
17. Most pagan Gods are, in some sense, a trinity.
18. Whereas the understanding of there being one definitive, singular name for the true God, (a name which encompasses the three individual names), clarifies.
19. One dominant, singular name is efficient, and selective. Otherwise, who is your God?
20. There are many Pagan Trinity Gods, many divine sons, many father gods, many holy spirits, mothers of god, etc. But what is the name?
Third. The sources of evidence.
1. The primary evidence comes from the revelation of scripture and secondarily from the revelation produced by the study of governments and other religions.
2. History of people, their governments and religions should reveal similarities and a proof of the principle.
Such as where one conclusive name would be used for one body or one god, though it had plural offices, forms, personalities, spirits, gods, etc.
Fourth. The amount of evidence to be expected, if the doctrine is true.
1. We should find that the use of one name for both God and his anointed one (Savior), was accepted by believers in both the Old and New Testaments.
2. We should find that those who did not accept Christ, as being the Messiah, would use the same terminology, (or name, for both the Messiah and for God), in trying to refute him.
3. That this same dominant name would be recognized by everyone as referring to the God of the Christian.
4. That those Christian doctrines and perversions of Christianity which are anti-Christ would abhor the use of this name, as being the name of God.
1. God has given a commandment concerning his oneness.
As one he would have one singular conclusive and inclusive name.
A multitude of equally conclusive and important names would be contradictory of his oneness and would produce confusion.
This Commandment is the first of the other nine.
This implies that the understanding of his oneness is essential and to be put above all other knowledge.
3. The dominant name of the Old Testament is Jehovah. In the translations into the English language the word "Lord" is used, almost exclusively, in place of the name "Jehovah."
The actual pronunciation of the original name and its spelling has been lost because of the sacred importance put on it by the Jews. They were afraid to say it and they eventually became so superstitious over it that they only wrote it down in short hand. However, the meaning of it has been preserved and is related to what God told Moses. "I am That I am." (The self existent one is the self existent one.)
The loss of the original pronunciation is proof of the reverence the Jews had for one inclusive and conclusive singular name.
Though they lost the spelling and pronunciation of this dominent name, they did not loose any of the other lesser names or titles.
The proper spelling or pronunciation are second- ary to the meaning and of little consequence.
The names Jehovah and Jesus are pronounced and spelled in different ways in other languages. However, the meaning is the same.
The name itself refers to the God of eternity. This logically speaks (or is the root of all), of the rest of the names of God and so, because of necessity, comes before all of the others. It would only be the self existent one who would be capable of being the almighty, etc.
Many other of the names of God have Yah in them, or have Jehovah, as an integral part of their meaning. The term, self existent one, necessarily is conclusive or definitive, for there is only one like Him.
There is no other and there does not need to be another. He is a plurality, yet he is alone.
In John 1:1 In the beginning -- Genesis 1:1 In the beginning-- He was before the beginning.
Before the Word communicated to humans, the Self Existent One was the Self Existent One.
So, the Word, the Son, the Angel of His presence, the Lord of hosts, etc. was both with the Self Existent One, of the Self Existent One and was the Self Existent One.
As we have seen, in Charles Finney's lectures on the God head, if we touch any one person of the Godhead we have touched them all.
The end or the logic of this, is, that, there must be one definitive, singular or conclusive Name.
(Definitions and comments from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words)
GOD - A knowledge of the character and attributes of pagan "gods" was thought to enable the worshipers to manipulate or influence the deities in a more effective way than they could have if the deity's name remained unknown. To that extent, the vagueness of the term 'el frustrated persons who hoped to obtain some sort of power over the deity, since the name gave little or no indication of the god's character.
(Note; people thought that by knowing about (how), God, his attributes, they could gain power over Him. V. M.)
LORD - yehwah ^3068^, "Lord."
The Tetragrammaton YHWH appears without its own vowels, and its exact pronunciation is debated (Jehovah, Yehovah, Jahweh, Yahweh).
The Hebrew text does insert the vowels for 'adonay, and Jewish students and scholars read 'adonay whenever they see the Tetragrammaton.
This use of the word occurs 6,828 times.
The word appears in every period of biblical Hebrew.
The divine name YHWH appears only in the Bible.
Its precise meaning is much debated. God chose it as His personal name by which He related specifically to His chosen or covenant people. Its first appearance in the biblical record is -
Gen. 2:4: "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens."
( I edited the following paragraph to more closely reperesent my understanding. V.M. - It is possible that Adam knew Him by this personal or covenantal name from the beginning. However, It is also possible that though Adam may have used this name he may have used it more as a description then as being the actual personal name of God. Back to Vines -)
Since Seth both called his son Enosh (i. e., man as a weak and dependent creature) and began (along with all other pious persons) to call upon (formally worship) the name of YHWH, "the Lord" <Gen. 4:26>.
The covenant found a fuller expression and application when God revealed Himself to Abraham - Gen. 12:8, - promising redemption in the form of national existence.
This promise became reality through Moses, to whom God explained that He was not only the "God who exists" but the "God who effects His will":
"Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The Lord [YHWH] God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, The Lord [YHWH] God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt: And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites..." <Exod. 3:15-17>.
So God explained the meaning of "I am who I am" <
Exod 3:13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. 15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD (Jehovah), God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. (KJV)
He spoke to the fathers as YHWH, but the promised deliverance and, therefore, the fuller significance or experienced meaning of His name were unknown to them Exod. 6:2-8.
(from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words)
Exod 6:2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD (JEHOVAH) . 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. (KJV)
Note in these verses it says Jehovah, or I am that I am, was to be his name forever. Exodus 3:15 above.
This should establish Jehovah as the dominant name of God.
The New Testament Testimony to One Name.
Phil 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee sh ould bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (KJV)
In these scriptures taken from the King James version, it says, 'Jesus was given a name which is above every name.' Now note how the NIV reads.
He was given the name that is above every name. This can only be referring to the Name Jehovah.
The Watch Tower Society, or the leaders of the Jehovahs Witnesses movement, has in their New World translation interpreted the English word Lord into the word Jehovah correctly in most places. It is generally recognized that the word in the Greek was used to bring across the word Jehovah from the Hebrew.
The following notes are from Vine. -
2962 kurios (koo'-ree-os); from kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, i.e. (as noun) controller; by implication, Mr. (as a respectful title):
LORD, LORDSHIP KJV-- God, Lord, master, Sir.
1. kurios ^2962^, properly an adjective, signifying "having power" (kuros) or "authority," is used as a noun, variously translated in the NT, "`Lord,' `master,' `Master,' `owner,' `Sir,' a title of wide significance, occurring in each book of the NT save Titus and the Epistles of John. It is used (a) of an owner, as in <Luke 19:33>, cf. <Matt. 20:8; Acts 16:16; Gal. 4:1>; or of one who has the disposal of anything, as the Sabbath, <Matt. 12:8>; (b) of a master, i. e., one to whom service is due on any ground, <Matt. 6:24; 24:50; Eph. 6:5>; (c) of an Emperor or King, <Acts 25:26; Rev. 17:14>; (d) of idols, ironically, <1 Cor. 8:5>, cf. <Isa. 26:13>; (e) as a title of respect addressed to a father, <Matt. 21:30>, a husband, <1 Pet. 3:6>, a master, <Matt. 13:27; Luke 13:8>, a ruler, <Matt. 27:63>, an angel, <Acts 10:4; Rev. 7:14>; (f) as a title of courtesy addressed to a stranger, <John 12:21; 20:15; Acts 16:30>; - from the outset of His ministry this was a common form of address to the Lord Jesus, alike by the people, <Matt. 8:2; John 4:11>, and by His disciples, <Matt. 8:25; Luke 5:8; John 6:68>; (g) kurios is the Sept. and NT representative of Heb. Jehovah (`LORD' in Eng. versions), see <Matt. 4:7; Jas. 5:11>, e. g., of adon, Lord, <Matt. 22:44>, and of Adonay, Lord, <1:22>; it also occurs for Elohim, God, <1 Pet. 1:25>.
"Thus the usage of the word in the NT follows two main lines: one-- a-- f, customary and general, the other, g, peculiar to the Jews, and drawn from the Greek translation of the OT.
"Christ Himself assumed the title, <Matt. 7:21, 22; 9:38; 22:41-45; Mark 5:19> (cf. <Ps. 66:16>; the parallel passage, <Luke 8:39>, has `God');
<Luke 19:31; John 13:13>, apparently intending it in the higher senses of its current use, and at the same time suggesting its OT associations.
"His purpose did not become clear to the disciples until after His resurrection, and the revelation of His Deity consequent thereon.
Thomas, when he realized the significance of the presence of a mortal wound in the body of a living man, immediately joined with it the absolute title of Deity, saying, `My Lord and my God,' <John 20:28>.
--- Thereafter, except in <Acts 10:4> and <Rev. 7:14>, there is no record that kurios was ever again used by believers in addressing any save God and the Lord Jesus; ---- cf <Acts 2:47> with <4:29,30>.
"How soon and how completely the lower meaning had been superseded is seen in Peter's declaration in his first sermon after the resurrection, `God hath made Him-- Lord,' <Acts 2:36>, and that in the house of Cornelius, `He is Lord of all,' <10:36>, cf. <Deut. 10:14; Matt. 11:25; Acts 17:24>. In his writings the implications of his early teaching are confirmed and developed. Thus <Ps. 34:8>, `O taste and see that Jehovah is good,' is applied to the Lord Jesus, <1 Pet. 2:3>, and `Jehovah of Hosts, Him shall ye sanctify,' <Isa. 8:13>, becomes `sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord,' <3:15>.
"So also James who uses kurios alike of God, <1:7> (cf. <v. 5>); <3:9; 4:15; 5:4,10,11>, and of the Lord Jesus, <1:1> (where the possibility that kai is intended epexegetically, i. e. even, cf. <1 Thes. 3:11>, should not be overlooked); <2:1> (lit., `our Lord Jesus Christ of glory,' cf. <Ps. 24:7; 29:3; Acts 7:2; 1 Cor. 2:8>); <5:7,8>, while the language of <4:10; 5:15>, is equally applicable to either.
"Jude, <v. 4>, speaks of `our only-- Lord, Jesus Christ,' and immediately, <v. 5>, uses `Lord' of God (see the remarkable marg. here), as he does later, <vv. 9,14>. "Paul ordinarily uses kurios of the Lord Jesus, <1 Cor. 1:3>, e. g., but also on occasion, of God, in quotations from the OT, <1 Cor. 3:20>, e. g., and in his own words, <1 Cor. 3:5>, cf. <v. 10>. It is equally appropriate to either in <1 Cor. 7:25; 2 Cor. 3:16; 8:21; 1 Thes. 4:6>, and if <1 Cor. 11:32> is to be interpreted by <10:21,22>, the Lord Jesus is intended, but if by <Heb. 12:5-9>, then kurios here also God. <1 Tim. 6:15,16> is probably to be understood of the Lord Jesus, cf. <Rev. 17:14>.
"Though John does not use `Lord' in his Epistles, and though, like the other Evangelists, he ordinarily uses the personal Name in his narrative, yet he occasionally speaks of Him as `the Lord,' <John 4:1; 6:23; 11:2; 20:20; 21:12>.
"The full significance of this association of Jesus with God under the one appellation, `Lord,' is seen when it is remembered that these men belonged to the only monotheistic race in the world.
To associate with the Creator one known to be a creature, however exalted, though possible to Pagan philosophers, was quite impossible to a Jew.
"It is not recorded that in the days of His flesh any of His disciples either addressed the Lord, or spoke of Him, by His *personal Name. Where Paul has occasion to refer to the facts of the gospel history he speaks of what the Lord Jesus said, <Acts 20:35>, and did, <1 Cor. 11:23>, and suffered, <1 Thes. 2:15; 5:9,10>. It is our Lord Jesus who is coming, <1 Thes. 2:19>, etc. In prayer also the title is given, <3:11; Eph. 1:3>; the sinner is invited to believe on the Lord Jesus, <Acts 16:31; 20:21>, and the saint to look to the Lord Jesus for deliverance, <Rom. 7:24, 25>, and in the few exceptional cases in which the *personal Name stands alone a reason is always discernible in the immediate context.
*(Note what I have written below concerning these last statements, about the use of the Personal Name Jesus. V. M.)
"The title `Lord,' as given to the Savior, in its full significance rests upon the resurrection, <Acts 2:36; Rom. 10:9; 14:9>, and is realized only in the Holy Spirit, <1 Cor. 12:3>."
From Notes on Thessalonians, by Hogg and Vine p. 25.
(*In answer to Hogg and Vine's comments about the use of the personal name of the Son of God, the name Jesus, etc. It would seem that the following notes are contradictory of what Hogg and Vine said above? -
Miscellaneous scriptures with notes affirming that the personal name of Jesus was used in place of the name Jehovah. Or that Jesus, Jehovah, or Lord were used interchangeably in many cases.
The Angel referred to him by his personal name, Jesus, then said "see the place where Jehovah or the Lord lay."
This has been mentioned earlier and in Finney's lectures. - Tell what Jehovah or the Lord has done; he went and told what Jesus had done.
They glorified God and fell down at his feet.
The Old Testament spoke of how the Christ was to suffer and that his name would be preached among all nations. The preponderance of New Testament scriptures refer to the death of Jesus. and him being preached, not justJehovah or Lord.
Jesus was not referred to as being a proclaimer of the Name Jehovah or Lord, but rather of his own personal name. We have no other evidence.
These people asked for Jesus and he affirmed that he was the "I am." This is the meaning of the word Jehovah. In other words they asked for Jesus and he acknowledged who he was, but he used the name Jehovah or its equivalent. This ties the name Jesus into the name Jehovah through the testimony of Jesus himself.
Who is the Christ? It is Jesus.
In most cases, when people addressed him they were using the term Lord in respect, not as him being Jehovah, until after his death.
This Jesus; no other appellations.
The name Jehovah was used to refer to their God and it was not a forbidden word. So why all of this uproar? It was not because of the use of the word or name Jehovah or Lord. But rather it was because of the definitive name of this man and the authority ascribed to both him and his name that was the problem.
Religious people still have a problem with this name Jesus. Those who do not accept the name Jesus as being interchangeable with the name Jehovah look at this type of usage as an implication that the name referred to is Lord or Jehovah. But look closely at the following usage of the name Jesus. -
For some reason the obvious is argued against relative to the name of Jesus. There are out right attacks by Christians against using the name Jesus as being the definitive name of their God.
They act as if they must avoid accepting this name even though their refusal to do so violates their own rules of interpretation.
In the Jehovah Witnesses New World Translation, in most places this word Lord is translated into the word Jehovah, (from the same Greek word that is used here.) Of course this would have had Paul asking "Who art thou Jehovah? With Jehovah answering "I am Jesus".
The Lord, even Jesus - Note the hesitation that is included below in the NIV. They inserted a couple of dashes between the Lord and Jesus. ?? You see if we leave out the even we can put the emphasis on the word Lord. By doing this we can de-emphasize the name Jesus. But, why??
In many scriptures the wording Christ Jesus or Jesus Christ is used. Here those Theologians who want to de-emphasize the name Jesus point to Christ as being the qualifying or de-emphasizing term. ??
Inclusive = Including or tending to include. Taking everything into account.
Conclusive = Leaving no room for doubt. Final. Settling the question. Convincing.
The Name "Jesus" is both inclusive and conclusive. It covers the definitions of all of the other names of God and is not contradictory of them. It is also definitive. When you pray or worship Jesus, everyone knows who you are talking to.
First. The Name "Jesus" includes the meaning of the others, for it indirectly refers to all three persons in the God head. To say, "Jehovah is Salvation" is the same as saying the "Father, Son and Holy Spirit is salvation."
Second. The Name "Jesus" leaves no doubt as to which God is being referred to. Jesus is the God of the Christian, this is both final and convincing.
There are many Cults who would not agree with these statements. Muslims would say it is blaspheme to say Jesus is God and Jehovah's Witnesses would say he is a lesser God, not the one God.
There are many Christians who tend to reject Jesus as being their One God; this is because they are not properly taught. Yet, they would definitely reject the doctrines of the Muslims and the Witnesses.
With the great influx of Cult religions into our country, we need to understand the God-head and who Jesus is.
Here we find the emphasis put on either the name or person of Jesus.
Some theologians do not think we are baptised into the name or in the name of Jesus, but rather, only in the authority vested in Jesus. Many of them think it is wrong to invoke the name Jesus as a key or used as part of a vocal formula or invocation during the act of baptism. We have no explicit preserved written formula or invocation, but surely it is praiseworthy to call on the name of Jesus during a baptism.
This verse is used to persuade people that the word Jehovah or Lord is the point of this scripture. I ask, why is it that the word Lord is not peculiar to the name of our God? Jehovah is, but we do not have it written here as Jehovah. However, Jesus is a peculiar and definitive name when used in reference to the faith of Christianity.
World wide, and for generations, what ever word that is translated into the given name for the Son of the Christian God is a definitive name.
The term Lord is used for all gods. Again - the definitive name is the name Mary called her son, (his personal name).
It is rather peculiar that Christians have avoided using the name Jehovah in the translation of the Old Testament and then proceeded to stand against the useage of the name Jesus as the name of God in the New Testament. For centuries, we have used the non-definitive title, Lord, in place of Jehovah.
Yet, we have known the name Jehovah is a peculiar definitive name. Still we have refused to bring it across into our own languages in its original form.
We use the word "Hallelujah" in every language and are saying "Praise Jehovah." So why did we not do the same with the name Jehovah?
One reason would be superstition. We do not want to take the name of God in vain. Another reason is because we have been purposely deceived by Satan. He wants people to be confused over the name of the one God. He also wants us to build false doctrines over it and he wants to hurt the first Commandment.
hallelouia ^239^ signifies "Praise ye Jah." It occurs as a short doxology in the Psalms, usually at the beginning, e. g., <111, 112>, or the end, e. g., <104, 105>, or both, e. g., <106, 135> (where it is also used in <v. 3>), <146-150>. In the NT it is found in <Rev. 19:1,3, 4,6>, as the keynote in the song of the great multitude in heaven.
"Alleluia," without the initial "H," is a misspelling. (from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words)
- I have a back ground in the One-ness movement. I have been baptised as the name, Jesus was called over me, and I was immersed in water. This act or form of baptism does not conflict with either the doctrine of the Trinity or the message of the One-ness doctrine. Neither do the doctrines of the Trinity or the One-ness doctrines conflict, except they be taken to the point of absurdity. Unfortunately, because of ignorance, this has happened and has hurt the body of Christ.
As a side note. - When a gathering, of Christians pray and baptize, those who are baptised have been sealed by faith no matter which formula is called over them. They could say we now baptize you in the name of God and still be correct. Christians can also be baptised in prayerful silence, into Christ. -
Whatever Godly Christians do, they do, in the name of Jesus; otherwise they are not Christians.
The repetition of the name "Jesus" creates no magical power . The only way power is released through that name is by righteous faith in the God it represents.
There are numbers of men called by that name and they have no special anointing except they be a godly Christian.
However, if we resist using the name "Jesus" because of some superstition we need to repent.
As the first two Commandments contain the other eight, so the name "Jesus" contains the complete, definitive name of God. He is the Self Existent one. He was with God from before the beginning and he was God. He is both the one God and the communication of God.
The name "Jesus", is a transliteration of Joshua, "Jehovah is salvation" and was and still is a common name. However, whenever this name is used in reference to God it is no longer to be thought of as common, but to be revered.
However, we must not forget, - this name is only significant or holy, when used in connection with God. God has put his word above his name.
We must come to this understanding -
If we deny the Unity or the Plurality of God or his definitive name we are into ignorant hurtful superstition. This Removes Peace.
Does our denial of these truths necessarily mean we do not love God. NO. But it does mean we are hurting.
The term Christian designates us as being followers of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, who is Jehovah, and who came as the Lord Jesus Christ. It is he, whom, we call Jesus. There is no other God.
The New Jerusalem is the Church. We are the Israel of God. We are, presently, the Temple of God. Godly believing Christians are now ruling and reigning with him in heavenly places. So, - If "Jesus" is not the name of our God, then how can Jesus be our God.
Vern Manson 5- 4-94 / 2-15-97 / 9-13-98 / 6-9-01