Did Christ or the Apostles Use the Name
YAHWEH?
Ernest L Martin
In this most revealing article, the Chairman of the Department
of Theology at our Pasadena campus presents proof positive — by the example of
Jesus and the apostles — that the USE and PRONUNCIATION of the Hebrew name YHWH
is unimportant and unnecessary today.
It IS supposed in some circles that Yahweh — or perhaps Yahvah — should be the
principal name by which we address God. While it will be admitted on all hands
that God is jealous over His name (especially its significance), one might
wonder if that "jealousy" extends to the exclusive use and pronunciation of YHWH.
For all of us who wish to live as God's children, we have a divine arbiter who
can settle all such matters for us — our Savior. lf we can determine that Jesus
Christ constantly (or even occasionally) used and pronounced the name YHWH, then
perhaps there is some justification for o u r using it today.
But what if Christ NEVER pronounced the name? What if He avoided its use
altogether? It then becomes a different matter.
The truth is, it can be proved absolutely that Christ NEVER used the name Yahweh
even when He spoke Hebrew or Aramaic to the people of Palestine!
He Would Have Been Called a Blasphemer!
Christ preached to the Jews of Jerusalem, Judaea and Galilee in the period of
the Second Temple. He taught publicly for over three years. Thousands upon
thousands of Jewish people heard Him. If Christ had used the divine name YHWH in
the midst of that Jewish community, He would have been accused of utter
blasphemy and judged worthy of excommunication from the society!
Why?
Because NO ONE was permitted to pronounce the divine name in the time of Christ.
This can be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Why was there such fear of pronouncing the name YHWH among Jews in the time of
Christ, It seems ludicrous, even bordering superstition — and perhaps there is
some truth in that assessment — but the Jews did have a major reason why they
never uttered the divine name. There was actually a biblical command which, as
the Jews interpreted it, clearly forbade them to express the divine name
precisely.
Why Jews Avoided the Tetragrammaton
The whole matter seems absurd. Yet, was it? Actually, there are two verses in
the Old Testament which can be interpreted as a prohibition against phonetically
expressing the name of YHWH. These scriptures are Leviticus 24:11, 16. They say
in our Authorized Version the following: "And the Israelitish woman's son
BLASPHEMED the name of the LORD [YHWH).... And he that BLASPHEMETH the name of
the LORD [YHWH) he shall surely be put to death."
I have capitalized and italicized the words "b1asphemed" and "blasphemeth"
because in Hebrew these two words come from the Hebrew verb nachav. The word
nachav is clearly susceptible of more than one meaning.
As Davidson's Lexicon shows, the verb can signify "to bore" or "to perforate."
The Authorized Version does on occasion translate nachav as "pierce" (II Kings
18:21), or "bored" (II Kings 12:9), or "strike through" (Hab. 3:14). By
extension it can mean "to pierce" (as in speech) or to give "cutting remarks."
This is tantamount to "cursing" or to "blaspheming." It is also used this way a
few times in the Bible. But another meaning, and one which is commonly used in
the Old Testament, is "to declare distinctly" (Davidson). It means "to express
precisely," "to say clearly," or "to name with precision." It is used this way
in I Chronicles 12:31; 16:41; II Chronicles 28:15; 31:19; Ezra 8:20; Numbers
1:17; Isaiah 62:2 and Amos 6:l. There is no question about it. The word nachav
can mean, as one of its prime meanings, "to pronounce or express distinctly."
It thus becomes clear that the word nachav might mean either "to blaspheme" or
"to pronounce distinctly." And this is just where the trouble comes.
The Jews about the time of Nehemiah began to wonder just how nuchav in Leviticus
24:11, 16 was to be interpreted. While the traditional (and certainly the
correct) way was to say it meant "to blaspheme." it could just as well mean "to
pronounce distinctly." This is a fact which no one can argue with. Now, taking
the latter meaning as the correct rendering of nuchav, Leviticus 24:11 would
read: "And the Israelitish woman's son pronounced distinctly the name of YHWH,
and cursed." Verse 16 could be: "And he that pronounceth distinctly the name of
YHWH, he shall surely be put to death."
Looking at nuchav in this fashion, the Jews soon decided they were on far safer
ground not even to express or pronounce the divine tetragrammaton. Soon after
the time of Nehemiah they began "to play it safe" in regard to the name of YHWH.
They came to believe that Leviticus 24:11, 16 commanded one NOT to pronounce the
name because it was so holy — which is the motive why some people today feel
they MUST pronounce it, because it is so holy! Neither, of course, is correct!
The Use of Yahweh and History of its Prohibition
From the time of Moses to the period of Jeremiah, the name YHWH was used freely
without any fear of pronouncing it. The Lachish Letters written in the time of
Jeremiah use the term YHWH indiscriminately and show that it was commonly used
even in everyday parlance. Immediately after the Babylonian Captivity, we find
Ezra the priest preaching before the people in Jerusalem using the name YHWH
(Neh. 8:l-8). However, a change in Jewish attitude concerning its use commences
about this time. With Nehemiah (during the latter part of Ezra's life), it has
been noticed by scholars that "Nehemiah almost wholly shuns its use" (Heinisch,
Theology of the Old Testament, p. 39).
About the time of Nehemiah we meet with a movement to be careful in relation to
the use of YHWH. The common people were told not to utter the name. Only the
priests were privileged to retain the pronunciation of it, because it was
included in certain benedictions prescribed in the Law which they were compelled
to read to the people at the Temple.
The Tetragrammaton, the four lettered Name of God, was fully pronounced only by
the priests in the Temple when blessing the people. Everywhere else it was
pronounced "Adonai." (Note to Abodah Zarah, the Talmud, p. 90, Soncino.)
As time went on, the use of the name became even further restricted. Its use was
finally confined to the high priest and even he might pronounce it only on the
Day of Atonement.
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia says:
The rabbis, however, were certain that the true name of God was the
Tetragrammaton. In the period of the Second Temple YHVH was never pronounced
except by the high priest on Yom Kippur [the Day of Atonement] (vol. 6, p. 7).
We are told by R. H. Charles, the translator of the Apocrypha and Pseudopigrapha,
published by Oxford University Press, that the Day of Atonement "was the only
occasion on which the Holy Name was pronounced" (Pseudopigrapha, p. 5 10).
Jewish history, as related in the Talmud, shows that Simon the high priest (300
to 270 B.C.) was able to utter the divine name on the Day of Atonement
throughout all his pontificate. Sirach, author of the apocryphal book of
Ecclesiasticus, wrote about 180 B.C. that Simon the Righteous, while giving his
glorious benedictions had been "privileged to pronounce his [the Eternal's)
name" (Ecclus. 50:20, Jerusalem Bible).
But even this allowance soon ceased.
At Simon's death, the rest of the priesthood decreed that from thenceforth no
one, not even the future high priests, were permitted to pronounce the name. The
later Jewish historians in the period of the Talmud record:
...The Ineffable Name could be pronounced only when there was some indication
that the Shechinah rested on the Sanctuary. When Simon the dications that such
glory was no more enjoyed, his brethren no more dared utter the Ineffable Name"
(Note to Yoma, 39b, the Talmud, p. 186, Soncino version).
This historical fact is expressed by The Jewish Encyclopedia as follows:
After the death of Simon the Righteous... the priests ceased to pronounce the
Name [YHWH]. From that time the pronunciation of the Name was prohibited.
"Whoever pronounces the Name forfeits his portion in the future world" (San. xi,
1). It appears that the majority of priests in the last days of the Temple
[during the time of Christ and the apostles] were unworthy to pronounce the Name
(vol. IX, pp. 162, 163).
There can be no doubt about it — from the death of Simon the Righteous in 270
B.C., no one, not even priests in the Temple, were permitted to pronounce the
name of YHWH. Its utterance meant the death sentence (see Sanhedrin, 56a, the
Tulmud).
Not Used From Third Century B.C.
From then on, the Jewish community interpreted Leviticus 24:11, 16 solely as a
prohibition against anyone pronouncing the tetragrammaton — no matter who he
was. As a matter of fact, in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament,
translated about 280 or 270 B.C., we find the two versa in Leviticus rendered
thus: "And the son of the Israelitish woman named THE NAME and cursed." Also,
"He that names the name of the Lord, let him die the death." It is clear that
the Septuagint translators took the word nachav to mean "to express" or "to
name." They didn't consider the other meaning, "to blaspheme," as worthy of
mention.
History shows how this prohibition found expression even in later literature The
author of Ecclesiasticus in the year 180 B.C. (about 100 years after Simon's
death) refused to use the tetragrammaton even in the Hebrew version of his work.
He decided to use, instead, three yods (''') as a substitute for the divine name
(R. H. Charles, Pseudopigrapha, p. 510).
And when we come to the Dead Sea Scrolls, written from the second century B.C.
to the second century A.D., we find a complete avoidance of using the
tetragrammaton.
The divine name YHWH (Lord) was omitted at Qumran through the belief that this
name is so awesome that one dare NOT UTTER IT (The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls
for the Bible, Brownlee, p. 83).
As sectarian as the Qumran people were, they avoided pronouncing the name YHWH
just like all the Jews. Professor Brownlee, who helped translate the Dead Sea
Scrolls, mentions that this evidence proves that the prohibition of pronouncing
the tetragrammaton was not of Talmudic origin, but goes back at least to the
second century B.C. when the earliest of the Dead Sea Scrolls came into
existence (ibid., pp. 163, 164).
A little later, in the time of Christ, a man named Onkelos translated the first
five books of the Old Testament from the Hebrew into the Aramaic which was the
language spoken throughout Palestine. This man was a disciple of Gamaliel who
also taught the Apostle Paul. For all we know, Paul and Onkelos may have known
each other. Whatever the case, Onkelos was contemporary with the apostles (M'Clintock
and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia, vol. X, p. 205).
Now, when Onkelos translated his Targum from the Hebrew into the Aramaic, he
rendered Leviticus 24:11, 16 as follows: "And the son of the woman the daughter
of Israel gave expression to the Name and cursed." And, "He who expresseth the
Name of the Lord, dying shall die." To Onkelos the only meaning of nuchav was
"to express" and not "to blaspheme." And interestingly, everytime Onkelos
translated the divine name he deliberately changed the pronunciation to make
sure no one would utter the true sound (Etheridge, The Targums of Onkelos and
Jonathan, vol. 11, pp. 7-10).
We also have the plain testimony of Josephus (the Jewish historian who lived in
the time of the apostles). When he came to the divine name, he studiously
avoided commenting on it. In fact, he considered doing so UNLAWFUL.
Whereupon God declared to him [Moses) his holy name, which had never been
discovered to men before; CONCERNING WHICH IT IS NOT LAWFUL FOR ME TO SAY ANY
MORE (Antiquities 11, xii, 4 ).
Thus, if Josephus (even though he was a priest) would not discuss the
tetragrammaton, do we think that any ordinary layman would pronounce it?
There can be no doubt about it. In the time of Christ, NO ONE (not even the
priests) dared utter the sound of the name YHWH. We have the further testimony
of Celsus and Irenaeus, in the second century A.D., that all Jews consistently
substituted another name, or another pronunciation, for YHWH (Heinisch, Theology
of the Old Testament, p. 40).
Thus, the historical proof becomes complete.
What All This Means
What does this history show? Very much. Notice it carefully. Had Christ ever
used the tetragrammaton in public, even once, He would have been reviled by
everybody in the Jewish community. The common people would never have given Him
a hearing. They would have considered Him impious.
The Scribes and Pharisees would have gotten rid of Him early had He ever
attempted to pronounce the divine name. The Sadducees would have considered Him
a clear fraud because of His disobedience to what they thought to be a biblical
prohibition concerning the utterance of the name. But, there is not a hint that
any of the laypeople in Palestine, or the priests, or the Scribes and Pharisees
or even the Sadducees, or anyone else, ever accused Christ or His apostles of
violating the precept that all Jews in the first century obeyed.
Surely, this absence of condemnation is proof positive that Christ never uttered
the divine name even once. Had He done so, it could not have escaped their
attention because all considered it blasphemous to mention that holy and august
name.
Now consider a final fact which further proves the case. When the religious
leaders of the Jewish community succeeded — on trumped-up charges — in
condemning Jesus to death for blasphemy, certain dishonest individuals sought
for and purchased the testimony of false witnesses. Even so, they could find
nothing in which to condemn Him (Mark 14.55-60)
Had Christ ever once uttered the divine name, there would have been no need of
false witnesses. The Sanhedrin would immediately have convicted Him of blasphemy
for that reason alone, and there would have been no occasion for dispensing with
the witnesses as they were finally driven to do in order to pronounce Him worthy
of death for blasphemy (verses 62-64).
There is no doubt about it. Jesus Christ never used that name which some today,
who say they desire to follow His example, think they must pronounce.
What Christ obviously did, as did all others, was to substitute the word Adonai
("Lord" — Kurios in Greek) when He spoke of the Eternal God of the Old
Testament, or He used the term "Father" when referring to the other Person of
the divine family. This was a common term that even many Jews utilized as a
substitute for YHWH.
It is instructive to observe that when Christ told His disciples how to pray, He
told them to say "Our Father which art in heaven." When He prayed His last
prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, He used the term "Father" throughout His
prayer.
Even though He didn't necessarily approve of the over-cautious scruples of the
Jewish community concerning the pronunciation of the name, nevertheless, He
didn't abuse their sensitiveness. He probably considered the matter unimportant
in general, because He worshipped His Father in spirit, and in truth — not in
syllables! (John 4:34)
Should We Use the Divine Name?
Those who wish to use the name Yahweh have, if anything, the Bible and history
against expressing the name. After all, an interpretation of nachav in Leviticus
24 can truly mean not "to pronounce" the name of YHWH even if we knew today
exactly how it should sound. Surely the prohibition against using the name has
far stronger warrant from the Bible than the supposition that it MUST at all
costs be used. Yet, it must make little difference to God.
Is "Yahweh" the Correct Pronunciation?
One question does need to be asked: Is Yahweh really the right pronunciation?
The Jews after the time of Simon the Righteous (270 R.C.) lost all knowledge of
exactly which vowel sounds were to be used. They admitted they didn't know. Then
where have scholars gotten their modern interpretation of the tetragrammaton as
Yahweh? If many sincere people who insist on pronouncing it in that fashion
really knew what fountain it came from. one wonders if they would persist in
their teaching.
Well, here is the truth. This pronunciation itself comes from the Samaritans!
Because the Samaritans never had the same scruples as the Jews over the matter,
they continued to say the word in their own dialect.
The pronunciation of the divine name as "Yuhweh" RESTS UPON SAMARITAN TRADITION
as given by Theodoret (fifth century A.D.), also upon evidence given by Clement
of Alexandria (Heinisch, Theology of the Old Testament. p. 39).
That's right! Even the modern pronunciation which scholars think may closely
resemble the ancient sound is clearly of Samaritan origin — not Jewish!
In the theological journal Oudtestamentische Studien, vol. 5, pp. 1-29,
published by Brill Press, Leiden, Holland, is an excellent article by Professor
Eerdmans entitled "The Name Jahu." One could hardly do any better than quote
from his extensive study on the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton.
Theodoret said that the Samaritans used the name Jabai (IaBar). In the treatise
Quaestiones in Exodus he wrote this name Jabe (IaBe). [The "J" had a "y" sound
and "B" something close to our "v".] These passages have induced scholars to
insert the vowels of the Samaritan Jabe into the original Hebrew consonants,
pronouncing Yahweh. But this is a mere guess. It is inconsistent with other
passages in Theodoret and lacks historical probability (page 2).
Professor Eerdmans continued his article by showing why it is not safe to follow
the Samaritan pronunciation:
Ezra... introduced a new alphabet, the "square script," to be used for the
sacred literature. The refused Samaritans [their brand of religion was
repudiated by Ezra] responded by making another alphabet for their own text of
the Thora. They built their own temple on Gerizim and had their own priesthood.
They thwarted the Jews whenever they could. The Sanhedrin of Jerusalem signalled
the time of the great feasts by means of fires in the hills. Since the
Samaritans lighted fires at inappropriate times in order to disarrange the
Jewish calendar the Sanhedrin had to use messengers. On account of their
attitude we may safely assume that the Samaritans had their own [different]
pronunciation of the holy name. For this reason the Samaritan pronunciation
should not have been regarded [by modern scholars] as evidence for the Jewish
pronunciation....
Consulting other passages in the works of Theodoret we learn that the name of
God used by the Jews was Jao, 'Iaw (page 3).
Another Jewish use of the name, as recorded by Theodoret, was Aia ('Ata), but he
said that this Aia "was not pronounced in Hebrew" (page 4).
As a result of the above information, Professor Eerdmans continues,
We learn from these passages that Theodoret knew the Samaritan pronunciation was
different from the Hebrew.
The evidence from other ancient authors is not in favour of the new-made term
Yahweh, however generally it may be used in textbooks and sermons (pp. 4, 5 ).
The professor then gives a list of ancient authorities, going all the way back
to the time of Christ, who purport to give a pronunciation of the tetragrammaton.
Diodorus Siculus said it was JAO. Irenaeus also said JAO. Origen wrote JAOU.
Epiphanius, JAO. Porphyry said JEUO, while Jerome wrote JAIIO (pp. 5, 6 ). All
these foregoing "Js" were pronounced somewhat like our English "Y".
Professor Eerdmans' research shows that the modern pronunciation which the
scholars borrowed from the Samaritans is probably not correct. Since the Jews
officially determined to forego the true pronunciation after the death of Simon
the Righteous (270 B.C.), is it really proper to go to the Greeks and Samaritans
for the supposed pronunciation?
The truth of the matter is, the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton should be of
little consequence to us. It is abundantly evident that Christ (and the
apostles) never uttered it. Instead, He commanded and set us the example to use
primarily "Father."
In this New Testament, Gospel age, we now have access directly to the Father —
the Most High God (Gen. 14:18; Luke 1:32, 35; 8:28). It is His — the Father's —
"name" (His character and power) which Christ emphasized. And it is His
Fatherhood to all who have become His begotten children that is all-important to
our divine Creator.