Translate

Showing posts with label Names. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Names. Show all posts

Friday, September 29, 2023

Names and Titles of Jesus

Some of the names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament are:
  • Almighty
  • Alpha and Omega
  • Amen
  • Apostle
  • Bishop
  • Bridegroom
  • Captain of Salvation
  • Chief Shepherd
  • Christ
  • Dayspring
  • Door
  • Emmanuel
  • Faithful Witness
  • Firstborn
  • God
  • Good Shepherd
  • Governor
  • Great Shepherd
  • High Priest
  • I am
  • Image of God
  • Jesus
  • King of the Jews
  • King of Kings
  • Lamb of God
  • Light of the World
  • Life
  • Lion of the tribe of Juda
  • Lord
  • Lord of Lords
  • Master
  • Messias
  • Nazarene
  • Only Begotten Son
  • Passover
  • Potentate (Blessed and Only)
  • Rabboni and Rabbi
  • Redeemer
  • Resurrection (The) and the Life
  • Rock
  • Root of David / Root and Offspring of David
  • Saviour
  • Second Adam / Last Adam
  • Shepherd
  • Son of David
  • Son of God
  • Son of Man
  • Son of the Highest
  • Teacher
  • True Vine
  • Truth
  • Way
  • Witness
  • Word / Logos
What would you add? Subtract?

Thursday, December 22, 2022

Jesus and Joshua, Hebrews 4:8

For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. Hebrews 4:8

There are legitimate discussions to be had about the King James translation. Despite all the armaments arrayed against it, it is still the Standard. There must be discussions about it, because it is the Bible to which all comers compare themselves, either positively, negatively, or both. This is inevitable, and should be understood without running to exasperation. However, some of the distractions are so wearisome, and border on the weirdly lunatic fringe of animus toward the King James translation – even when the detractors are otherwise very intelligent and educated people. The admin at “Dust Off The Bible” is one such example, being an M.Div seminary graduate who writes well. Yet he comes up with some real whoppers, such as complaining about the KJV translators using a “J” for Jehovah and Jesus. He apparently never bothered to check an original printing, which does not have a letter “J” (what some mistake for a “J” is a blackletter capital “I”). Jehovah is Iehovah and Jesus is Iesus.

Here he comes again this time with an imagined Translation Error In The King James Version: Hebrews 4:8 (Jesus or Joshua?). Introducing the essay, he writes, “The Greek text clearly has the name Ἰησοῦς (Iesous)...” Seems there should not be much to say about translation after that. The rest should be exegesis and interpretation. But no.

The translators are translating Greek. The KJV Old Testament names from Hebrew and New Testament names from Greek reflect that difference. For example, Elijah vs. Elias/ηλιας, Elisha vs. Eliseus/ελισσαιου, Isaiah vs. Esaias/ησαιας, Jonah vs. Jonas/ιωνας (and, of course, Joshua vs. Jesus). You think they should have standardized the spellings? Fine, but be honest, that is not the same as a mistranslation!

The simple fact is the name is correctly over from the Greek in an English language and English Bible that has a history. You do not like it? Get over it. Here is some of the history of the spelling in the Bibles leading up to 1611.

  • 1526 Tyndale - Iosue v. 8, Iesus v. 14 (This is chapter 5, “verse 1” in Tyndale)
  • 1535 Coverdale - Iosua v. 8, Iesus (v. 14 = 5:1)
  • 1537 Matthew - Iosue v. 8, Iesus (v. 14 = 5:1)
  • 1539 Taverner - Iosue v. 8, Iesus (v. 14 = 5:1)
  • 1540 Great - Iosue v. 8, Iesus (v. 14 moved to 4th chapter)
  • 1541 Great Bible - Iosua v. 8, Iesus v. 14
  • 1557 Geneva NT - Iosue v. 8, Iesus v. 14
  • 1560 Geneva Bible - Iesus v. 8, Iesus v. 14 (v. 8 has note, “Meaning Ioshua”)
  • 1568 Bishops - Iesus v. 8, Iesus v. 14 (v. 8 note says, “By Iesus, is meant Iosua”)
  • 1602 Bishops - Iesus v. 8, Iesus v. 14 (v. 8 has note, “By Iesus, is meant Iosua”)
  • 1611 KJV - Iesus v. 8, Iesus v. 14 (v. 8 has note, “That is, Josuah”)

Here is how the names appear in Greek:

  • Hebrews 4:8 ει γαρ αυτους ιησους κατεπαυσεν ουκ αν περι αλλης ελαλει μετα ταυτα ημερας
  • Hebrews 4:14 εχοντες ουν αρχιερεα μεγαν διεληλυθοτα τους ουρανους ιησουν τον υιον του θεου κρατωμεν της ομολογιας

The spelling difference ιησους vs. ιησουν is related to the case, nominative (subject) versus accusative (object). See 6:20, where the Greek spelling for “Iesus” the Christ is the same as 4:8 for Joshua. 6:20 οπου προδρομος υπερ ημων εισηλθεν ιησους κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ αρχιερευς γενομενος εις τον αιωνα.

Looking over these historical samples, it is evident that (1), the Greek spelling for the Old Testament successor of Moses and the New Testament Messiah is the same; and (2) the English spelling reflecting that sameness appears in other Bibles, and was changed by the Reformers at Geneva from what had been in previous Bibles to standardize the Greek word which was the same in both places, with the addition of a note of explanation.

The 1885 English Revised Version changed the name in verse 8 to Joshua (with the note, “Gr. Jesus”) and has Jesus in verse 14. 

Nothing sinister or stupid is going on with the name “Jesus” in the King James Bible. A little research is good for what ails ya.

Wednesday, June 01, 2022

Simon the Canaanite, an apostle

Q. Why is the other apostle named Simon called a Canaanite in Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18?

A. This Simon receives a designation to distinguish him from the other apostle Simon (Simon Peter).[i] It appears that the predominant view about the word “Canaanite” in these verses does not have to do with ethnicity, or a geographical location, but that it is a translation of a Syriac word (which most now call Aramaic) meaning “zealous” and probably referring to a sect of the Jews. For example, Smith’s Bible Dictionary says that Luke’s ζηλωτης (Zelotes, in Luke & Acts) is the Greek equivalent for the Syriac term κανανιτης/κανανιτην (Canaanite) used by Matthew and Mark, both of which are names of a Jewish sect.[ii] The Jamieson-Fausset-Brown commentary says, “The word ‘Kananite’ is just the Aramaic, or Syro-Chaldaic, term for ‘Zealot’.”

Some have understood that this Simon was a Canaanite in the sense of either from the land of Canaan or from Cana in Galilee. Albert Barnes writes, “His native place was probably ‘Cana.’ Afterward he might with propriety be called by either title.” [That is, either Canaanite or Zelotes, rlv.] Jerome also thought this Simon was from Cana, writing, “He was surnamed Peter to distinguish him from another Simon who is called the Cananean, from the village of Cana of Galilee, where the Lord turned water into wine.”[iii]

Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 in the Traditional Text form have κανανιτης and κανανιτην, respectively. Eclectic texts such as Westcott-Hort, Tyndale House, and UBS have καναναιος and καναναιον. Older versions based on eclectic texts (e.g., RV, ASV, and RSV) translated this “Cananaean,” while modern versions such as CSB, ESV, LEB, and NIV translate (interpret) it as Zealot. Zelotes is ζηλωτην/ζηλωτης, found in Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13.

Though not explicitly stated, it seems likely all of the twelve apostles were Jews. Jesus initially sent the twelve (of whom Simon was one) neither “into the way of the Gentiles” nor “into any city of the Samaritans” but rather “to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” This, in my opinion, makes it unlikely that one of the twelve was a Gentile. At least to the understanding of the gathered crowd on the Pentecost after Christ’s resurrection, the disciples were “all Galilæans” (Acts 2:7).

There is a noticeable difference in the Greek spelling in κανανιτης (Canaanite) in the Gospels, to χανααν (Canaan) and χαναναιοι/χανανεις/χαναναιους (Canaanite) in reference to a location and people. The word Canaanite in the Gospels starts with the Greek letter kappa (κ) and the land of Canaan starts with the Greek letter chi (χ). This may not be definitive – since words can have more than one spelling – but it is at least a clue that the words are different (a difference that does not show up in English).[iv]

My conclusion is that ζηλωτης and κανανιτης have the same meaning. Matthew and Mark use the Syriac term, while Luke uses the Greek term, meaning “zealous” or “zealot”. “Canaanite” is a proper word, a good translation (for example, “Zealot” in the CSB, ESV, LEB, and NIV is more of an interpretation), somewhat of a transliteration, and part of the ongoing English translation tradition leading up to the King James Bible.[v] It is best to be satisfied that it means “zealous” or “zealot”[vi] and remain uncertain whether Simon was a member of the Jewish sect called Zealots – since it is an historical question whether Jews were identified by that name as early as the time Jesus ordained his apostles.[vii]

Other comments

  • John Gill: “The former of these is called Simon the Canaanite, to distinguish him from Simon Peter, before mentioned; not that he was a Canaanite, that is, an inhabitant of the land of Canaan, a man of Canaan, as a certain woman is called a woman of Canaan, (Matthew 15:22) for all the disciples of Christ were Jews; though in Munster's Hebrew Gospel he is called (ynenkh Nwemv), ‘Simeon the Canaanite’, or of Canaan, as if he belonged to that country; nor is he so called from Cana of Galilee, as Jerom and others have thought; but he was one of the (Myanq) , ‘Kanaim’, or ‘Zealots’; and therefore Luke styles him, ‘Simon called Zelotes’, (Luke 6:15) (Acts 1:13).”
  • Matthew Poole: “We must not understand by Canaanite a pagan, (for Christ sent out none but Jews), but one of Cana, which by interpretation is Zelus, from whence it is that Luke calleth him Zelotes.”
  • Matthew Henry: “Simon is called the Canaanite, or rather the Canite, from Cana of Galilee, where probably he was born; or Simon the Zealot, which some make to be the signification of Kananites.”
  • Expositor’s Greek Testament: “The form Καναναῖος seems to be based on the idea that the word referred to a place. Jerome took it to mean ‘of Cana,’ ‘de vico Chana Galilaeae’.”
  • Adam Clarke: “The Canaanite—This word is not put here to signify a particular people, as it is elsewhere used in the Sacred Writings; but it is formed from the Hebrew קנא kana, which signifies zealous, literally translated by Luke, Luke 6:15, ζηλωτης, zelotes, or the zealous, probably from his great fervency in preaching the Gospel of his Master.”
  • Vincent’s Word Studies: “The Canaanite (ὁ Καναναιος) Rev., Cananaean. The word has nothing to do with Canaan. In Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13, the same apostle is called Zelotes. Both terms indicate his connection with the Galilaean Zealot party, a sect which stood for the recovery of Jewish freedom and the maintenance of distinctive Jewish institutions. From the Hebrew kanná, zealous; compare the Chaldee kanán, by which this sect was denoted.”


[i] Using the “nickname” of “surname” of “the Zealot” or “the Canaanite” likely was one way to help distinguish this Simon from the other Simon, called Peter.
[ii] Many students of the language believe κανανιτης etymologically comes from the Syriac/Aramaic word qan’an, meaning “zealous one.”
[iii] Commentary on Matthew, St. Jerome, Translated by Thomas P. Scheck, Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2008, p. 115.
[iv] On the other hand, in Greek the city of Cana in Galilee is spelled beginning with a kappa. Cana = κανα.
[v] Simon Chananæus and Simonem Cananæum (Latin Vulgate), Simon Chananeus and Simonem Chananeum (Anglo-Saxon Gospels, circa 700-900), Symount Chananee and Symount Cananee (1382 Wycliffe Bible), Simon off cane and Symon of cane (1526 Tyndale NT), Simon of Canan and Simon of Cane (1557 Geneva NT), Simon the Cananite and Simon the Cananite (Geneva 1560; with the note: Or, the zealous/zealous), Simon [the] Cananite and Simon Cananite (Bishops Bible), Simon the Chanaanite and Simon the Chanaanite (1602 Bishops Bible), Simon the Canaanite and Simon the Canaanite (1611 Barker King James Bible). I include the Latin Vulgate since the Anglo-Saxon Gospels and the Wycliffe Bible is translated from it rather than from the Greek.
[vi] “Showing great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or objective” and “a person who is enthusiastic, fanatical, and/or uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals.”
[vii] In the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (1992), David Rhoads writes, “The evidence from Josephus suggests that it was not until about 68 C.E. during the Roman-Judean War that one of the revolutionary factions came to identify itself formally as the Zealots. Therefore, it is anachronistic to view people acting with zeal before 68 C.E. as members of a sect called the Zealots.”

Wednesday, March 30, 2022

Why is Ιακωβος translated James rather than Jacob?

Q. Why is Ιακωβος translated “James” rather than “Jacob”? [i]

A. First, note that the inspired New Testament writers used Ιακωβ when referring to the Old Testament patriarch Jacob, but Ιακωβος when referring to Jesus’s “contemporaries” (the two apostles, Matthew 10:2-3; and his half-brother, Galatians 1;19).[ii] The Greek ιακωβ (translated Jacob) appears 27 times in 25 verses in the King James Bible and the 1894 Scrivener Greek New Testament.[iii] It always appears in that form when referring to people who are “before” Jesus, but never restricted to that form concerning his contemporaries. A name in Greek can have different endings (making it appear to be different), depending on how it is used in the sentence (i.e., the case in which it is used). In accord with that, the names of Jesus’s contemporaries appear in the Greek New Testament in the following forms: ιακωβον (accusative case) /ιακωβος (nominative case) /ιακωβου (genitive case) /ιακωβω (dative case). In contrast, Ιακωβ does not change forms according to usage. For example, whether it is used as a nominative/subject in John 4:5 (Jacob gave) or as genitive/possessive in John 4:6 (Jacob’s well), it is always Ιακωβ. Concerning this, the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (BDAG) says that Ιακωβ (יַעֲקֹב) is “the un-Grecized form of the OT, is reserved for formal writing, and esp. for the patriarch.”

The answer, then, begins in the different New Testament usage, transferred into the English language. The other half of the answer is found in the English language itself. This distinction between “Jacob” and “James” goes back in English Bibles to Wycliffe (1382). The earlier Anglo-Saxon Gospels, on the other hand, use Iacob for the patriarch, but the Iacobe /Iacobes /Iacobum /Iacobus forms for the contemporaries. Therefore, sometime between the 700s and 1380, it seems the Anglo language developed a change of name for Iacobus to James, or at least a preference for James over Iacobus. Tyndale and other English translations followed Wycliffe in this.

Oxford English Dictionary entry gives the following information:

“Old French James (Gemmes, *Jaimes) = Spanish Jaime, Provençal, Catalan Jaume, Jacme. Italian Giacomo < popular Latin * ‘Jacomus, for ‘Jacobus, altered from Latin Ia’cōbus, < Greek Ιακωβος, < Hebrew yaʿăqōb Jacob, a frequent Jewish name at all times, and thus the name of two of Christ’s disciples (St. James the Greater and St. James the Less); whence a frequent Christian name.”[iv]

The Online Etymology Dictionary has for “James”:

“masc. proper name, New Testament name of two of Christ’s disciples, late 12c. Middle English vernacular form of Late Latin Jacomus (source of Old French James, Spanish Jaime, Italian Giacomo), altered from Latin Jacobus (see Jacob).”

The progression of the name from Hebrew to English seems to be this:

  • Hebrew       Yaʿaqob
  • Greek          Ιακωβος
  • Latin           Iacobus to Jacomus
  • Old French Jammes (Gemmes)
  • English       James

As the New Testament, so the King James Bible (as well as most all English translations) maintains and presents a distinction in usage between Jewish and Christian generations of the name Jacob and Jacobus.[v]


[i] I have capitalized “Ιακωβ” and “Ιακωβος” in places in accommodation or reference to our English style. As far as I can tell, the Koine Greek does not use capitalization in the same manner we do, though some compiled Greek texts do so.
[ii] Matthew also uses “Ιακωβ” twice in his genealogy in reference to Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary (Matthew 1:15-16).
[iii] I did not check other translations or Greek texts. The English name “James” appears in 38 verses of the New Testament in the King James Bible. According to Blue Letter Bible Word Search, ιακωβ occurs 370 times in 337 verses in the Septuagint (LXX).
[iv] Interestingly, I noticed the French Louis Segond Bible has “Jacques” rather than “Gemmes,” where we have “James.”
[v] In contrast, the Tree of Life Version of the Messianic Jewish Family Bible Society uses “Jacob” in all cases, masking the distinction made by the New Testament writers.
[vi] Note: There is a floating Anti-KJV “urban legend” that King James forced the translators to change “Jacobus” to “James” so that his own name would appear in the Bible. (I say “floating” because I have not found a source for this, just “I have heard.” I did find at Church Times that they answered an anonymous question that began with this statement, “Since the King James Version of the Bible, the name Jacob in the Greek New Testament has been rendered as James, as a way of sucking up to the King.”) The mythological nature of this claim is easily seen in that the English translations of the Bible for over 200 years before the King James translation had already used the name “James.”

Thursday, August 26, 2021

In other words, Proper Nouns

  • Ausgangstext, noun. The original, initial, or source text of the Scriptures; the one ancestor of all the extant Greek copies.
  • Confessional Bibliology, noun. The position that accepts the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts used by the framers of the major post-reformation confessions, which they called “authentic” and “pure”, as the preserved text of the Bible.
  • Jenny Greenteeth, noun. The name of: a female supernatural being or creature said to lurk beneath the surface of (esp. weed-covered) ponds, ditches, etc., waiting to pull in and drown those who venture into or near the water.
  • Manhattanhenge, noun. A phenomenon in which the sun rises or sets in alignment with the streets that run east to west on the street grid of Manhattan, New York City.
  • Nowheresville, noun. A largely unknown or uninteresting place, esp. a small, rural town; (also figurative) obscurity, insignificance, limbo; Also, Nowhereville.
  • Owczarek, noun. Any of several breeds of sheepdog originating in Poland; a dog of one of these breeds.
  • Solon, noun. Athenian statesman and lawgiver. One of the Seven Sages, he revised the code of laws established by Draco. (often lowercase) A wise lawgiver.
  • Synoptic, adjective. Taking a common view, specifically in reference to the similarities of the first three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. (often lowercase) Forming a general summary or synopsis, or affording a general view of the whole.
  • Tom Tiddler’s ground, noun. A children's game in which one player, designated ‘Tom Tiddler,’ tries to catch the others who run on to his or her territory, marked by a line drawn on the ground, crying ‘We're on Tom Tiddler’s ground, picking up gold and silver,’ the first, or sometimes the last, caught taking the place of the pursuer.
  • Tropic of Cancer, noun. The parallel of latitude that is approximately 23¹/₂ degrees north of the equator and that is the northernmost latitude reached by the overhead sun.
  • Vesak, noun. A major Buddhist festival commemorating the birth, enlightenment, and death of the Buddha, observed on the day of the full moon in the month Visākha (April–May).

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Hazelelponi

Last year I posted briefly about the biblical character Hazelelponi. What follows is something I found while researching the name.
The name Hazelelponi starts with the letter ה (he), and that seems to indicate the grammatical form which indicates an active causative form of what follows.The first of these comes from the root group צלל The verb צלל (salal III) means to be or grow dark. This verb occurs twice: Nehemiah 3:19 and Ezekiel 31:3.  The common, masculine, noun צל (sel) meaning shade or shadow. This noun occurs frequently in the Bible (Judges 9:15, Jeremiah 6:4, Jonah 4:5). This noun is frequently employed to describe the transitoriness of life (Job 8:9, 17:7, Psalm 144:3, 102:12). The second part of the name comes from the verb פנה (pana), meaning to turn.
Hazelelponi at Abarim Publications

Wednesday, October 10, 2018

Why Should Baptist Churches Keep the “Baptist” Label in Their Names?

By Ben Stratton

Back in April I posted a comment by Ben about using the Baptist name label. He has recently expressed it in more detail. Ben is Southern Baptist (pastor of the Farmington Baptist Church, Farmington, Kentucky), so he approaches it directly  from that perspective. Nevertheless, it applies to the broader Baptist family as well.

Why Should Baptist Churches Keep the “Baptist” Label in Their Names?

1. It is ethically honest. Most of the Southern Baptist churches dropping the Baptist label have the attitude “We’re Baptist, just don’t tell anybody.” How is this being truthful?

2. It encourages interest in doctrine and history. I don’t know of any churches that have dropped the “Baptist” name that are strong on Baptist / Bible doctrine or Baptist distinctives. Most are weaker than dishwater on the topic!

3. The Baptist name is NOT a deterrent to evangelism or church growth. This is a strawman argument. In every region of the United States you can find churches with “Baptist” in their name that are growing and doing well in reaching people for Christ. The reason our Southern Baptist churches are not growing is not their name, but the lack of prayer, evangelism, biblical preaching, etc. in our churches.

4. It is less confusing. What are the popular names that Southern Baptist churches are using today? Cross Point, Hope Church, Cross Roads, Eagles Church, etc. Now you have Assemblies of God, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutherans, etc. using those same names. How are you supposed to know what that church believes?

Saturday, July 14, 2018

Hazelelponi is remembered

The unusual and intriguing name Hazelelponi occurs just one time in the Bible, in 1 Chronicles 4:3: And these were of the father of Etam; Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash: and the name of their sister was Hazelelponi.

We barely know who she was. We know she was a descendant of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob, of the tribe of Judah, the daughter of Etam, sister of Jezreel, Ishma, and Idbash. That’s all.

We are not sure what her name means. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon says it means “give shade, thou that turnest to me.” Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has “the shadow looking at me.” Hitchcock’s Bible Names Dictionary has “sorrow of countenance.” All the Women of the Bible says it means either “Deliver me, O God who regardest me,” or “the deliverance of the God who regardeth me.” The “authorities” do not agree.

We are sure that God remembers her. We are sure because his word mentions her. We are sure because of the nature of God. The Lord knows all things. The Lord knoweth them that are his, and the very hairs of your head are all numbered. It is encouraging to find these little reminders of God knowing the otherwise unknown, and God remembering the otherwise unremembered.

Tuesday, June 06, 2017

LORD, Lord and lord

Question: Why is the word Lord printed in different ways in the Bible? For example, Psalm 38:15 says, “For in thee, O Lord, do I hope: thou wilt hear, O Lord my God.” The first appearance is in capitals and the second starts with a capital letter followed by small letters. What is the reason for this?

Answer: The passage in Psalm 38:15 uses two print styles, but the Bible actually distinguishes the English word “lord” in three different ways. Sometimes it is in “small caps” or all capital letters (Lord or LORD).[i] Sometimes only the first letter is capitalized (Lord). Sometimes all letters are lowercase (lord). Isaiah 19:4 is one verse that uses all three. “And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts.” [bold emphasis mine]

The first “lord” in Isaiah 19:4 is a translation of adon, as well as the second “Lord.” The all lowercase spelling “lord” is used of a human lord/master/ruler. “Lord” beginning with a capital letter denotes the use of adon or adonai in reference to God. The third use of “Lord” in Isaiah 19:4 is a translation of the Hebrew word YHWH/Yahweh/ JHVH/Jehovah. So in Psalm 38:15 we have, “For in thee, O Lord [JHVH], do I hope: thou wilt hear, O Lord [Adonai] my God [Elohim].”[ii] In Isaiah 19:4 we have “And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord [Adon] ; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord [Adon], the Lord [JHVH] of hosts.”

This original language name in Isaiah 19:4 can be illustrated with The Names of God Bible (© 2011 by Baker Publishing Group). It transliterates[iii] “the Lord, the Lord of hosts” as “Adonay Yahweh Tsebaoth.”

So the general rule of usage in the Old Testament is:
  • lord (all lowercase) – a human master or ruler
  • Lord (capital followed by lowercase) – the divine master or ruler, God
  • Lord (small caps or uppercase) – God, translating his name Jehovah or Yahweh (or the shortened form Jah or Yah)
Disclaimer: This is a general rule, but there are exceptions to the rule.

History
The name “Tetragrammaton” (four letters) refers to the four Hebrew letters יהוה‎ name for God,[iv] now most commonly transliterated into Latin letters as YHWH. According to Jewish practice the Tetragrammaton was not pronounced but read aloud as Adonai or Elohim. This practice was transferred into translations of the Bible, and hence our English typography Lord was generally used to designate the Tetragrammaton, i.e. JHVH or Jehovah. There are a few exceptions that necessitated its use – in English (usually) as “Jehovah.”[v] The King James Bible has 4 such exceptions (Exodus 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2, and Isaiah 26:4).[vi]

Usage
According to The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon[vii] at Bible Study Tools, King James Bible word usage of YHWH totals 6519 – Lord 6510, God 4, JEHOVAH 4,[viii] variant 1.

According to The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon at Bible Study Tools, King James Bible word usage of Jah/Yah (a shortened form of YHWH/Jehovah) totals 49 – Lord 48, JAH 1.

According to The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon at Bible Study Tools, King James Bible word usage of adonai totals 434 – Lord 431, lord 2, God 1.

According to The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon at Bible Study Tools, King James Bible word usage of adon totals 335 – lord 197, master(s) 105, Lord 31, owner 1, sir 1.

New Testament

The common words in the New Testament are Lord for kurios (κυρίος) and God for theos (θεὸς).

I hope this helps, and I hope the small caps formatting turns out OK on the blog!


[i] This may vary according to the printer – especially for individuals – but the usual print style is what is called “small caps”. Small caps typography (small capitals) is short uppercase/capital letters designed to substitute for and blend with lowercase text. In the practice of spelling Lord in the Bible, this begins with one full uppercase or capital letter (L), followed by three “small caps” (ord). Printers unable to use small caps typography will use all capitals instead (LORD).
[ii] In the Old Testament when “God” is used, it is usually (though not always) a translation of the Hebrew word “Elohim.”
[iii] Transliterate: to change (letters, words, etc.) into corresponding characters of another alphabet or language.
[iv] Jod (י), He (ה), Vau (ו), He (ה) in the King James Bible – see Psalm 119 headings for the transliteration of the letters.
[v] It has been transferred into English as Jehovah, Yahweh, Yehowah, and various other ways.
[vi] Isaiah 26:4 Trust ye in the Lord for ever: for in the Lord [JAH] JEHOVAH [YHWH] is everlasting strength:
[vii] The Hebrew lexicon is Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon.
[viii] Not counting the cases in Genesis 22:14, Exodus 17:15 and Judges 6:24.

Monday, November 28, 2016

Traveling through Texas - Ambiguous Appellations

Whacky Texas county and place names

When you arrive in Burleson, you won’t be in Burleson County. You’ll have to go to Caldwell to be there. But if you want to be in Caldwell County, you’ll need to go to Lockhart! Texas is a big place, and we have our “normal” names, where city and county names match -- like Goliad in Goliad County, Nacogdoches in Nacogdoches County and Refugio in Refugio County, or Brownwood in Brown County, Floydada in Floyd County and Jacksboro in Jack County. On the other hand, we failed many times to get the right city in the right county! For examples:
  • Athens is a city in Henderson County, Texas, while Henderson is in Rusk County, and Rusk is in Cherokee County.
  • Beaumont is in Jefferson County, while Jefferson is in Marion County, and Marion is in Guadalupe County.
  • Bellville is in Austin County, while Austin in Travis County, and Travis is in Falls County.
  • Brownsville is in Cameron County, while Cameron is in Milam County, and Milam is in Sabine County.
  • Lockhart is in Caldwell County, while Caldwell is in Burleson County, and Burleson is in Johnson County.
  • Ozona is in Crockett County, while Crockett is in Houston County, and Houston is in Harris County.
  • Plains is in Yoakum County, while Yoakum is in Lavaca County, and Lavaca (now Port Lavaca) is in Calhoun County.
  • Sonora is in Sutton County, while Sutton is in Robertson County, and Robertson is in Jasper County.
  • Woodville is in Tyler County, while Tyler in Smith County, and Smith is in Wood County.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

About the title Reverend

ABOUT THE TITLE REVEREND
by J. F. Manning

"When Methodists want to justify infant baptism, they say the Bible does not forbid it. Such logic is common to Methodists, who would have thought Baptists would resort to it.

"We should not use the title “reverend” in addressing our ministers. Reverence for one another is a virtue to be cultivated. But we are nowhere, by precept or example, warranted in God’s word in calling anyone “reverend” as a title, or for any other purpose. (Some) say we are not forbidden to use it. The Methodists say we are not forbidden to sprinkle infants. Some use exactly the same logic as the Methodists.

"The New Testament clearly teaches that the preachers were called elders. If we want to follow the New Testament, we must discard the old Romish and Pedobaptist practice of calling our preachers “reverend” and call them elders.

"If others want to call them “reverend,” “the right reverend,” “the most reverend,” “holy papa,” “holy father,” or whatever man-made title they choose, they have a legal right to do so. But please excuse me. We do not have to use such titles to show reverence."

From The Baptist Progress, July 21, 1938 as reprinted in The Baptist Waymark, Vol. II No. 7 March-April 1992

Sunday, August 15, 2010

The Antidote of death

The vital savour of His name
Restores our fainting breath;
Believing, we rejoice in Him,
The Antidote of death.


Isaac Watts (stanza 3 of "The Different Success of the Gospel", beginning "Christ and His cross is all our theme")

Saturday, July 19, 2008

What a difference a day makes

Most popular boy/girl baby names in 1950, according to the U.S. Social Security Administration:
1. James / Linda
2. Robert / Mary
3. John / Patricia
4. Michael / Barbara
5. David / Susan
6. William / Nancy
7. Richard / Deborah
8. Thomas / Sandra
9. Charles / Carol
10. Gary / Kathleen

Most popular boy/girl baby names in 2007, according to the U.S. Social Security Administration:

1. Jacob / Emily
2. Michael / Isabella
3. Ethan / Emma
4. Joshua / Ava
5. Daniel / Madison
6. Christopher / Sophia
7. Anthony / Olivia
8. William / Abigail
9. Matthew / Hannah
10. Andrew / Elizabeth

According to writer Jeanna Bryner, "Mary" was the top baby girl name from the 1880s into the 1950s; "John" consistently stayed among the top boy names during that same period. I'm not sure where "Sunday Rose" will fit into the list.

Monday, May 26, 2008

The name of Jesus

"How sweet the name of Jesus sounds in a believer's ear" is and has been a popular hymn of John Newton -- at least in the circles I travel in. I wouldn't been surprised if it is second only to his more widely known "Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound." We usually sing it with the tune "Ortonville" by Thomas Hastings.

Stephen Conte has been going through the
Olney Hymn book of Newton and Cowper, posting the hymns on the pb-mb forum. It is good and interesting to put these in context of their original settings. Newton associated this hymn with Song of Solomon 1:3 -- Your anointing oils are fragrant; your name is oil poured out; therefore virgins love you -- and titled it "The name of Jesus". [Olney Hymns, Book 1, No. 57, common meter]

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Not reading the names

In my Bible, three pages before the beginning of the book of Genesis, there is a page title "Key to Pronunciation". The information on this page explains the diacritical marks found in this King James Wide Margin Bible printed by World Publishers. It begins, "Every reader of the Bible has found the proper names very difficult to pronounce." Yes, join the crowd. We're all in the same boat. The names -- especially the Hebrew ones and most especially the loooong Hebrew ones that don't look like anything we English have ever seen -- are hard to read and pronounce. OK, so we start out sailing along in the same boat. What separates us? Different solutions to this age-old problem.

(1) Don't read the names. For example, "Number 13:3-16 -- And Moses by the commandment of the LORD sent them from the wilderness of Paran: all those men were heads of the children of Israel. These names I can't read are the names of the men which Moses sent to spy out the land." I've noticed this seems to be a popular new development. In the past I can recall plenty of comments on the difficulty of reading the names, but these folks generally opted to...
(2) Muddle through the reading of the names. The person reading the Bible attempts to read the names, at least calling out sounds he thinks may be vaguely similar to how the name looks. This seems better than the above, but not as good as when we...
(3) Learn to read and pronounce the names. Most folks of average intelligence are capable of learning to read and pronounce Bible names, and become at least reasonably proficient. And if you don't get them all exactly right, just who will know anyway!! ;-D

In my opinion, the third option is a solution of integrity. It respects the fact that God both inspired and preserved those "hard to read" names in His holy word. I don't mean to imply that those who take the first option intend disrespect of inspiration. They may be trying to emphasize their own unscholarliness. I'm not any smarter than the average Joe. Sometimes my eyes cross and tongue tangles when I encounter unusual Bible names. But if we believe the words of the Bible are inspired of God*, shouldn't acknowledging that inspiration cause us to try to read and pronounce Bible names? And wouldn't even a stumbling attempt show more respect than a
"Reader's Digest" version that leaves out altogether verses and sections of the Bible?

* "The Bible is a lean book. There is no filler material in it. Every word of every book is important for our spiritual development. It is all good and it is all needed." -- David Robinson, Sow to the Wind -- Reap the Whirlwind (p. 19 Adult Quarterly, Fall 2007, B.S.S.C., Texarkana, TX)

Thursday, September 06, 2007

The names and titles of Christ

The names and titles of Christ (from several scriptures). L. M.

'Tis from the treasures of his word
I borrow titles for my Lord;
Nor art nor nature can supply
Sufficient forms of majesty.

Bright image of the Father's face,
Shining with undiminished rays;
Th' eternal God's eternal Son,
The heir and partner of his throne.

The King of kings, the Lord most high,
Writes his own name upon his thigh
He wears a garment dipped in blood,
And breaks the nations with his rod.

Where grace can neither melt nor move,
The Lamb resents his injured love;
Awakes his wrath without delay,
And Judah's Lion tears the prey.

But when for works of peace he comes,
What winning titles he assumes!
Light of the world, and Life of men;
Nor bears those characters in vain.

With tender pity in his heart,
He acts the Mediator's part;
A Friend and Brother he appears,
And well fulfils the names he wears.

At length the Judge his throne ascends,
Divides the rebels from his friends,
And saints in full fruition prove
His rich variety of love.


Isaac Watts (1674-1748)
Hymns and Spiritual Songs, 1707.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Goodwill Baptists

In Let's Use a New Modifier in a New Century to Describe Baptists, an article on EthicsDaily.com, Robert Parham suggests a new name, or modifier, for moderate Baptists -- Goodwill Baptists. I have my doubts that it will catch on.

In suggesting the name "Goodwill" as a modifier or descriptor of "moderate" Baptists, does Brother Parham suggest that Baptists who are not moderates are "Badwill" Baptists, or Baptists of ill will? I know not Robert Parham's motive, but I have read enough moderates on the internet to know that at least some moderates think that conservatives, fundamentalists, hardshells, landmarkers, and non-cooperative Baptists are vicious and mean-spirited. No doubt some of us can be. Do not be fooled, though. Behind their "goodwill", some of the moderates can be "just as mean" as us, for example, calling SBC conservatives "virus-infected detractors", or referring to the death of Jerry Falwell as the reason for "the lovely lack of humidity (hot air) today..." We'd probably better leave off what they call hardshells and landmarkers! ;-D


It seems to be an oft-used debate tactic to attack the person rather than respond to and/or differ with the substance of the person's position. It would be better for us to assume the other person's motive is honorable and they really do sincerely believe what they believe, unless proven otherwise. That seems like goodwill to me.

Update: In Why Does the SBC President Think Jesus' Agenda Is Liberal?, a "Goodwill Baptist" suggests that the SBC's non-participation in the New Baptist Covenant indicates racism, politics, and nursing old wounds: "I hope that they will set aside racial prejudice, secular political loyalties and hurt feelings, attending what will be a celebration of a new day for all Baptists in North America." So much for Goodwill, I suppose.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Kinds of Baptists

Some comments re the Baptist Name Tags blog made me consider posting my list of Baptists in the United States. First, though, here is a little background that may help build a foundation for understanding some of the differences among Baptists in the United States.

The major source of origin of Baptists in America is the Baptists of the British Isles. These Baptists fell into two basic categories: (1) General Baptists and (2) Particular Baptists. The General Baptists held that Christ's atonement was in general for all men predicated upon their repentance and faith. The Particular Baptists held that Christ's atonement was in particular for only those elected by God to salvation. Both kinds of British Baptists came to America and established churches, thus forming General and Particular Baptists in what would become the United States.

Two early controversies among Baptists in America were the laying on of hands (after baptism), and the seventh day sabbath versus the first day of the week. This created two more kinds of Baptists - the Six-Principle Baptists (in favor of laying on of hands as an ordinance) and the Seventh Day Baptists (in favor of the Sabbath). The Particular Baptists came to predominate the Baptist scene, especially through the influence of the Philadelphia Baptist Association. They increasingly became more often known as Regular Baptists. The General Baptists became almost extinct. The element of them that survived in the South later became known as Free Will Baptists (the present day General Association of General Baptists came from Benoni Stinson and other Regular Baptists who adopted the general atonement position). In the North, there was a strong Free Baptist movement that came out of the Regulars, and flourished in New England. Most of these New England Free Baptists would in the early 1900's become part of the Northern Baptist Convention (now ABCUSA), though a few became part of the National Association of Free Will Baptists.

The Great Awakening led to an influx to the Baptists of people that held some positions not common with the Regulars. They were identified as Separates. Most of the Separates and Regulars set aside their differences and united around 1800, and agreed to be called United Baptists. But the great push for missionary and benevolent societies, theological seminaries, and other such movements soon brought dissension among the "United" Baptists, and this dissension brought division. Those in favor of these movements were in the majority and generally continued to be called Regulars or United, though they were called Missionaries by their opponents. Those who looked on these movements as unbiblical innovations, often called Regulars, came to call themselves the Primitive (meaning original) Baptists.

Upon the heels of this missionary/anti-missionary division, the Regular (missionary) Baptists would again be divided, this time geographically. The Baptists were unable to withstand the political upheaval going on in the nation over slavery and other sectional issues. This created the Northern and Southern Baptists (the Northern Baptists did not adopt that name or a convention system until early 1900; the SBC was organized in 1845). A few Baptist groups of today have a somewhat different background because of ethnic origin. This includes the National Baptist Conventions (African-American), the Baptist General Conference (Swedish), and the North American Baptist Conference (German).

These facts provide some background for the broad categories I will use in my blog tomorrow on "Baptist Groups in the USA". These catergories are are based on Albert W. Wardin's works and not original with me. Broadly, Baptists in the United States divided (1) theologically over the atonement; (2) geographically; (3) over means; and (4) by ethnicity. Then there are divisions within these broad categories, of which we shall see more tomorrow.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Baptist "Name-Tags" - Are They Helpful?

Often the question is asked - Which Baptist are you? I can't imagine asking John the Baptist what kind of Baptist he was. But, as they say, "We've come a long way, baby."

How helpful are Baptist "name-tags"? It seems that you and the one to whom you are speaking must have the same concept of the meaning of the names in order for them to be accurate and descriptive. Do the "name-tags" often used by Baptists (conservative, fundamental, historic, independent, landmark, liberal, missionary, moderate, primitive, reformed, regular, unaffiliated, etc.) have a narrow enough definition to convey an accurate meaning of what one really is? For example, to say one is "independent Baptist" among many of my acquaintances will conjure up the Hyles/Rice type of Baptist. Yet a number of "independent" Baptist churches with which I am familiar are "Primitive" Baptists - probably the almost exact opposite end of the spectrum. Even to say one is SBC, BBF, etc., while identifying with which body one is affiliated, probably does not really tell much about what the individual believes.

"Name-tags" -- Are they helpful? Are they confusing? Are they divisive? Are they necessary?

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Baptist "Name-Tags" - Are They Helpful?

Often the question is asked - "Which Baptist are you?" So someone responds, "I'm a ____ Baptist." Do we then know what that person believes?

How helpful are "name-tags"? It seems that you and the one to whom you are speaking must have the same concept of the meaning of the names in order for them to be helpful. Do the "name-tags" often used by Baptists (conservative, fundamental, historic, independent, landmark, liberal, missionary, moderate, primitive, reformed, regular, unaffiliated, etc.) have a narrow enough definition to convey an accurate meaning of what one really is? For example, to say one is "independent Baptist" among many of my acquaintances will conjure up the Hyles/Rice type of Baptist. Yet a number of "independent" Baptist churches with which I am familiar are "Primitive" Baptists - almost the exact opposite end of the spectrum. Even to say one is SBC, BBF, etc., while identifying with which body one is affiliated, probably does not really tell much about what the individual believes.

"Name-tags" -- What do you all think? Are they helpful? Are they confusing? Are they divisive?