next »

[The_Editor]

Greetings,

Ronald's recent post got me to thinking about some things I wanted to revisit in my head, and share on this forum.

A few Scriptures and some thoughts:

I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world...Holy Father, watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me...And I have made your name known to them and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them.
            (John 17:6,11,26)

Jesus' apostles were not ignorant regarding God's personal name Jehovah, no more than Abraham, Isaac or Jacob.  Rather, in making known his Father's "name", Jesus revealed things about Him as a Person that had not been revealed before.

All things have been delivered to me by my Father, and no one fully knows the Son but the Father, neither does anyone fully know the Father but the Son and anyone to whom the Son is willing to reveal him.
            (Matt. 11:27)

No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten god who is in the bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him.
            (John 1:18)


Under the Law code, the Israelites had revealed to them that Jehovah caused himself to become the "Purposer" or "Fulfiller" and that His word will "prove to be true".

For no matter how many the promises of God are, they have become Yes by means of him. Therefore also through him is the "Amen" said to God for glory through us.
            (2 Cor. 1:20)

What we learn in the NT is that all of the old ways of worship; it's ideas, expectations and physical manifestations, had their spiritual fullfillment--their greater fulfillment--in Jesus Christ:

"We have found the one of whom Moses, in the Law, and the Prophets wrote" (John 1:45) This thought of fulfillment is replete on the pages of the NTstruck throughout these sacred writings.  In Jesus Christ the promise is confirmed; the prophecies, law, salvation, sacrifices have been realized. The Prophet like Moses has been revealed, the Son of David reigns.


At Revelation 19:10, the angel told John,

   ...the bearing witness to Jesus is what inspires prophesying.

All prophecies ultimately point to Christ and find fulfillment in or about him.

Through YHWH revealing Himself through His Son in a very intimate, unique and profound way (Hebrews 1:3) a way to view YHWH was opened up to believers heretofore unknown:

However, as many as did receive him, to them he gave authority to become God's children, because they were exercising faith in his name.
            (John 1:12)

As children of God, we can now refer to Him in a much more personal way:

Now because you are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of his Son into our hearts and it cries out: "Abba, Father!"  So, then, you are no longer a slave but a son; and if a son, also an heir through God.
            (Gal. 4:6,7;  See also: Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15)

This closeness begins to be revealed in the Sacred writings themselves, as we see a decided shift in emphasis from the OT to the New. Even in the New World Translation which inserts the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times, God is referred to as "Father" some 260 times.  Equally remarkable is that God's Son uses "Father" as his preference. Additionaly, though the NWT has made a determination to use "Jehovah" in the NT, even in this translation the name "Jehovah" is absent completely from Philippians, First Timothy, Titus, Philemon and the three letters of John.

No suggestion is here being made that use of the name is wrong, or that it should not be used. It is only that a shift in emphasis from "Almighty God Jehovah", to "Father" is clear with Jesus opening up the way to a greater closeness with God as a Father. The formal approach to God has given way a more intimate one, "Abba, Father!" And this sheds some light on the less frequent use of the divine name in the NT and the more frequent use of "Father".

My intent is not to denegrate those that champion knowledge that God has a personal name, but rather, God's 'taking out a people for his name' has a different or greater meaning than mere attachment to a label or application of a pronoun; and showing that one 'sanctifies God's name' and "praises" it requires more than simply repeated use of some form of the Tetragrammaton. --Acts 15:14.

Regards, Brenden.

[humbleservant]

Hi Brenden,

It is quite amazing, I have also been doing a lot of thinking about this same point of late.
If you notice from a lot of my posts that I often use wording similar to, "our Father" or " our Heavenly Father." It is not very often that I use God's name in it's various forms.

I am in agreement with you concerning the shift from the clinical use of God's name in the OT to the more intimate use of "Father" throughout the NT.

I think that your reasoning is similar to mine, that we are being given the example by our Lord & Master while He was on the earth. This being the shift to a very close relashionship with The Father, as you have said. This brings us into the position similar to that which Adam & Eve had while in Eden before they sinned.

This is also another reason, (if I may beat the drum) that there is NO need for an organization for true christians, since Pentecost.
 As Jesus said at Matt.18;20, "For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them." NKJV

Just for the record, I am of the views also the the NWT has incorrectly inserted the Divine name into the NT. It has been pointed out to me many years ago that the God's name Jehovah is not actually used in the very original manuscripts of the NT.

I have no way of ascertaining if this is true, even though the tetragramaton does appear in some of the manuscripts, this does not neccesarily say they were in the very original writings. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Thanks for bringing this subject up.

Regards,

 Ion

[The_Editor]

Hi Ion,

If you are not familiar with them, I would refer you to scholar [amazonsearch]F. F. Bruce[/amazonsearch]'s works on the ancient texts.  He is a readable and thorough fellow, and I believe that he covers much on the ancient texts as they have come down to us.  As I understand it, whereas there is a "paper trail" so to speak of the texts that reach into the 4th century (so that we can be reasonably certain what the originals contained) the only extant original dates from around 125, and this is a small section of John's Gospel.

But I would highly reccomend Bruce's works.  If you would like some particulars, feel free to email.

Regards, Brenden.

[RRD]

The title Father certainly designates the special relationship between a son and the one who has given life to the son, and I do believe the New Testament is placing a lot of emphasis on that relationship (as related to the new creation). Many, however, use such statistics, similar to that provided, as a excuse to replace the holy name in other scriptures, not with "Father", but with other words, such as "Lord", "God", "the Eternal", HaShem, Adonai, etc. We should never think that "Father", or any other title, should become a replacement for the holy name in the New Testament.

While some translations have gone somewhat overboard, not using much discretion at all in where the Holy Name should be restored, the New World Translation, I believe, was overly restrictive in restoring the holy name. The NWT translators seemed to have mostly ignored many places that the word Theos appears to have replaced the holy name, and have otally ignored dunamis (power) and megalosune (majesty).

Furthermore, the possibility has also been suggested that "Father" was inserted in some places so as to replace the holy name, especially in John's letters, although I don't know of any translation or "version" that actually puts any form of the holy name where we presently see forms of the Greek pater -- father. (It would be really difficult to try to determine where such possible replacements might have happened.)

The Restored Name King James Version, however, has YHWH several times in the John's letters. We should also note that the Restored Name King James Version has YHWH three times in Philemon.
http://yahushua.net/scriptures/

Nevertheless, it does not really matter how many times the holy name appears as compared with Father, God, etc. Even without such a comparison, we can see that there is much emphasis on the sonship (the new creation) in the New Testament, which, of course, also often requires the title of "Father" to express that relationship.

Christian love,
Ronald