Who is this Deity Named Yahweh?
Dr. Thomas M. Strouse
Emmanuel Baptist Theological Seminary
Newington, CT 06111
Introduction
The Psalmist David proclaimed, "O LORD our Lord, how
excellent is thy name in all the earth!" (Ps. 8:1). Certainly the
Lord's name is excellent, but what is this excellent name? Some state
dogmatically that the Hebrew tetragrammaton JHWH (hwhy)
was originally pronounced "Yahwe." Others say that it should be
rendered 'Iabe or 'Iao or Jaho. Orthodox Jews
substitute the word Ha-Shem ("The Name") into their commentaries to
avoid taking the name of the Lord in vain. The Masoretic Hebrew Text
behind the Authorized Version renders the vocalization of the
tetragrammaton as Jehovah (hA'hy>). This has
been the accepted pronunciation of JHWH for at least the last four hundred
years in the Western world. Scripture, translations, commentaries, prayer
books, theological works, hymns and Christians at large have utilized this
standardized pronunciation Jehovah. Yet recently in scholarly circles the
notion has been advanced that the pronunciation Jehovah should be replaced
with Yahweh. Is it important that believers know the correct vocalization
of the Lord's special Old Testament name? How will believers "sing
praise to the name of the LORD" (Ps. 7:17), if they do not know how to
pronounce it?
The History of the Pronunciation of JHWH
The traditional history for the pronunciation of the
name for JHWH assumes that the original correct pronunciation was lost, if
ever given. Some have claimed that God never inspired a pointed, vocalized
original Hebrew text. Others, building upon this initial view, have
posited that the Lord gave an oral tradition of vocalization for the
un-pointed consonantal text, but the vocalized pronunciation was lost. For
instance, Oehler stated, "The Jews maintain that the knowledge of the true
pronunciation of the name has been entirely lost since the destruction of
the temple." Josephus affirmed that the name was originally given to Moses
(cf. Ex. 3:14 ff.) and that he, Josephus, was not permitted to enunciate
it. Maimonides (AD 1135-1204) averred that the sacred name was pronounced
at blessings and by the high priest on the Day of Atonement during the
early years of the Second Temple, but later was exchanged for 'adonai
after the death of Simon the Just (3rd century BC).
The alleged loss of the proper pronunciation of JHWH
occurred because of one of several reasons, according to this common
historical account. 1) The Jews developed a superstitious fear of taking
the Lord's name in vain according to the warning of Ex. 20:7, and
consequently stopped pronouncing it. 2) These same Jews further
interpreted Lev. 24:16 to read "and he that nameth (Hebrew: blasphemeth)
the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death." Consequently,
according to this history, during the silent years until the coming of
Christ, Jews refused to pronounce the sacred name. This refusal among the
Jews continued until time of the Masoretes (c. AD 6th - 10th
century), who, having supposedly invented vowel pointing for the
traditional Hebrew text, substituted the vowels of 'adonai (yn"doa])
for the vocalization of JHWH, producing the popular, but "linguistically
impossible," Jehovah. Based on the practice of the LXX to render
JHWH by ho kurios ("the Lord"), the pre-Christian Jews and
ultimately the Masoretes placed the shewa of the hateph
pathach under the yodh (y>), the
cholem above the waw (A), and the
kamets beneath the waw (w"). The
Reformation theologians continued the practice of using the qeri
vowels of the Masoretic text for the kethiv consonants JHWH (the
so-called qeri perpetuum), popularizing the artificially "hybrid"
name Jehovah. To augment the veracity of this history, advocates appealed
to the laws of philology, showing that the prefix and suffix forms for
proper names based on JHWH (i.e., Yeho [Jehoshaphat], Yah
[Shephatiah]) demand Yahweh (hw<h.y:) as the proper
pronunciation. The German rationalist Heinrich Ewald (1803-1875) was the
first to popularize the form Jahve, followed by the eminent E. W.
Hengstenberg (1802-1869) promoting Jahveh.
In summary then, the best that critical scholars can
derive from history for the discovery of the pronunciation for the sacred
tetragrammaton JHWH is as follows. If God ever revealed the proper
vocalization of His OT name JHWH, the apostate Jews, from the Babylonian
captivity onward, lost this pronunciation. Believers therefore have not
known the true name of the Lord for about 2,600 years. However, with the
help of the LXX, the laws of philology, and the scholarship of
liberal German rationalism, the "true" vocalization Yahweh has been
recovered. Should believers be thankful that critical scholarship has
restored the proper vocalization of the name of JHWH that God chose not to
preserve? Is it true that Christians may now know that the proper
pronunciation of the OT name of the Deity they serve is Yahweh?
The Biblical Position on the Name of JHWH
It should be evident to those who believe God has
promised to preserve His Words perfect, and this preservation is in the
Masoretic Hebrew text and the Received Greek text, that this history
contradicts Scriptural promises and is therefore un-biblical and
consequently contrived. The Lord has promised to preserve all of His
inspired, canonical Words through His ordained institutions for all
generations subsequent to the inscripturation of these Words. Therefore,
He has preserved His OT Words, consonants and vowels, jots and tittles,
including the inspired vocalization of His name, the tetragrammaton.
Since the Lord God has preserved the proper pronunciation of JHWH,
scholars have no need to restore their vocalization of it, and, as
history, philology, and critical scholarship have demonstrated, they are
incapable of restoring authoritatively the pronunciation of JHWH.
The Scriptural Promises of Plenary Verbal Preservation
The Bible is replete with the teaching that God will
perfectly preserve His Words. This teaching then constitutes the doctrine
of the verbal, plenary preservation of the Words of God. Several passages
from the OT Scripture promise the preservation of the Words of the Lord
forever. Although one reference is sufficient to establish the doctrinal
truth of the preservation of the Words of the Lord, a selective few
additionally clinch the clear Biblical position. The Psalter gives these
references for this doctrine: Pss. 12:6-7; 119:111, 160, et al. In
addition, Prov. 22:20-21 and Isa. 40:6 make the same claim for perfect
Words preservation.
In the NT, the Lord Jesus Christ claimed the perfectly
intact Hebrew OT Words (Mt. 4:4), the preservation of the consonants and
vowels of Hebrew Words (Mt. 5:18), and the perfect preservation of all of
His canonical words including the NT Words (Mt. 24:35). The Scriptures
also teach the respective agencies which God promised to use for His
preservation process. For the OT Scriptures, His agency was the Jewish
nation (Rom. 3:2) and for the NT Scriptures, He promised to use the pillar
and ground of the truth--the NT churches (I Tim. 3:15). In fact, bound up
in the great Commission is the requirement of the churches to observe or
guard His canonical Words (Mt. 28:19-20). The Lord's people, in their
respective agencies, have the sole responsibility to preserve for their
generation and following the Words of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The Deficiency of History, Philology and Critical
Scholarship
In rejecting the preserved Words of Scripture,
including the inspired vowel pointing for JHWH, critical scholars are left
with several non-authoritative means to attempt to discern the "correct"
vocalization of the Lord's tetragrammaton. These means are
historical documentation, comparative philology, and rationalism.
History
Bible history indicates that believers and unbelievers
did not have "the dread of uttering The Name" of the Lord. From the first
writer of Scripture to the last, OT saints pronounced the name of Jehovah.
The first writer of the OT canon, Job, referred to "the hand of the
LORD" in the affairs of man (Job 12:9). Moses, upon writing Genesis,
initially referred to the LORD God as creator of the earth and the heavens
in Gen. 2:4. Later, Moses began to express the name of Jehovah to the Lord
and to others (Ex. 4:1; 5:1). About a thousand years later Nehemiah
expressed the LORD's name in his prayer (Neh. 1:5) as did Ezra in his
preaching (Neh. 8:9). The last book of the Tanak records the name
of Jehovah (II Chron. 36:23) as well as the last book of the prophets
(Mal. 4:5). Furthermore, unbelieving Gentiles mentioned the vocalized
tetragrammaton in their conversations without fear of punishment by
death. Ranging from Pharaoh to Rahab to Cyrus, these goyim
pronounced Jehovah's name without dread and suffered no ill affects (cf.
Ex. 9:27; Josh. 2:9; Ezra 1:2). This survey of the period of Biblical
history (22nd to 5th century BC ) indicates that no
saint or sinner, Jew or Gentile, from beginning to end, ever expressed
dread to pronounce the tetragrammaton or suffered death as its
consequence.
The history of this "dread" must have commenced during
the silent years (the four centuries before Christ's first advent) while
Judaism continued to apostatize. The testimony of unbelieving Jews, such
as Josephus or Maimonides, and fallible patristics such as Origen,
Eusebius, and Theodoret, suggesting that the vocalization was lost among
all the Jewry for sacred reasons must be debunked. These non-authoritative
historians have passed on their surmisings of the traditions of apostates.
Maimonides' speculation that the vowels for 'adonai were
substituted for the tetragrammaton is just that--non-authoritative
speculation. There is no historical documentation for this popular but
fanciful conjecture.
That this conjecture is strengthened by the supposed
existence of a pre-Christian LXX which translated the
tetragrammaton with ho kurios and approved of the 'adonai
pointing for JHWH is based on unproved assumptions. There is no credible
history for the origin of the LXX, and the Bible does not teach
that Christ and the Apostles ever used the LXX or had need to use
it. If there was a pre-Christian LXX it is not extant except in the
hybrid form of three different "LXX" translations in Origen's
Hexapla. The Lord Jesus Christ declared that the Hebrew text was
perfectly intact in His day (Mt. 4:4), the jots and tittles were preserved
(Mt. 5:18), and the three-fold Tanak division of the Hebrew OT was
in use (cf. Lk. 11:50-51; 24:44). Neither He nor His disciples attempted
to evangelize Gentiles with the Greek OT Scriptures. They used the Hebrew
OT with the Jews and their inspired Greek statements and messages, as
recorded in the canonical Scriptures, with the Gentiles (cf. Mt. 15:21
ff.; Acts 2:42, etc.). The best that history can demonstrate is that some
Jews, apparently apostates, had a dread for pronouncing the Lord's name
and may have justified re-pointing JHWH with the use of a Greek
translation. This history however, is inadequate for overturning the
pointing of JHWH as it is preserved in the Masoretic text.
Philology
Philology is the study of words, and is foundational to
the study of grammar, which includes linguistic phenomena and their
origin. Modern philology is based on evolutionary principles, including
the evolution of the Hebrew language and the need for the practice of
textual criticism since God allegedly did not preserve His words. However,
the preserved OT words must constitute the basis for Hebrew grammar as
divine revelation, since scientific and comparative linguistics are not
authoritative and therefore fallible. For example, M'Clintock and Strong
argue that JHWH comes from the hayah (= hawah) "to be" verb
and consequently the middle radical may not take the cholem, thus
ruling out the Jehovah pronunciation. However, this is an effort to make
the science of linguistics authoritative over divine revelation and
ignores the fact that the tetragrammaton is the unique revealed
name of God (cf. Ex. 6:3).
Furthermore, the aforementioned authors insisted that
the Greeks would have pronounced JHWH as Jao, treating the two He
consonants as silent letters, placing an alpha after the iota
and substituting the omicron for the waw. Gehman favored
extra-biblical sources as well, stating, "There was also in the coastal
Plain and in part of Galilee a dialect pronunciation Yeu from
Yehu, a form derived by dissimulation from Phoenician Yohu from
Yahu. The Yahweh pronunciation is also favored by Greek
transcriptions: Iabe, Iaoue, Iaouai, Iae." In this case, looking to
extra-biblical grammatical guidance is an attempt to make comparative
linguistics authoritative over the preserved vowel pointing the received
Hebrew text.
In the classic passage for the presentation of the
special name of JHWH, the LORD punned on the hayah verb with His
name (Ex. 3:13-15). The Lord God gave His name as a denominative with the
jodh prefixed and special, unique pointing. As the NT confirms, He
did not give Moses the Qal imperfect of hayah, which would
be Yihyeh ("he shall be"). In Jn. 8:58, the Lord Jesus Christ
declared "before Abraham was, I am" (ego eimi), emphasizing
His interpretation of the unique Hebrew pointing for Jehovah. Philology
which rejects the divine preservation of Hebrew pointing, words and
grammar, must instead rely upon evolutionary linguistic schemes and
extra-biblical comparisons for the vocalization of JHWH is deficient. It
produces the non-biblical and therefore non-authoritative vocalization
Yahweh and must be rejected by Christians.
Rationalism
The Scripture is clear about its own authority and
sufficiency. The Apostle Paul stated, "All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be
perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (II Timothy
3:16-17). The Lord God does not need man to recover what He allegedly
chose not to preserve, because He has indeed preserved all canonical
revelation He gave man. The doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration demands
the doctrine of verbal plenary preservation and the Bible teaches both
doctrines. Man's only responsibility is to receive by faith God's written
revelation and then guard it for his respective generation. It is
ludicrous then, for critical scholarship to attempt to restore and
reconstruct the text of the divinely written revelation, including the
vowel points for the tetragrammaton. As rationalistic scholarship
looks to historical documentation and philological techniques to determine
the "true" name of the Lord in the OT, it falls short because of its
initial rejection of the doctrines of inspiration and preservation. The
best that rationalistic scholarship can produce is the suggested
speculation, confirmed by liberal Bible scholarship, for the vocalization
of the tetragrammaton. Unregenerate Jews, catholic patristics, and
liberal scholars have all agreed that the best pointing for the
tetragrammaton should be something like Yahweh, and not Jehovah.
However, this rationalistic approach for vocalizing the name of the LORD
is Biblically deficient and spiritually unsatisfactory for the Bible
believer.
Rationalists have rejected the teaching of the
preserved vocalization for JHWH because they have rejected the teaching
that the preserved OT Scriptures have been preserved through the Masoretic
text. For instance, E. Wurthwein reasoned that the main criterion for
discovering the OT text must be the history of the transmission of the
text. However, he did not look to biblical history that gives theological
grounding for the transmission of the text, but instead considered
religious history. He maintained that three text types representing the OT
text emerged at Qumran, namely the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX
and the Masoretic text. How this could be, however, he could not answer
reasonably. Wurthwein cited F. M. Cross, who stated, "The ground is not
yet sure, and many missteps will be taken before sure results can be hoped
for." Although others suggest a pre-sixth century AD "Masoretic" text,
they do not look to Scripture for this "faith" position as expressed by
the Lord Jesus Christ (Mt. 4:4). For instance, B. J. Roberts affirmed the
"likely existence of a pre-Massoretic 'Massoretic' text." The student of
the Bible knows that there was a pre-Masoretic Hebrew text and a
pre-Textus Receptus Greek text based on the promises of God, and not on
the skills of the Masoretes or Erasmus. These "pre" texts are the
preserved texts of the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT.
The Name Jehovah in the OT
The preserved vocalization of JHWH is Jehovah as
represented by the Masoretic Hebrew text. The Authorized Version (1611)
and the American Standard Version (1901) translate the tetragrammaton
as LORD and the Hebrew name 'adonay as Lord, differentiating the
two Hebrew words. The AV transliterates JHWH in Ex. 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Isa.
12:2 and 26:4 as JEHOVAH, with the last two references reading literally
Jah Jehovah. David's reference to Jah is transliterated JAH in Ps.
68:4. The writers of Scripture coupled both Jehovah and Jah with 'elohim
(God) in various places throughout the OT (cf. Gen. 2:4 and Ps. 68:18,
respectively). The translators of the AV have given English speaking
people a consistent presentation and biblical understanding of the
vocalized tetragrammaton Jehovah.
Conclusion
Do Christians worship and serve a God named Yahweh? If
God has not preserved His words including the vowel pointing of the
tetragrammaton, and critical scholars have restored His name through
historical documentation, philology, and rationalism, then the answer is
in the affirmative. However, since none of the aforementioned is
Scripturally valid or authoritative, then believers do not know how to
pronounce the name of the Lord unless they receive by faith the preserved
vocalization found in the Masoretic Hebrew text. Christians do not know or
worship a god named Yahweh, but instead believers do know and worship the
God Jehovah. Believers have the assurance that "His name shall endure
forever" (Ps. 72:17), which name is "the LORD God" (v. 18).
|
