Should God’s name Jehovah or Yahweh appear in the English New Testament text were there is a quote from the Old Testament, for example at Matthew 22:44 & Romans 10:13?

Roman 10:13 “For all who will call on the Name of YHWH have Life.” - Joel 2:32; The Hebraic-Roots Version Scriptures Revised Edition Containing The Tanak and Ketuvim Netzarim

Hebrew NT https://newchristianbiblestudy.org:- כי כל אשר יקרא בשם יהוה ימלט׃


Matthew 22:44 ”YHWH said to my Adon: Sit you on My right hand, until I make Your enemies the footstool of your feet? - Psalm 110:1; The Hebraic-Roots Version Scriptures Revised Edition Containing The Tanak and Ketuvim Netzarim

Hebrew NT https://newchristianbiblestudy.org:- נאם יהוה לאדני שב לימיני עד אשית איביך הדם לרגליך׃

The above are two examples of many O.T. quotations in the N.T. were the name Jehovah/Yahweh appers.

Therefore my question is: why is it not the name in the English N.T. texts as it is in the Hebrew N.T. texts ?

ADDED Infomation Jehovah From: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia-under Jehovah what the early Christians call God:-

Greek transcriptions similar to "Jehovah" Ιουώ: Pistis Sophia[18] (2nd cent.) Ιεού: Pistis Sophia[19] (2nd cent.) Ιεηωουά: Pistis Sophia[20] (2nd cent.) Ιευώ: Eusebius[21] (c. 315) Ιεωά (Ieōa): Hellenistic magical texts[22] (2nd-3rd centuries), M. Kyriakakes[23] (2000) Ιεχοβά (like Jehova[h]): Paolo Medici[24] (1755) Ιεοβά (like Je[h]ova[h]): Greek Pentateuch[25] (1833), Holy Bible translated in modern Greek by Neophytus Vamvas[26] (1850) Ιεχωβά (like Jehova[h]): Panagiotes Trempelas[27] (1958)

FURTHER ADDED INFOMATION DUE TO QUESTIONS:- Jehovah/Yahweh found in The LXX Foead 266 1st century B.C. The Foead-papyrus collection (Foead; inv. n° 266) is in possession of the Société Egyptienne de Papyrologie in Caïro. This collection is dated from the 1st century B.C. The collection was discovered in Egypt in 1939 and includes parts from the Bible books of Genesis and Deuteronomy. The Name cannot be found in the Genesis fragments, because the text is incomplete. But, in the book of Deuteronomy, in the midst of the Greek text, it is written 49 times in Hebrew characters. The Tetragrammaton can be found three more times in fragments that are not identified (fragments 116, 117 and 123). IIn a commentary on this papyrus collection Paul Kahle wrote in 'Studia Evangelica', edited by Kurt Aland, F. L. Cross, Jean Danielou, Harald Riesenfeld and W. C. van Unnik, Berlin 1959, page 614

GO TO: THE TETRAGRAMMATON IN THE LXX W. G. WADDELL The Journal of Theological Studies, Volume os-XLV, Issue 179-180, 1 July 1944, Pages 158–161, https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/os-XLV.179-180.158 Published: 01 July 1944

A Greek papyrus MS of Leviticus (4QLXX Lev.b), in a hand similar to that of the Fouad papyrus of Deuteronomy (first century B.C.), employs' instead of Kyrios, which nowhere occurs in the document. . . . the Greek versions of Aquila and Symmschus represents the divine name by Pi, Iota, Pi, Iota, capitalised*, obviously intended to approximate to the Hebrew** characters for the Tetragrammaton in the LXX, ....' -'YAHWEH The divine name in the Bible' by G.H. Parke-Taylor p.84-85.

In a second century BCE Septuagint Manuscript (Dead Sea Scroll, 4Q-LXX Leviticus-B) the divine name (traditionally, Jehovah or Yahweh) is represented in Greek as ΙΑΩ; or Iota, Alpha, Omega. This form "ΙΑΩ," is also found in what appears to be a second century CE Christian manuscript, which either quotes or paraphrases the book of Revelation. However, since I have not yet been able to access said manuscript, please consider this paper to be conjectural. The manuscript is PMich 155, 3. The reference is found in Bauer's Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature; under the heading: "ειμε. I. As predicate 'to be.'" In the edition I have [ISBN 0-226-03932-3] this is found on page 223 in the left column. The text presented in the passage found in Bauer says: "ο ων θεος ο Ιαω κυριος παντοκρατωρ" Literally, "The being God the IAO lord almighty.

In a letter written at Rome, 384 C.E., Jerome states: "The ninth [name of God] is the Tetragrammaton, which they considered [a•nek•pho'ne•ton], that is, unspeakable, and it is written with these letters, Iod, He, Vau, He. Certain ignorant ones, because of the similarity of the characters, when they would find it in Greek books, were accustomed to read PIPI [Greek letters corresponding to the Roman letters PIPI]."--Papyrus Grecs Bibliques, by F. Dunand, Cairo, 1966, p. 47, ftn. 4..”-www.equipministry.com/studies/yhwhinnt.htm

Detail available or 600dpi image

A user asked us to make available digital images of this fragment. First published in 1983 by P. J. Parsons (Oxyrhynchus Papyri vol. 50), it was produced in the first century AD. The fact that this comes from a conventional papyrus roll makes it more likely to be Jewish than Christian: from very early on, Christians were already using the new technology of the bound codex. The text is Job 42:11-12, from the Septuagint (Hellenistic Greek translations of the holiest Hebrew books).

The fifth line (see detail) contains the tetragrammaton, the four-letter divine name, written in archaic Hebrew script. This is unusual. Septuagint texts routinely substitute the Greek kurios — and copyists who want even normal Hebrew sometimes just leave a blank and get a Hebrew-literate friend to fill in the gap later. “The scribe of 3522 ... wrote the Hebrew continuously and fluently...but apparently without understanding” (PJP). SEE F:\BIBLE STUDY\GODS NAME\YHWH IN LXX\POxy 3522 tetragrammaton.htm

MATHEW FIRST WROTE HIS GOSPEL IN HEBREW:- Around 180 Irenaeus of Lyons wrote that

Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia. (Against Heresies 3:1:1) Fifty years earlier Papias, bishop of Hieropolis in Asia Minor, wrote, "Matthew compiled the sayings [of the Lord] in the Aramaic language, and everyone translated them as well as he could" (Explanation of the Sayings of the Lord [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 3:39]).

Sometime after 244 the Scripture scholar Origen wrote, "Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language" (Commentaries on Matthew [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 6:25]).

Eusebius himself declared that "Matthew had begun by preaching to the Hebrews, and when he made up his mind to go to others too, he committed his own Gospel to writing in his native tongue [Aramaic], so that for those with whom he was no longer present the gap left by his departure was filled by what he wrote" (History of the Church 3:24 [inter 300-325]).

Thus "YHWH" would apper therein.

Isaiah 42:8 “I AM JEHOVAH: THAT IS MY NAME: ...”-THE DIVINE NAME KING JAMES BIBLE Go To: http://www.dnkjb.net

  • Because they're translating the Greek text, which doesn't have the tetragrammaton. A Hebrew NT which puts in the tetragrammaton is not actually translating the Greek text in those places. – curiousdannii Nov 4 '18 at 0:40
  • @curiosdanni - So what then do Jewish/Hebrew Christians read that do not read Greek or English? – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 0:43
  • I'm not really sure what you mean. There are several Hebrew translations of the NT of varying qualities. They can read them. But if they read the one you quote in the question they should be aware they're not reading an accurate translation in these places. – curiousdannii Nov 4 '18 at 0:54
  • @curiosdanni As The OT came first as God's revelation to man then that which follows should follow the first; OT, to be accurate, should it not, thus the Hebrew NT thefore must be more accurate as it follow that which came first The OT as The Greek does not do so! – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 1:03
  • 1
    @ethos There is absolutely no evidence of that. All the many, many codices and fragments are in Greek. – Nigel J Nov 4 '18 at 18:19

In brief, the answer is NO. I offer the following reasons why the tetragrammaton should NOT be inserted in quotes from the OT or anywhere else:

  • The NT is a translation of the Koine Greek text which does not contain the tetragrammaton. Inserting the tetragrammaton in various places would not produce a faithful translation of the Greek text.
  • When the NT quotes the OT, it is almost always the LXX (another Greek text) which is quoted and NOT the Hebrew Text.
  • Even the LXX does not retain the tetragrammaton in its translation.
  • If we believe that the NT authors were inspired and its text "God-breathed" (see 2 Tim 3:16, 17 and 2 Peter 1:19-21), and these inspired writers did not see the need to retain the tetragrammaton, then I cannot see how we believe we can improve things by altering their text.

In brief, we have enough trouble understanding the NT text as given to us without altering it and trying to "fix" it. Leave the inspired text alone and just produce accurate translations.

| improve this answer | |
  • The below fragments are evidence that the Septuagint originally contained the name Yahweh. The first is an ancient fragment of the Septuagint dated between 50 BCE and 50 CE (AD). If this dating is correct, it would have been written near the time of Yahushua's ministry. The name of these fragments are "Nahal Hever Minor Prophets" because they are fragments of Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah and Zechariah found in the Nahal Hever cave, south of Qumran. The Tetragrammaton is indicated with the large black arrow.- eliyah.com/lxx.html. The Christians read "YHWH" in The LXX! – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 15:33
  • The LXX contains "YHWH" or "PIPI" for "Jehovah/Yahweh" as proved by the LXX scrolls found in The Dead Sea Scrolls find on hundreds of fragment etc. etc. SEE 'Manuscripts Of The Greek Bible' by Bruce M. Metzger; Special Features of Bible Manuscripts - The Tetragrammaton pages 33-35. Just as a start! – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 16:03
  • All true but these are rare. Mast of the LXX MSS do not have these and, more importantly, neither does the NT MSS. – user25930 Nov 4 '18 at 20:42
  • Not as "rare" as you think. But the main point is that they were there and Christians saw them when the x refed with the Hebrew just as we can today. – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 21:06
  • It is the Hebrew MSS that hold the authority over the Greek LXX & NT not the other way around. – user26950 Nov 4 '18 at 21:12

What is a translation? It is is the equivalent of what is said in one language in another. Neither 'Jehovah' (a pronunciation impossibility, by the way) nor 'YHVH' are meaningful in any way.

To include the letters Y, H, W, H in English for the sake of it is completely meaningless. Surmising vowels equally so.

A placeholder like ΠΙΠΙ is also absolutely without meaning.

We're better off using the convention of the Septuagint and the New Testament in rendering יהוה with a synonym: [ο] κυριος ("Lord").

| improve this answer | |
  • The Bible does not say "lord" so it is wrong! – user26950 Nov 5 '18 at 15:33
  • If 'Lord' is wrong, so much more meaningless and wrong is the non-word, and non-name 'YHVH.' At least 'Lord' conveys a meaning comparable to the meaning of יהוה. Whereas Jehovah or YHVH doesn't even slightly. At least that's what the authors of the New Testament thought when they continued using the Septuagintic convention. – Sola Gratia Nov 5 '18 at 15:37
  • To make a point think on this, "HALLELUJAH (hal-e-lu'ya; Heb. hallelu-ya; "praise ye Jah," i.e., Jehovah; Gk allelouia).Evidently a common form of adoration and thanks-giving in Jewish worship, as appears from its frequent employment at the beginning and close of many psalms (See Pss 106,111-13,117,135). ... "-'NEW BIBLE DICTIONARY' p.518; also see Hebrew, Greek, and 'English Dictionary of Scriptural words' by H.Browne, M.D. Lond. So when "Allelouia" is use its "praise to Jehovah." There is a place for "Lord" but that is NOT a name its a title so to use it for "YHWH" is wrong of two counts. – user26950 Nov 5 '18 at 16:32
  • Graita Isaiah 42:8 “I AM JEHOVAH: THAT IS MY NAME: ...”-THE DIVINE NAME KING JAMES VERSION – user26950 Nov 5 '18 at 16:43
  • 1
    But יְהוָה =/= "Jehovah." – Sola Gratia Nov 6 '18 at 15:37

I fully support anyone trying to work on authenticity of the Word and their practice. This is one of those questions the experts cringe at with good reason. But I believe the least we can do is put the Name of God used or quoted from the Writing of Moses or OT as LORD the same as the book it was quoted from. So if Deuteronomy has LORD we should use LORD meaning the Divine Name. YHWH. I feel at this stage due to politics behind the Roman name Jove or Yehowah to me as a Hebrew reader and a Jewish believer too tuff to swallow. I would prefer YHWH if you must, but LORD says that the same as when a Jews reads Adonai in Synagogue. The name issue is massive, so please put it in perspective "Father" is how He wants to be addressed by us. Which is only a side note to this disscussion but a important observation. So LORD in any Bible should be referring to the Divine name YHWH.

| improve this answer | |
  • This help? 1 Chronicles 29:10 David said: “May you be praised, O Jehovah the God of Israel our father, throughout all eternity. Isaiah 63:16 . . .You, O Jehovah, are our Father.. . . " Isaiah 64:8 " But now, O Jehovah, you are our Father.. . ." NWT "JHVH" IS OUR FATHER – user26950 Nov 6 '18 at 9:02
  • Jesus condemed the Jews for Godless traditions: NWT Mark 7:13 "Thus you make the word of God invalid by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like this.” A very serious matter, yes? – user26950 Nov 7 '18 at 17:43