What's in a Name?
Christian Teachings
Hi Blake,Of course I would like to get to know you better. I love debates, and I love dialogging on more than a superficial level - which is so often the case on the Internet.We don't see "eye to eye" on everything, but I take no offense and believe in freedom of conscience and expression.In fact, I am sympathetic to your views because I was once on a similar path. I was a Sabbath keeper, a legalist, even holding to dietary restrictions - until I found my freedom in Christ under the New Covenant. I have studied and debated issues with Messianic and Jewish roots people before, and understand that mindset to a certain degree. I have dear friends still within these groups and in the SDA Church.My only problem, in discussing these issues with you, is that you don't seem to read the links I provide. Many of the points you bring up were already refuted in the very first link I gave you -
Response to the Extreme Exclusive Sacred Name Movement by Paul Wong. Since you have apparently missed that, I will take the time and effort to bring them to your attention.You make the statement -
Remember names are not translatable; but they can be transliterated into different languages. My name is Blake Higginbotham in Russia, Mexico or Japan. It just may sound a little different if spoken in any other language than English. Paul Wong -
The writer was trying to tell us that transliteration of names is an absurdity or impossibility. It is a very common thing. Let me give you an example. In the United States my official name is Paul Wong. I have Chinese ancestry and I am going to give you my name in four Chinese dialect transliterations. Chinese always place the family name first. In Mandarin Chinese I am known as Huang Pau Law. In Cantonese I am called Wong Pou Law. In Hakka they call me Wong Pau Law. In Hokkien (Taiwanese) I am known as Ng Po Lo. Why are there so many different pronunciations? They are just dialects that have been developed in different parts of China. There are hundreds of Chinese dialects. It does not make any difference what dialect transliteration people call me. They know me and I know they are calling me. Transliteration is an accepted practice by all people all over the world. My Japanese friends in Japan would call me Oo-o-ng Po-Ro. They do not have the direct phonetic alphabets for Wong and no L sounds in their spoken language for Paul. Do I have my name in Japanese? Sure, I do!Transliteration of our Saviors name has been used in Bible translations in more than 700 languages...Transliteration of our Saviors name have existed centuries before His birth in Bethlehem. The Septuagint Bible has the transliterated Greek name of Joshua. Pilate wrote the transliterated Greek and Latin names of our Savior on the cross where He was crucified (Jn. 19:19-20) You also made this statement Blake,
let's face it Ken, I live in a real world where the generic term "God" could mean nothing or anything. I believe that it is both helpful and useful for us to put a specific name to our "God" so that people know that we believe that He is the One and Only True God. Once again, this is something dealt with in the very first link I pointed you to.
Paul Wong -
Some argue that God is a word that is used by pagans to refer to idols. That is true. Pagans who used the Hebrew or Aramaic language also called their idols by Hebrew names such as Elohim, El, "Eloah and Elah (Gen 35:2; Josh. 24:15) but Yahweh, or the LORD, inspired his prophets to apply the same names to Him. This shows that it is not wrong to refer to the true God by the same words that the pagans misused in reference to their idols. If EESNM want to be strict about it and use the same judgment that they have against the English word God they should throw away or burn every Sacred Name Bible that have the word Elohim. Blake you also make this statement,
I want make you aware that most theologians agree that there was indeed a Hebrew text from which both the Old and New Covenants of the Bible were derived. This is completely false for several undeniable reasons. I will point you to the following article as a refutation. I have presented a few relevant statements from it, since you don't seem to read the articles I point you to lol.
Was the New Testament Written in Hebrew? by Tim Warner
One of the subtle attacks on the Christian Faith comes from the notion that the New Testament was not written in Greek, but in "Hebrew." ...No ancient Hebrew manuscript of the New Testament has ever been found from the early centuries of Christianity. The oldest are Greek. The oldest papyrus fragment [a portion of the Gospel of John] dates back to the late second century. So the manuscript evidence alone weighs heavily against the concept of Hebrew originals.The proponents of the Hebrew New Testament claim that internal evidence suggests the original language of the text was Hebrew. Actually, the Hebrew of the Torah was not widely spoken at the time of Christ. ...So, lets not begin with a false impression that true Hebrew of the Torah is even a possible candidate for the original documents of the New Testament. It is not. No one except a few Jewish scholars would have been able to read it.Proponents of the Hebrew New Testament concept claim that the Greek New Testament is unreliable, due to Hellenization of the text. Hellenized simply means influenced by Greek culture and thought. ...The real message of Jesus was allegedly lost in the Hellenized and embellished documents we call the four Gospels. My friends, this is NOT of God! It is EXACTLY the tactic of every major cult. They all claim that true Christianity was lost, and they have been chosen to recover the true message of Jesus and the Apostles.The Hebrew New Testament proponents would have us trust them to fix the faulty Scriptures, by relying on their supposed knowledge of Jewish customs and figures of speech. In short, we need to sit at the feet of rabbis in order to understand what was written. But, by editing the text of the New Testament to conform to so-called Jewish thought only leads AWAY from the message preserved by the providence of God. God promised to preserve His Word for every generation [Psalm 12:6,7 Matt. 24:35]. God kept His word! The Traditional Greek text of the New Testament is reliable...Limiting the words of Jesus and the Apostles to a Jewish culture and to Jewish thought is to limit the Son of God to human ideologies! ...The message of the New Testament transcends the Jewish and Greek cultures! Personally, what is the "clincher" for me Blake, is how Jesus and the Apostles treated this issue, as the New Covenant was being instituted. I will borrow from another of Paul Wong's articles -
THE NAME WHICH IS ABOVE EVERY NAME . Not that I think he is authoritative on this subject, but for the sake of time and brevity, it is easier for me to quote him - when he holds to the same view I do which is certainly not always the case.
During His crucifixion Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me? (Mt. 27:46; Mk. 15:34) In the Sermon on the Mount He taught His disciples In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. (Mt. 6:9; Lk. 11:2) Our Lord had addressed His prayers to My Father and My God and not once as YAHWEH. If our Lord Jesus Christ had never taught His disciples to pray in the name of YAHWEH no one should insist on it.Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, wrote nine epistles to the Gentile churches. Being a Roman citizen he wrote to the Roman church in Latin. (Acts 22:25-29; Rom. 1:7; 11:13) All the other eight epistles were written in Greek. Paul was well educated and spoke Greek. (Acts 21:37) He spoke to the Athenians using the Greek words Theos for God and Kurios for Lord. He used the same words over and over again in his eight epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians. In all his epistles he addressed the Savior in Greek as Kurios Iosous Cristos translated as Lord Jesus Christ.Many Sacred Name congregations do not use the Greek/English form of the name JESUS because of two main reasons. They think that it is derived from the names "Zeus" or IASO the mythical Greek deities. This is incorrect. Any reliable Bible dictionary will inform us that JESUS is a transliteration of the Greek IESOUS. The second objection is that the letter J was non-existent in the Hebrew alphabet. Do you really think God is concerned about phonics, or is he concerned about hearts?This article
Jesus or Zeus? by Tim Warner, also deals with some of the objections you have raised.You said, at one point, that you didn't know why I had originally made my post, or why I was making it an issue. Actually, another member here made it an issue by posting on it and trying to make himself infallible by blocking my comments.From my point of view, both he and you, have fallen for some of the "Jewish Roots" teachings, that are not founded on scripture, or sound scholarship. Of course, you are welcome to hold those opinions, but personally, I find ample reason to reject them - having given the matter considerable thought and study.Blessings to you and yours,Ken
