PRELIMINARY REMARKS

This is intended to be a relatively brief response to the article by Dr. Daniel Botkin called The Messiah’s Hebrew Name: Yeshua or Yahshua? (Petah Tikvah, Vol. 30, No. 1.) For a more complete treatment of the subject of the Savior’s true name, anyone who requests it may obtain a free copy of a 90 page book, which I have written, called The Name Above All Names, by writing to the following address: Congregation of Yahshua Messiah, c/o Bob Young, 279 New Hampshire Ln, Trafford, PA 15085.

Before I begin the presentation of my understanding on this matter, I want to say that, even though I disagree with him on this and a few other matters, I have great respect for brother Daniel Botkin, his scholarship in general, and especially the work that he does for our Master. So this should in no way to be construed as an attack upon him personally. As fellow believers in the Messiah, regardless of what term we use as His name, we are one in the Spirit, and we should all pray for that time when His “watchmen shall see eye to eye, when Yahweh shall bring again Zion” (Isa 52:8). In the meantime His true disciples will be known by the love that they have for one another. With that said, let’s begin our study.

CALLING UPON HIS NAME

I begin by pointing out that the issue I will be dealing with is not how to write our Savior’s name in Hebrew, but how to pronounce it (and how to best represent that pronunciation in English). It is true that early on in what has been called “The sacred name movement” some wrote His name in Hebrew as .יהשׁוּע As brother Botkin points out, this is a form not found in the Bible or (as far as we know) in any other ancient writings. However, the real issue is not how it is to be written in Hebrew. That is well known. It is an established fact that the Messiah had the same Hebrew name as that of the man whom we normally refer to in English as “Joshua”. In its original, fuller form(s) this man’s name was (and is) written in Hebrew as יהושׁע and as יהושׁוּע. In the course of time this name became written in a shorter form as ישׁוּע, which is how it is found written in Nehemiah 8:17. From its transliteration into the Greek it became determined that this shorter form is the form that was normally used as our Savior’s name.

In its fuller form(s), as shown above, the divine name of Yahweh (as Yahu, or Yah) is clearly seen in the Hebrew characters used. This name (of “Joshua”) came into existence through Moses calling the son of Nun, whose name originally meant “Savior”, by a name meaning “Yahu-Savior” or “Yah-Savior”. As written in Hebrew this change in names became expressed by the addition of the Hebrew yod (י) to the original name of this man called “Joshua”. In the shorter, contracted form, as used in Nehemiah (ישׁוּע) the “h” (Hebrew ה) is dropped in the written form. But the name “Yah” is still understood and is represented by the first letter, the Hebrew yod (י). All of this that I have thus far presented is known and accepted by most, if not all, Hebrew scholars.

However, as said, the real issue is not how it is to be written in Hebrew. The real issue, even as brother Botkin deals with it, is how it is “to be pronounced” - how it is to be sounded. This indeed is the important issue, for the Bible does not instruct us to write a letter to Yahweh in Hebrew (or any other language) in order to be saved. Rather it says, “Whosoever shall call on the name of Yahweh shall be saved” (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; Rom 10:13). Calling relates to sound, not to writing. (According to Num 13:16, Moses changed the son of Nun’s name by calling him by a name that contained the Creator’s name, not by writing it. Writing it only came later to express in the Bible what had happened.) Since we are told in Acts 4:12 concerning the Messiah that, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved”, we conclude that calling on the name of Yahweh, as foretold in Joel 2:32, is done by calling on the name of the Messiah.

I do not hold the belief of some that no one can be saved if they do not use the correct form of the Savior’s name. (In fact, even among those who emphasize using His [Hebrew] name there is not universal agreement as to its exact pronunciation.) According to my understanding, to call on His name means to call on the person whose name that is (which in the Bible days would, of course, have included using the correct form of His name, since there was no question then as to what that was). It is a matter of whom you believe in, and accept, as the Messiah/Savior that determines whether or not you will be saved. Nevertheless, if we become aware of the connection between His true name and that of His Father, Yahweh, and if we love Him and the truth, I believe we should want to use His correct name as He was called when here on earth - the name used by all the apostles and early believers before the changes and confusion came about.

If the Messiah had (and, therefore, still has) the same name as His Heavenly Father, we honor Him and the Heavenly Father by using His true, correct name when we speak to Him, and of Him. Again, it is the sound to be used in calling upon that name (and verbally praising that name) that is the important issue. The written form of the Messiah’s name (in Hebrew or any language) is only important to the extent that it correctly shows the sound of His name (and its connection with that of the Father’s name).

HIS NAME FOREVER

Brother Botkin correctly points out that our Master’s statement in John 5:43 (that He came in His Father’s name) means that He came representing the Father, and in the authority of the Father. However, even though it is incorrect to seek to use that particular verse as proof that our Savior has the name of Yahweh, the fact remains that there is clear Bible proof that our Savior did have the Father’s name in His name.

I cannot put the abundance of biblical proof of this in this brief article, but do supply much of it in The Name Above All Names, which our congregation offers free to those requesting it. All I will do here is mention two things that should bring one to the conclusion that the Messiah had His Father’s name.

The first thing is found in Ex 3:15. There we find that, after giving His name as “Yahweh”, the Almighty said, “this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” The second thing is that the Savior is the same one who spoke those words. He is Elohim (“God”). Thus, since He said “Yahweh” is His name forever, He did not change it when He (as the Word, which “was with Yahweh, and was Yahweh” according to John 1:2) “became flesh and tabernacled among us” (as John 1:14 says). He merely took the name prepared beforehand through Moses, the name that means “Yahweh-Savior, which in its fullest sense only applies to Him. In fulfillment of Isa 12:2, which says, “Yah-Yahweh…has become my salvation”, Yahweh became flesh and saved us in the person of His Only Begotten Son.

As already indicated, there is much more, very clear evidence that the Father and the Son have the same name. When Yah became our Salvation, the only change was not in His basic name, which He said was forever, but in its being combined with a term which designates that He became our Savior - our Salvation. This is the name He tells us to call upon and to give honor and praise to.

HOW IT SHOULD BE SOUNDED

Problems arise when we adhere to “science” as developed by man above what the scripture shows us. As one example, there was a time when many preachers began to seek to make their interpretation of the Bible conform to the teachings of evolution, because they thought science had proven evolution. Some still do this. But many no longer feel pressured to do so, for they find more and more modern scientists are casting off that false teaching of evolution.

What does all of that have to do with the sound of the Savior’s name? The answer is that the science of linguistics (which I studied in my formal schooling) is not perfect anymore than the “science” of biology is perfect as men have developed it. The rules of pronunciation found in biblical grammars that men have developed are not proven to be how ancient, or biblical Hebrew, was pronounced. The rules of pronunciation those grammars give are primarily based upon the Masoretic pronunciations, which came from the sixth century A.D. With regards to most things this is not really important. But when it comes to the subject of the correct sound of our Savior’s name, it is.

I show in my book that some real scholars of Biblical Hebrew have serious doubts that the Masoretic pronunciation is the same as biblical Hebrew. Also, I show from certain factors pertaining to the transliteration of Savior’s name as found in the Septuagint, and what has become called “The New Testament”, that that Greek transliteration may well have been consistent with the pronunciation of the Savior’s name as “Yahshua”. Furthermore, I show that in the time when biblical Hebrew was still spoken those who had the name of “Joshua” had “a favorite practice” of using a Greek name (Iason) that clearly had the Yah sound in it when they wanted to use a Greek representation for their name, rather than using the less clear transliteration of “Iesus” (as it is commonly written in English transliteration).

Although that Greek transliteration could well be properly pronounced as consistent with sounding the Savior’s name as “Yahshua”, it also had a more common alternate pronunciation (which, thereby, gave it some ambiguity). That alternate Greek pronunciation is the one that came down through the Latin into English as “Iesus”, which was changed in later English to “Jesus”. (Incidentally, I do not subscribe to the idea that “Jesus” is from “Zeus”, for I find no clear evidence to support such a teaching.)

Let me remind the reader that both biblical Hebrew and biblical Greek are dead languages. That is to say, they are no longer spoken. Furthermore we have no certainty that they were spoken as they are now represented in modern grammar books of so called “Biblical Hebrew” and “Biblical Greek”. In fact, as I have said, and point out in my book, it is very doubtful that they were, at least not totally.

Remember that, until the system of vowel markings developed at the time of the Masoretes, there were no written vowels in Hebrew. So everything hinges on how the, then unwritten, vowel after the first letter in the Heavenly Father’s and Savior’s, name was sounded. Was it sounded as “eh” like it is in modern Hebrew, or was it as “ah”? If it is as “ah”, then, “Yahweh” and “Yahshua” are correct ways to accurately write them phonetically in English. I believe in my small (90 page) book I establish that “Yahshua” is clearly the way of correctly, unambiguously presenting the proper sound of our Savior’s name, and that it is the way that accords with the teaching of the Scripture, which is that the Son does indeed have the Father’s name. As such, using it gives the honor due unto the one and only personal name of our Creator – the name above all names.