7

Holy Father, protect them by Your name, the name You gave me, so that they may be one as we are one. BLB

Is it actually, literally a name or just an authority to use to accomplish God's work?

EDIT:

Really appreciate some of the great answer content. There is another aspect that seems core to this matter about the 'name'. Please consider including this aspect in existing answers.

so that

Whatever this name aspect means, it is the precursor to a greater accomplishment;

they may be one as we are one.

This name that Jesus bears is the reason, the principle, to achieve oneness - to the point it that would be impossible if absent.

9
  • 3
    @Lucian 'Christ' is not a 'surname' : it is a title. It means 'Anointed' and refers to him, once risen and ascended ('named both Lord and Christ') as the Head of new humanity from which head comes down the anointing 'down the head and the beard to the skirts of the garments' that is to say to the whole body seen as a garmented bride.
    – Nigel J
    Jul 23 at 19:43
  • 2
    @Lucian Neither cognomen nor supranomen mean a 'title', especially not a title after elevation to a high position.
    – Nigel J
    Jul 23 at 20:27
  • 2
    Only 1 answer so far seems to have flagged up the difference of translations. The NWT translates John 17:11 as: "Holy father, watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one." The KJV says "Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." Two completely different meanings! That may call for a fresh question.
    – Anne
    Jul 31 at 10:38
  • 1
    @Lucian λεγόμενον Strong 3004 occurs in connection with 'Barrabas' (disputably not a personal name - 'son of the father' or 'son of the teacher') the 'Pavement' and 'Golgotha'. Titular names not personal names. But the fact remains that 'Messiah' and 'Christ' are titles, not names. 'Called' yes, for no other can bear the title, so it becomes his, personally. But it is not a personal name, given at birth or inherited.
    – Nigel J
    Aug 2 at 5:29
  • 1
    @NigelJ: Jesus was his (proper) name, and Christ was his co-name or over-name (Acts 1:23, 13:1, 13:9; Colossians 4:11). The term, in itself, had kingly overtones, but that's a different matter altogether.
    – Lucian
    Aug 2 at 7:19

12 Answers 12

4

John 17:11

Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.

Is it actually, literally a name?

No, it is not a secret name whose spelling is known only to selected individuals.

The name is the person himself. This is a figure of speech called synecdoche.

The same John makes it clear earlier in 3:18

He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Interposing the word "name" is a literary device to magnify the title of the person.

3
  • Also relevant Acts 19.13-16
    – Robert
    Jul 23 at 17:07
  • Agree well said Tony. When I try to intuit or deeply remind myself (“re-intuit”?) what “name” refers to in the bible, I do two things: 1. Recognize what it would mean to say “I do this in the name of love”. and think about that sense of using name. You wouldnt ask, “Oh well what is love’s name?” 2. Say “name and nature” (eg “We ask this in the name and nature of our Lord Jesus Christ”). John 17:11 would work well replacing name with nature. God gave His nature to Christ. Not saying this is perfect or hermeneutical, just sharing one thing that works for lay-folk to connect better with God
    – Al Brown
    Jul 29 at 18:52
  • Amen. Thanks for the comment.
    – Tony Chan
    Jul 29 at 19:04
3

The short answer - it is both.

Names of YHWH in the OT applied to Jesus:

  • "God" Deut 4:35, 6:4, 32:39, Isa 44:6, 45:5, 6; compare Matt 1:22, 23; John 1:1, 18, 20:28, Titus 2:13, Heb 1:8, 9, 2 Peter 1:1
  • "My Lord" Ps 35:23 (LXX: κύριός μου), Ps 110:1; compare John 20:13, 28, Luke 1:43, Phil 3:8, Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, Acts 2:34
  • "Creator" Isa 44:24, 45:18; compare John 1:3, 10, Col 1:16, 17, Heb 1:2
  • "Savior" Isa 43:3, 11, 45:17, 21; compare Matt 1:21; Acts 4:12; 2 Tim 1:10, Tit 1:4, 2:13, 3:6; 2 Pet 1:1, 11
  • "Shepherd" Psalm 23:1; Eze 34:11ff; compare John 10:11-16; Heb 13:20, 1 Peter 2:25, 5:4; Rev 7:17
  • "Bridegroom" Isa 49, 54, Jer 2, Hosea; compare Mark 2:19, Matt 9:15, Luke 5:34, 35
  • "First and Last" Isa 41:4, 44:6, 48:12; compare Rev 1:17, 18, 2:8, 22:13
  • "Lord of Lords" Deut 10:17, Ps 136:3, 26; compare Rev 17:14, 19:16
  • "Lord of All" Deut 10:17, Josh 3:11, 13, Ps 97:5, Zech 4:14, 6:5, Mic 4:13; compare Acts 10:36, Rom 10:12, Col 1:15
  • "I Am" Ex 3:13-15; and (form LXX) Deut 32:39, Isa 41:4, 43:10, 13, 25, 45:19, 46:4, 48:12, 51:12, 52:6; compare Matt 14:27, Mark 6:50, Mark 13:6, Luke 21:8, Mark 14:62, Luke 22:70, John 4:26, 6:20, 8:24, 28, 58, 13:9, 18:5-8.

Authority/Name

  • John 5:43 - I have come in My Father’s name, and you have not received Me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will receive him.
  • John 10:18 - No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”
  • Rev 2:27 - He will rule them with an iron scepter and shatter them like pottery—just as I have received authority from My Father.

Finally, notice what the NT does to identify Jesus:

  • Deut 32:43 is quoted by Heb 1:6 showing that Jesus is LORD
  • Ps 45:6, 7 is quoted by Heb 1:8, 9 showing that Jesus is LORD
  • Ps 102:25-27 is quoted by Heb 1:10-12 showing that Jesus is LORD
3

καὶ οὐκέτι εἰμὶ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ εἰσίν κἀγὼ πρὸς σὲ ἔρχομαι πάτερ ἅγιε τήρησον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ᾧ δέδωκάς μοι ἵνα ὦσιν ἓν καθὼς ἡμεῖς (John 17:11, Textus Receptus)

The Greek word ὀνόματί that was translated here as "name" is rich with potential significance. It can also be understood as reputation or even character. Jesus wants us to be Christian in more than just name--to be Christlike in every sense of the word.

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." (John 17:11, KJV)

The KJV differs somewhat from the translation in the question, and does not seem so focused on the name having been given to Jesus. But either translation could be correctly understood from the Greek text. The word "ᾧ" in Greek can mean "that" but it can also mean "who" or "which" -- basically any of a number of relative pronouns often used to start a dependent adjective clause in English (similar to "she/asher" in Hebrew).

Taking the verse to refer to the name having been given Jesus by the Father, we can compare it to many other passages where Jesus' name is given prominence. We are to pray to the Father in Jesus' name (see the Lord's prayer). There is no salvation in any other name (see Acts 4:12). Jesus is the only name of God-given importance in the New Testament--the name by which the disciples always baptized after hearing Jesus' commission in Matthew 28:19-20 where Jesus told them to baptize in the name (singular) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is the name above all names.

There is no mention in John 17:11 of "authority," nor is that concept directly involved. The name is given importance, not the position.

16
  • 1
    Someone scratched the car of the father, of the mother, and of the son. - Does this necessarily mean there is only one car for the entire family ?
    – Lucian
    Jul 23 at 20:33
  • 1
    @Lucian Readers may wrest the meaning of the text to support their preconceptions if they wish, but once you have established that there are three names for God, and not one, then you will have a doctrinal problem with texts like Acts 4:12, not to mention Acts 2:38; 8:12; 8:16, etc. where the disciples baptized in the name of Jesus. "Father" is not a name--does your father have a name? "Son" is not a name. "Spirit" is not a name. Those are all titles. To make them out to be names one must ignore the Biblical context, in addition to throwing aside common sense.
    – Polyhat
    Jul 23 at 22:33
  • It is quite common, in many languages, to omit a noun in a repetition. It is also common to use the (repetitive) singular, instead of a plural, in similar situations. I thought you were making a (flawed) trinitarian argument as to consubstantiality.
    – Lucian
    Jul 23 at 22:55
  • 1
    @Lucian Many overlook the fact that the Biblical "Godhead" (deity/divinity) is singular: it is not a trinity. The English suffix -head is the same as is used for "maidenhead"--another word still using this old English morphology. Modern usage would exchange -head for -hood, e.g. adulthood, parenthood, priesthood, etc. To make it plural (e.g. priesthoods), one would need to say Godheads. In any case, if the BIble taught that God is a trinity, what are the three names? Trinitarians ignore the elephant in the room. "Father" and "Son" are not names. What is the Father's name?
    – Polyhat
    Jul 23 at 23:11
  • 1
    We are told to pray to the Father in the name of Jesus. John 16:23 as you have noted. That's easy to understand. You have a proposition that has no obvious support. If conjecture is all you have, this amounts to foolishness and is to be avoided. All you have provided thus far is what 'is not' - not 'what is' with any persuasion at all. Your Acts 4:12 postulate is without merit. God fathered Jesus, and a dozen other important things, if that means 'no part' to you - the logic escapes me.
    – steveowen
    Jul 31 at 13:51
2

The problem is when we apply our (western/modern) ‘thinking’ to Hebraic concept. In this case ‘a name’. So to correctly discern what John 17:11 means “.. [snip] .. in your name, which you have given me” - we need to look back.

EXODUS 23:20 Behold, I send an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. 21 Pay careful attention to him and obey his voice; do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgression, for my name is in him.

A ‘name’ is not a ‘tag’ or ‘title’ by what you are known by. It is who you are. But the concept goes deeper. It’s who you are standing for, representing.

The angel in Exodus 23 stood ‘as God’. And fully represented God. It was as if God himself stood before Moses. And yes, this angel represented Gods authority - he could ‘speak’ for God. So name = authority (in Hebraic ‘thinking’.)

Gods name ‘was in’ the angel, Gods name was ‘in’ Jesus. And ‘us’ as believers also have authority in ‘his’ name.

Even ‘naturally’ - we stand for, or ‘as’ our father when he is no longer able to represent himself. You are a representative of your family. So the same ‘thinking’ to some extent is part of our culture. It’s just our understanding of ‘a name’ that can cloud this biblical interpretation. That is, a ‘name’ is not by what what you are ‘called’ - it’s as whom you stand ‘as’ - who you represent.

4
  • Why the DV for this answer? anyone?
    – steveowen
    Jul 23 at 22:04
  • @user48152-I don't know who downvoted this A. It is somewhat hard to follow but the gist of it seems correct, so I feel confident enough to upvote it myself, it is not after all in contradiction to my own answer, so here we go. Jul 24 at 13:49
  • One big problem with this is the text doesn't say that the angel of YHWH carrying the name (such as with the Ten Commandments) or something like that. It says the name is in him. This is like when the text says that YHWH will write his name on the saints — yet, the text says "in" and not "on". That isn't mere representation, as is the case with the saints. It is, in NT terms, " the exact representation of YHWH's nature". Moses saw the very form / appearance / image of YHWH when he saw the Angel: his face (Numbers 13:7-8). That seems to be the case, anyway. What would your response to this be?
    – The Wayist
    Sep 6 at 13:01
  • @The Wayist - My response would need more than a comment. ‘Representation’ is an accepted Hebraic concept, and is somewhat difficult to express to suit [western] rational. To discuss the [biblical] difference/use of/between ‘in’ and ‘on’ needs a discussion [and agreement] over which ‘lens’ to use first.
    – Dave
    Sep 6 at 20:23
2

Although the given name of Jesus has a meaning (Saviour), this is not the sense in this context.

As @Polyhat has mentioned before, "ὀνόματί", Hebrew "שֵׁם", does often not refer to a given name. Rather, it has the meaning as in English "In the name of", meaning "with autorisation of", leading to the meaning "Authority" which is an important meaning of "ὀνόματί" or "שֵׁם".

For example 2Chronicles 6:7

וַיְהִי, עִם־לְבַב דָּוִיד אָבִי, לִבְנוֹת בַּיִת, לְשֵׁם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃

translates to (American Standard Translation)

Now it was in the heart of David my father to build a house for the name of the LORD, the God of Israel.

which does not really make sense in English. שֵׁם is the whole being, going far beyond a given name. Valid translations are person, honour, fame, authority, glory. The example of chronicles would better translate to

Now it was in the heart of David my father to build a house in honour of the LORD, the God of Israel.

In this sense, you are completely right; the sentence would better translate into

Holy Father, protect them by the power of your authority, the authority you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.

2

What is the name God gave Jesus? John 17:11

John 17:11,12 in making reference to the 'name' that God gave to His only begotten son, after being manifested in the flesh, we are to understand this to be that of Jesus, Yehoshua in the Hebrew language. Jesus is the latin form of the Greek, I.e.sous and means 'Jehovah is salvation'. We are not to be thinking 'authority' here. The name was given to Mary by way of the angel Gabriel. It was therefore under the name of Jesus, or whatever derivative thereof, that his disciples were protected and were to be continually protected even after Jesus' departure from the earth.

Mary's Jesus, subsequently became 'the Christ', or 'anointed one', the long awaited 'Messiah'. Jesus being the 'name' and Christ the 'title'. Nothing more need be said.

NB:-

For more understanding, I pulled the following from a previous answer of mine:-

John 17:12(NASB)..."While I was with them, I was keeping them in Thy name 'which'(emphasis mine) Thou has given Me; and I guarded them, and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled"...

...As to the emphasis on 'which' this is because some translations incorrectly translate the first 'ho', in the interlinear, as 'those whom', which is out of agreement with previous verse.

5
  • Sry old mate, did you read the verse? the power of your name, the name you gave me. It seems they shared this name somehow me thinks.
    – steveowen
    Jul 24 at 8:08
  • I read the original language and took note of the context surrounding. I stand by my answer 100%. Both God (JHVH) and his Christ (Jesus) had very meaningful names. The Almighty's name means "causes to become" and Jesus means "Jehovah/Yahweh is salvation". It is you that needs to reread the verse and then properly interpret its meaning. Jehovah's name may well have been 'entwined' within Jesus but that doesn't mean that they 'shared' the 'same' name. Jul 24 at 13:13
  • 1
    It's not as if the scripture says..."...your name, the name you gave me (also) !!! Jul 24 at 14:02
  • @OldeEnglish would it work for the second part to say His nature? I sometimes replace name with “name and nature” (eg “We ask this in the name and nature of our Lord Jesus Christ”). John 17:11: God gave His nature to Christ. (?)
    – Al Brown
    Jul 29 at 19:02
  • @AlBrown-What was 'given' to Jesus was the 'name', which -incorporated- the Father's. name. Strong's, with regard to "onomati" gives more to the meaning, i.e. character, fame, reputation, so why not nature. Although, 'nature' is more of a characteristic of the person who has been 'given' the -all important- name, with it's 'distinctive' meaning. Thank you for your vote. I was beginning to think I was on my own here. Jul 29 at 20:16
2

It's hardly possible to grasp the significance of 'name' in this verse without consulting the many other times 'name' is used in a similar way in scripture. Even confining a search to its application to Jesus, we are left wondering. Let me just give an example of this.

John 17:11 - The Father gives the Son his name; that name protects all those the Father gave to Jesus (to be saved, to be one with them).

Revelation 2:13 - Blessed Christians hold fast Jesus' name.

Revelation 2:17 - Christ gives them "a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that recieveth it."

Revelation 3:12 - He who overcomes has Jesus "write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, new Jerusalem... and I will write upon him my new name."

All I'm going to offer by way of an answer is that the power of God's name (given to Jesus) is such that believers who overcome also receive that name, plus a new name of their own, plus the new name given to Jesus. One day, in the glory, we will start to understand what those various names mean. Meantime, we honour the name of God and the name of Christ as having such a closeness as to be one name, believing that we will somehow share in that oneness in a way we are not capable of grasping this side of glory.

There is power in the name that is above every name. That is the name of God which is also the name of Christ, for "God also hath given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and in earth and under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:10-11) Woe betide those who dare to add the word 'other' in those verses, as if there was a name superior to the name God has given to Christ.

Whatever that name is, we are to bow our knees to the Christ who has that name, for unless we do, he shall never give us that name, given to him by God.

1
  • That was great. As i commented above, if I want to intuit or deeply remind myself (“re-intuit”?) what “name” refers to in the bible, I do two things: 1. Recognize what it would mean to say “I do this in the name of love”. and consider using name that way. We wouldnt ask, “Oh, what is love’s name?” 2. Say “name and nature” (eg “We ask this in the name and nature of our Lord Jesus Christ”). John 17:11 would work well replacing name with nature: God gave His nature to Christ. Not saying this is perfect or hermeneutical, just sharing one thing that works for lay-folk to connect better with God
    – Al Brown
    Jul 29 at 19:00
2

I will no longer be in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to You. Holy Father, protect them by Your name, the name You gave me, so that they may be one as We are one. BLB

It seems there is another way to read this verse and grasp the intended meaning which removes the apparent ambiguity over the 'name'.

The subject here is, the sheep, given to Jesus by the Father.

  • they are in the world
  • protect or keep them
  • that they be one

The focus on the subject is maintained in these two translations.

and no more am I in the world, and these are in the world, and I come unto Thee. Holy Father, keep them in Thy name, whom Thou hast given to me, that they may be one as we. Youngs

Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given me, that they may be one as we are. KJV

John 17:11 is not about the 'name God gave Jesus', as some translations put it, but the little ones Jesus was praying for.

I have revealed Your name to the men whom You gave me v6

and I have made Your name known to them v26

Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name, those whom You have given me, that they may be one as We are.

The name of God is the power and authority Jesus used for all he did and said. He prayed that as he had found comfort, direction and every provision under God's name, the disciples would too.

We see from the preceding verse 2,

...just as You gave him authority over all mankind, so that to all whom You have given him, he may give eternal life. 3And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

v6 I have revealed Your name to the men whom You gave me out of the world

These men knew who their God was! Yet Jesus here is expressing a whole new paradigm leading to eternal life under the glory and might of God's name. V12

I was keeping them in Thy name; those whom Thou hast given to me I did guard...

In the name of God evil is kept at bay, restricted and suppressed around those called into God's name and given to Jesus for special purposes.

2
  • You were so close until you injected YOUR theology into the answer. I was going to respond that the Greek doesn’t say as the BLB translates but it should read “keep them in your name, the ones you have given me”. That does NOT then give you the license to ASSUME that Jesus did everything in the Father’s name and that’s where he got power from. “The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!”” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭10:17‬ in whose name? Jesus’ they were speaking to Jesus. Jesus confirms “Behold, IIII have given you authority” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭10:19‬ Sep 7 at 4:50
  • Whether or not this answer applies elsewhere is another question. I agree that it does apply here, therefore up-voted +1.
    – Nigel J
    Sep 7 at 8:11
1

My answer was copied and pasted here from research supports the truth.

AND THE EVIDENCE IS –

“Originally, the name of the Messiah was , pronounced Yehoshua. This is the Messiah’s original name, and meant ‘Jehovah is salvation’. It is quite evident that the modern form “Jesus” does not even remotely resemble the original name that the disciples used.. This is fact. “ -Encyclopedia Americana (Vol.16, p. 41)

“It is simply amazing to think that all these years, hundreds of years, mankind has been calling the Saviour by the wrong name!!” -Gospel of The Kingdom True Names and Title Dr. Henry Clifford Kinley 1931 – Ohio USA

” ‘Jesus’ was not the Messiah’s name when He walked the earth.” -The True Name of The Messiah by Neil Bornhoft

“It is interesting that throughout his life, Jesus Christ never did hear himself called by that name.” — “Man’s Great Adventure,” by Edwin W. Pharlow, professor of history, Ohio State University.

“The founder of Christianity never heard Himself called ‘Jesus Christ’ during His life. He was known by His Hebrew name Jehoshua. – Colliers magazine of Sept. 11, 1937 Paul Parnell

“IN 1415,THE CHURCH OF ROME TOOK AN EXTRAORDINARY STEP TO destroy all knowledge of two Second Century Jewish books that it said contained ‘the true name of Christ.’ -What Was The Church Trying to Hide? by Tony Bushby

“The plan of the Greeks was simple, they merely dropped the Hebrew terminology of names which referred to the Hebrew deity, and substituted the name, or letters, referring to the name of the supreme deity, Zeus.” -The Faith Magazine Volume 69

“Now our modern translated scriptures say Christ’s name is Jesus. The name Jesus is a compound word made up of Ie and Sous (Hail Zeus).” -The Origin of Christianity by A.B. Traina

“This name of the true Messiah, was objectionable to the Greeks and Romans, who hated the Judeans (Jews), and so it was deleted from the records, and a new name inserted…Ie-Sous (hail Zeus), now known to us as Jesus.” -The Origin of Christianity by A.B. Traina

“It is simply amazing to think that all these years, hundreds of years, mankind has been calling the Saviour by the wrong name!! It’s hard to give up the name of Jesus because it’s so deeply ingrained in us and much has been said and done in that name.” -Gospel of The Kingdom True Names and Title Dr. Henry Clifford Kinley 1931 – Ohio USA

“It is known that the Greek name endings with sus, seus, and sous were attached by the Greeks to names and geographical areas as means to give honour to their supreme deity, Zeus.” -Dictionary of Christian Lore and Legend Professor J. C. J. Metford

“The Messiah’s name was replaced with Iesus (Greek)…Further, the Greek “Iesus” comes from the name Zeus, the ruling God in the Greek pantheon.” -Gospel of The Kingdom True Names and Title Dr. Henry Clifford Kinley 1931 – Ohio USA

“Some authorities, who have spent their entire lives studying the origins of names believe that “Jesus” actually means – “Hail Zeus!” For Iesous in Greek IS “Hail Zeus.” “Ie” translates as “Hail” and “sous” or “sus” translates as Zeus. The English name “Jesus”, therefore, stems etymologically from “Jupiter-Zeus” the chief god of the ancient Greek Olympus.” -“Yeshua” or “Jesus” — Which? Biblical Research Institute; 1996 by Les Aron Gosling

“research reveals that the name “Jesus” is linked to the Greek Sun-god “Zeus” “ -COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE, by C. J. Koster

“Originally, the name of the Messiah was , pronounced Yehoshua. This is the Messiah’s original name, and meant ‘Jehovah is salvation’. It is quite evident that the modern form “Jesus” does not even remotely resemble the original name that the disciples used.. This is fact. “ -Encyclopedia Americana (Vol.16, p. 41)

“Jehoshua” means ‘whose help is Jehovah’; ‘Help of Jehovah’ or ‘savoiur of Jehovah’.” -Smith’s Bible Dictionary under ‘Jehoshua”

“the construction of theophoric names, starting with the letters “Jeho” is evidence that God’s name is actually ‘Jehovah’ (and that Christ’s name is actually Jehoshua)” – Smith’s 1863 “A Dictionary of the Bible” Section 2.1

THE ‘ JEWISH’ NAME OF MESSIAH WAS REJECTED

“The traditional Christian Church has forgotten, and even rejected, her Jewish roots.” -The History of The Church vs The Synagogue by Wayne Bedwell

“Later, in a similar manner, Pope Alexander VI ordered all copies of the Jewish Talmud destroyed. The Council of the Inquisition required as many Jewish writings as possible to be burned.” -What Was The Church Trying to Hide? by Tony Bushby

“The mass destruction of Jewish books included hundreds of copies of the Old Testament. In an attempt by the church to remove Rabbinic information about Christ from the face of the earth, the Inquisition burnt 12,000 volumes of the Talmud.” -What Was The Church Trying to Hide? by Tony Bushby

“In the mass destruction of Jewish writings, the church attempted to destroy all documents that recorded ‘the true name of Christ ’.” -What Was The Church Trying to Hide? by Tony Bushby

“the Talmudic evidence indicates that historically the Jews regarded the name of Christ as ‘Yehoshua’ .” – The Names Yeshua and Yehoshua Yehoshua in the Septuagint Yehoshua in the Hebrew Bible by Dr. James Price, professor of Hebrew

“In order to make the previously despised cult of the Early Christians acceptable to Constantine, emperor of Rome – the new (pagan) Church Fathers had to remove from its teachings certain doctrines which they knew were objectionable to Constantine. To accomplish this, certain “correctors” were appointed, whose task it was to rewrite the Gospels.” -Apollonius the Nazarene Part 1: The Historical Apollonius Versus the Mythical Jesus By: Dr. R. W. Bernard, Ph.D.

“Learned men, so called Correctores were, following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD, selected by the church authorities to scrutinize the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to correct their meaning in accordance with the views which the church had just sanctioned.” -Prof. Eberhard Nestle `Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament,’ Einfhrung in die Textkritik des griechischen Testaments: Eberhard Nestle

“the (biblical) manuscripts were carefully revised by the correctores.” -“Manuscripts” by Louis Bréhier in The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910)

“…theological disputes, specifically disputes over the trinity (Christology), prompted Christian scribes to alter the words of scripture in order to make them more serviceable.” -The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture Prof. Bart D. Ehrman

“after the Council of Nicea, A.D. 325, the manuscripts of the New Testament were considerably tampered with by scholars, called `correctores’, who were appointed by the ecclesiastical authorities, and actually commissioned to correct the text of the Scriptures in the interest of what was considered orthodoxy.” -Archdeacon Wilberforce

THE DECEPTION OF TRANSLATORS REGARDING CHRIST’S NAME

“The issue IS how to transliterate the real name, Yeshua (or Jehoshua), from the Hebrew, into English. We certainly don’t need to go through Greek into Latin and then from Latin into English. Why would anyone want to take such a circuitous route, unless he’s trying to “prove” the validity of the erroneousness,”Jesus?” –IS JESUS a PAGAN NAME? YHWH is Elohim – Yahushua is the Messiah by Yahkov Hartley

“The change of the Messiah’s name from Yeshua (Yahushua) to Jesus (a mistranslation) certainly serves the purpose of obscuring his Jewish identity and his Jewish ministry. The true ministry of Yahushua the Messiah is and was dedicated to finding the “lost sheep of the House of Israel.” –IS JESUS a PAGAN NAME? YHWH is Elohim – Yahushua is the Messiah by Yahkov Hartley

“The English name “Joshua” is a rendering of the Hebrew language “Yahoshua”, meaning “Yehowah” is salvation”. -^ A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament Francis Brown, with S.R. Driver and C.A. Briggs, based on the lexicon of William Gesenius. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 221 & 446

“Yehoshua may refer to: Yehoshua, the Hebrew name of Joshua, the son of Nun or of Jesus, the Christ; since both hebrew names are identical. Joshua (Hebrew: יְהוֹשֻׁעַ‎‎ Yehoshuaʿ; and both have the same meaning. Why do some Bible’s translate it as ‘Joshua’, while others translate it as ‘Jesus’? There is a definite inconsistency here.”

“Jehoshua, meaning ‘Jehovah is Salvation’.” -The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8, p. 374

“To transliterate the Hebrew name ‘Yeshua’ (or ‘Yehoshua’) into English, we merely go to (another man with the same name as Christ), ‘Yeshua’ (or Yehoshua) (who was the son of Nun) (He is mentioned in The Old Testament as well as The New Testament. Thus his name is pronounced Yeshua (or Yehoshua) both in Hebrew and in English – a perfect transliteration. What could be simpler?” (The letter ‘J’ replaces the letter ‘Y’ in English). –IS JESUS a PAGAN NAME? YHWH is Elohim – Yahushua is the Messiah by Yahkov Hartley

“History, both religious and secular, is clear that the “Church” has expended a vast effort to distance itself from the true nature, origins, and purpose of this Jewish messiah!” –IS JESUS a PAGAN NAME? YHWH is Elohim – Yahushua is the Messiah by Yahkov Hartley

“This name, Yahshua, being Hebrew, was objectionable to the Greeks and Romans, who hated the Judeans, and so it was deleted from the records, and a new name inserted. Yahshua was thus replaced by Ie-Sous, now known to us as Jesus. They had worshipped Zeus, or Jupiter, as the supreme deity, so now they were told the new name was Theos, or Dios, or God. Their savior was Zeus, so now they were to accept Jesus (Iesous, or Zeus).” – Chapter 3 THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY By A. B. Traina

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on July 9, 2013. Blessed is he – Who comes in the name of Jehovah Leave a reply BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF JEHOVAH

Blessed is he – Who comes in the name of Jehovah

“Blessed is he that cometh in the name of Jehovah…” (Psalm 118:26)(ASV)-BibleGateway

“I have come in my Father’s name….” (John 5:43)(NIV)-BibleGateway

“As for the crowds, those going ahead of him and those following kept crying out… Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name!” (Matthew 21:9)(NWT)

Christ said – “For I say to YOU, YOU will by no means see me from henceforth until YOU say, ‘Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name!’” (Matthew 23:39)(NWT)

“Blessed is the One coming as the King in Jehovah’s name!”…. (Luke 19:38)(NWT)

“The next day the great crowd….took the branches of palm trees and went out to meet him. And they began to shout: “Save, we pray you! Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name, even the king of Israel!” (John 12:12,13)(NWT)

JEHOSHUA

“For I have come to you in my Father’s name….” (John 5:43a)(NLT)-BibleGateway

“the Hebrew name…..Jehoshua, means ‘Jehovah is Salvation’. “ -The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8, p. 374

“Joshua (or Jehoshua) not only means ‘Jehovah is salvation’ – but also suggests deliverance….” — Luke: That You May Know the Truth by R. Kent Hughes – 1998

“Messiah’s original name was…”salvation.” This was…Jehoshua or Joshua, “the salvation of Jehovah*….” -The Book of Joshua by George Frederick Maclear – 1897

CHRIST DECLARED : “I have come in My Father’s name and with His power…” (John 5:43)(AMP)-BibleGateway

“Christ….Matthew (1:21) interprets the name originally as Joshua, that is, ‘Yahweh (Jehovah) is Salvation,'” -Encyclopedia Americana (Vol.16, p. 41)

The first letters of Christ’s Name – start with the very same letters of God’s Name, Jehovah. This was not by mere coincidence. It is a purposeful way of Jehovah identifying his son – as the saviour that he had promised.

“…for they shall cry unto Jehovah because of oppressors, and he will send them a saviour, and a defender, and he will deliver them.” (Isaiah 19:20)(ASV)-BibleGateway

“the name of Christ in the New Testament means “Jehovah is salvation.” This comes from the same Hebrew word translated Joshua or Jehoshua in the Old Testament. It also means “Jehovah is salvation.” This means that the name of Jesus should have been translated into English as “Joshua” or “Jehoshua.” “ -Jesus and Joshua Had the Same Hebrew Name * The Name Of Jesus; By Paul Rusnak

“Christ name….In the Septuagint was the common Hebrew name Joshua (Jehoshua);” -Encyclopedia Britannica – 15th Edition

“The name Joshua (Jehoshua) derives its greatest importance and highest sanctity from the fact that it was sacredly chosen as the name to be borne by the Messiah. This name was corrupted and altered in time into the name Jesus.” –Personal Names in the Bible by Dr. W.F. Wilkinson, M.A. Joint Editor of Webster and Wilkinson’s Greek Testament: pages 342-343. (Vol. 10 p.149)

Jehoshua – The Salvation of Jehovah

“There is salvation in no one else! God has given no other name under heaven by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)(NLT)-BibleGateway

“And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered…” (Joel 2:32)(ASV)-BibleGateway

“…this is what was said through the prophet Joel, ‘“And in the last days,” God says… everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”’” (Acts 2:16,17,21)(NWT)

“For the Scripture says… ‘everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.'” (Romans 10:11,13)(NWT)

“…in the name of (Jehoshua) Christ the Naz·a·rene´, whom YOU impaled but whom God raised up from the dead, by this one….there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.” — (Acts 4:10,12)

“Only (Jehoshua) has the power to save! His name is the only one in all the world that can save anyone.” (Acts 4:12)(CEV)-BibleGateway

Jehovah’s Name is “Embedded” within the name of Jehoshua

A Name Within A Name.

Jehovah’s name is “embedded” within the name of Christ – “Jehoshua” (Jehovah’s Salvation). Whenever God’s Name is embedded within another name, it is known as a “Theophoric” Name.

“The name Jhvh (Jehovah) enters into the composition of many names of persons in the Bible, as the initial element, in the form Jeho- (as in Jehoram),” -The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition; 1910-11, vol. 15, pp. 312, in the Article “JEHOVAH”

“Jesus….is taken from the Hebrew name ‘Yehoshua’, which in English is translated as Joshua. or Jehoshua, from the Hebrew – which means “Yehovah Saves”. “ -Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance

“Jehoshua” means – “whose help is Jehovah”; Help of Jehovah or savoiur of Jehovah.” -Smith’s Bible Dictionary under ‘Jehoshua”

If Christ’s name were altered and deprived of his Jewish connection to the Jewish God, Jehovah, then so many prophecy’s concerning the Messiah, would lose their meaning and would virtually become null and void.

Christ was foretold to come in Jehovah’s Name. Yes, the Messiah was to be the Salvation that Jehovah God would send to mankind. And how appropriate that Jehovah named his son after himself. Think of how many worldly Fathers seek to name their fleshly sons after themselves. So, too, Jehovah arranged to have His Only Begotten Son, to bear Jehovah’s Name within the framework of the Name of His Chosen Messiah.

“the construction of theophoric names, starting with the letters “Jeho” is evidence that God’s name is actually Jehovah, (and that Christ’s name is actually Jehoshua) …..” – Smith’s 1863 “A Dictionary of the Bible” Section 2.1

Joel 2:32 – Calling upon Jehovah

Joel 2:32 prophetically declares that those calling upon Jehovah will receive Salvation. Then in the New Testament book of Acts – this same prophecy is re-affirmed as being truth. Those calling upon “Jehoshua” – will be saved.

Both prophecies will be fulfilled when we call Christ by his True Name – “Jehoshua”.

Jehovah’s name is “embedded” within the name of Christ – “Jehoshua” (Jehovah’s Salvation). Whenever God’s Name is embedded within another name, it is known as a “Theophoric” Name.

Since Jesus real name – “Yehoshuah” literally means – the Salvation of Jehovah – we can see why Jesus said that he came in his Father’s Name. We can also see why Jehovah chose this name for his son – because Jesus (Joshua) was to be the means by which Jehovah would provide Salvation to Mankind.

This is in total harmony with the prophet Joel, who said that only those calling upon the name of “Jehovah” would be saved. Those calling upon Jehoshua – would at the same time be calling upon “Jehovah” – since the name of Jesus (Jeho-shuah) has Jehovah’s divine name imbedded in his son’s name. How clever and how appropriate.

“And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered…” (Joel 2:32)(ASV)-BibleGateway

“…this is what was said through the prophet Joel, ‘“And in the last days,” God says… everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”’” (Acts 2:16,17,21)(NWT)

“For the Scripture says… ‘everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.'” (Romans 10:11,13)(NWT)

“And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered…” (Joel 2:32)(ASV)-BibleGateway

Jehovah Sends His Son “Jehoshua” (Jesus)

“…for they shall cry unto Jehovah because of oppressors, and he will send them a saviour, and a defender, and he will deliver them.” (Isaiah 19:20)(ASV)-BibleGateway

“…At the time that God has already decided, he will send Jesus Christ back again.” (1Timothy 6:15)(CEV)-BibleGateway

JESUS (Jehoshua) DECLARED : “I have come in My Father’s name and with His power…” (John 5:43)(AMP)-BibleGateway

“I will come with the mighty acts of the Lord Jehovah…” (Psalm 71:16)(ASV)-BibleGateway

USING CHRIST’S “REAL” NAME IS FULFILLING THE WORDS OF THE PROPHET JOEL

“JEHOSHUA” in Fulfillment of (Joel 2:32)

All the above scriptures will be fulfilled – only in the name of “Jehoshua” or “Jahshua”. Since Jehovah’s name is embedded in Christ’s name – One can call upon the Messiah – and still be calling upon Jehovah’s name as well.

2
  • My answer pales compared to this one. Very well said. Upvoted + 1. Sep 9 at 1:46
  • @Olde English. Thank you. Sep 9 at 3:47
0

When the Bible says “blessed be the Name of the Lord” (Psalm 113:2), or “blessed are those who trust in the Name of the Lord”, it is the Lord Himself implied, with all His features, power and authority. Just like when an American football fun will say: “blessed be the name of Brady!”, this phrase will be exchangeable with the phrase “blessed be Brady!” for the name stands for the reality expressed by this name.

Thus, when the Lord says that He received the God-Father’s name, He implies all the divine features the Father has, His power, His wisdom, His authority - in full. The only feature that differentiates Them is the fatherhood and sonship, for the Father is never Son and the Son never - Father. Now, if He, Jesus Christ has all divine features by bearing the Father’s name of God, then He also is worshipable along with the Father.

Now, when did He, the Lord Jesus Christ receive this entirety of divine features? Was not one of those features God’s glory? Yes, sure (John 17:5). But this glory He co-possessed with the Father before the creation of the world. But how could He receive those features from the Father, gradually and in process, so as to receive them one after another and portion by portion, or all at once, instantly and entirely? Of course the second must be true, in avoidance of a mythology that before creation of the world, the Father begat the Son and for many quintillion years has been gradually transmitting Him (the Son) His (Father’s) divine features, power and authority, until one day telling Him, “now my Son, you have my features all perfectly in you, so that your education has ended, all my features now are perfectly yours, so my Name is fully given to you and you are also God now after so many years of your hard work and study!” And then They created the world. But let us abandon this absurdity and affirm that the Son received Father’s divine features instantly and entirely, without any lapse of time and process, before the time and world even started, i.e. in eternity. Thus, at His very eternal birth from the Father the Son instantly and in entirety receives all infinite fullness of the Father’s divine features and thus the Father’s Name, therefore being eternally God with the Father, as John also says (John 1:1).

But we can say that in His human nature the Lord has received divine Name also in time and historically, for His human nature was created in time. Thus, the Lord Jesus Christ is eternally God as the Father’s eternal Son and Logos, but He made human nature His own, impersonalizing it, and thus, since the Person of Logos is God, divinizing/deifying it, so that we can say that Lord Jesus Christ received God-ness, i.e. divine Name, also in time and historically, according to His human nature.

0

Based on Lucian's insightful comments on the OP, I decided to search the NT for "Jesus Christ".

Following the link will show the hits where "the name" Jesus Christ occurs:

  • twice at the beginning of Matthew when he identifies "the name" of the one who is the subject of his Gospel

  • once at the beginning of Mark, for the same purpose as Matthew.

  • twice in John: once for the same purpose as Matthew and Mark, but the second instance is by Jesus, himself, on the night of his betrayal:

    1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said,
    Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
    4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

    John 17:1-5 (KJV)

    Jesus, here, calls himself by the name 'Jesus Christ', and it can be seen by Matthew, Mark and John's use of it to introduce their Gospel accounts that it's the messiah's name, not his title. A name no different to Pontius Pilate or, if a name that contains a title is necessary, Julius Caesar.

  • 192 other hits where the name of Jesus Christ is declared, without any doubt, to be the full name of the Messiah.

For those who are still in doubt about whether Jesus Christ is the name of the Messiah, then refine the original search by including the word "name", i.e. name "jesus christ".

For convenience, here is a link: name "jesus christ"

Conclusion

The evidence is abundantly clear, that Jesus Christ is the name of the Messiah, and that he claimed the name for himself. Since Jesus, himself, testified as to the source of his words...

28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
John 8:28 (KJV)

... it is also the name that God chose for his son to be known, esteemed and called upon in perpetuity.

-1

I like to give simple answers that uncomplicate these kinds of things, so I apologize if this is too practical. I think most of my answers are. Even the ones that have a lot of verse references.

enter image description here

The name that he was given is Yehsua, which is Ieosus in Greek, Jesus in English when it is translated from Ieosus, and Joshua in English when it is translated from Hebrew. (Every translation is correct and valid, unless maybe it changes the meaning.) It was a surprisingly common and quite boring name at the time from what I understand. Kinda like the names Joe and Mike are today. But it's important to note that the name YHWH is in the name Yeshua — because the name Yeshua means "YHWH is salvation" — and I consider this to be important because YHWH said that "YHWH" is the name that everyone should use to refer to him for all generations (Exodus 3:15). That he preserves this name even in the name Yeshua seems to be critically important, therefore.

As far as the importance of this name for achieving the oneness of Yeshua's Body, and of its members therein, my answer for this is probably also quite boring. Before the sons of YHWH are born-again, we are Adam. Part of Adam, one in being with him, his body. Genesis 5 says that before the Fall, both the Man and the Woman were named Adam. This is what corporate headship really is, and it is why we are born with a sin nature. We are Adam before we are born-again. His nature is our nature. And then we become born-again and that changes. We become Yeshua — part of Yeshua, one in being with him, his body, having his nature (his human nature, note, with participation in his divine nature as 2 Peter 1:4 says).

That is why his name is the key to oneness. We are Yeshua and no longer Adam. In Adam we were one in sin, in abuse, in honor-shame power games, in exploitation, in vampirism of the Life of YHWH from other created beings. In Yeshua we are one in righteousness, if we choose to mature into that nature, feeding Creation with the Life of YHWH that he has given us. Remembering that we are in Yeshua and not Adam is vital to that process. If live as if we are Adam we will eventually become Adam again because we will be rejected, and we may even become deniers of the Sovereign Lord who bought us (2 Peter 2:1).

There are some other things that I could mention about "name" also meaning "nature" in Hebrew, but someone already kind of touched on my example of that with the name of YHWH being "in" the angel of YHWH, so I won't mention back over again. I left a comment on that answer if you want to see more of what I think about that. I don't know if this kind of referencing is legal though.

I will note that it is very important that Yeshua is called "the Name" ("ha-shem") by the Apostles:

enter image description here

And that the ark of the covenant was called "the Name":

enter image description here

And that the temple was built for "the Name":

enter image description here

And that both the ark of the covenant and the merkabah of Ezekiel 1 look alike:

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

And that the angel of YHWH (revealed to be the glory of YHWH) says that the temple is his sanctuary:

enter image description here

And that the NT says that Yeshua's body is the temple (John 2:21, in which every member of the Trinity dwelled surprisingly), and that ultimately he will be the New Creation, as his body essentially expands with him as the seed of the New Creation — and all Creation will become his Body when glorified, and was always created to be such through Adam, and has always been partaking in him in a sense, since he is the Light of Creation of Genesis 1 (John 1:3-5, which is Memra symbolism). When Yeshua incarnated, he incarnated as Adam (specifically — think "first to the Jew"), and then Creation (generally — think "then to the Gentile"), to restore the original purpose of things. And so all things hold together in him (Colossians 1:17). So the oneness that comes by the name of Yeshua extends far beyond just the sons of YHWH, even.

enter image description here

"That there will be one YHWH" is quite a kink in though, both for Unitarians and Trinitarians/Unitarians. I imagine that's why this verse is never taught. It is still the greatest mystery in the text that I'm waiting for the Spirit to reveal to me. If he ever does.

9
  • 1
    The issue of oversized text being used is addressed on Meta. My own downvote is due to this not being an hermeneutic answer but being based on theological (and personal) opinion and supposed private revelation.
    – Nigel J
    Sep 7 at 8:08
  • @Nigel J This makes no sense given that my answer comes solely from Phillipians, which is hermeneutics. Whatever you could call theology is auxiliary — it helps but it isn't part of the main point. What you mean by "private revelation" is likely a misquote of 2 Peter 1:20, which refers to subjectivism. We know this because your interpretation contradicts texts like 1 Corinthians 2, particularly the latter verses about how we know what the text means. Everybody answers with theological and personal opinion, that's why even people quote scholars they quote the ones that agree with their view.
    – The Wayist
    Sep 7 at 9:30
  • @Nigel J (Also, I often say "the inconsistency reveals the power game" — it's worth note that I don't see you commenting these things under any other answer. The ones that are theological and personal opinion, you don't mention theological and personal opinion. There is another that is longer than what I wrote here and you don't mention length. Some make conclusions that aren't based on sound hermeneutics (like saying Yeshua is the sole name of God in the NT) but you don't mention hermeneutics. I don't know what the power game is but it's definitely targeted and not a concern for rules.)
    – The Wayist
    Sep 7 at 9:40
  • 3
    Please replace your images with actual text quotes - it's so much easier for everyone! You should be able to easily copy the text from Bible Gateway or something similar.
    – curiousdannii
    Sep 7 at 12:24
  • 1
    Meanwhile I'd suggest you rephrase this answer to not make such condescending generalisations as "no one teaches this verse". Now admittedly Zechariah is a little bit more obscure than some books churches love to preach from, but you make it sound like everyone, both Trinitarians and Unitarians, are trying to pretend this verse doesn't exist, which is just nonsense. I don't even get why you think it's such a tricky verse, isn't it just affirming the oneness of God like so many other verses? Monotheism is well accepted by Christians of almost all denominations...
    – curiousdannii
    Sep 7 at 12:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.