YHWH in the New Testament:
This article is a English version of a Italian article published
on the catholic magazine, edited from Dehonian friars, "Rivista Biblica", year
XLV, n. 2, April-June 1997, p. 183-186. Bologna, Italy.
For a long time it was thought that the divine Tetragrammaton
YHWH, in Hebrew written with the letters YHWH (which recurs over 6800 times in
the Hebrew text of the Old Testament) did not appear in the original writings of
the New Testament. In its place it was thought that the writers of the New
Testament had used the Greek word for LORD, KYRIOS. However, it seems that such
an opinion is wrong. Here below are some factors to consider:
1) The Tetragrammaton in the Greek Version of Old Testament, the Septuagint
(LXX).
One of the reasons produced to support the above mentioned opinion was that the
LXX substituted YHWH (YHWH) with the term KYRIOS, (kurios) which was the
equivalent Greek of the Hebrew word ADONAY used by some Hebrews when they met
the Tetragrammaton during the Bible reading.
However, recent discoveries have shown that the practice of substituted in the
LXX YHWH with KYRIOS started in a much later period in comparison with the
beginning of that version. As a matter of fact, the older copies of the LXX keep
the Tetragrammaton written in Hebrew characters in the Greek text. (See App. 1)
Girolamo, the translator of the Latin Vulgate confirms this fact. In the
prologue of the books of Samuel and Kings he wrote: "In certain Greek volumes we
still find the Tetragrammaton of God's name expressed in ancient characters".
And in a letter written in Rome in the year 384 it says: "God's name is made up
of four letters; it was thought ineffable, and it is written with these letters:
iod, he, vau, he (YHWH). But some have not been able to decipher it because of
the resemblance of the Greek letters and when they found it in Greek books they
usually read it PIPI (pipi)". S. Girolamo, Le Lettere, Rome, 1961, vol.1,
pp.237, 238; compare J.P.Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol.22, coll.429, 430.
Around 245 C.E., the noted scholar Origen produced his Hexapla, a six-column
reproduction of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures: (1) in their original Hebrew and
Aramaic, accompanied by (2) a transliteration into Greek, and by the Greek
versions of (3) Aquila, (4) Symmachus, (5) the Septuagint, and (6) Theodotion.
On the evidence of the fragmentary copies now known, Professor W. G. Waddell
says: "In Origen's Hexapla . . . the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and
LXX all represented JHWH by PIPI; in the second column of the Hexapla the
Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew characters." - The Journal of Theological
Studies, Oxford, Vol. XLV, 1944, pp. 158, 159. Others believe the original text
of Origen's Hexapla used Hebrew characters for the Tetragrammaton in all its
columns. Origen himself stated that "in the most accurate manuscripts THE NAME
occurs in Hebrew characters, yet not in today's Hebrew [characters], but in the
most ancient ones".
A biblical magazine declare: "In pre-Christian Greek [manuscripts] of the OT,
the divine name was not rendered by 'kyrios' as has often been thought. Usually
the Tetragram was written out in Aramaic or in paleo-Hebrew letters. . . . At a
later time, surrogates such as 'theos' [God] and 'kyrios' replaced the Tetragram
. . . There is good reason to believe that a similar pattern evolved in the NT,
i.e. the divine name was originally written in the NT quotations of and
allusions to the OT, but in the course of time it was replaced by surrogates". -
New Testament Abstracts, March 1977, p. 306.
Wolfgang Feneberg comments in the Jesuit magazine Entschluss/Offen (April 1985):
"He [Jesus] did not withhold his father's name YHWH from us, but he entrusted us
with it. It is otherwise inexplicable why the first petition of the Lord's
Prayer should read: 'May your name be sanctified!'" Feneberg further notes that
"in pre-Christian manuscripts for Greek-speaking Jews, God's name was not
paraphrased with kýrios [Lord], but was written in the tetragram form in Hebrew
or archaic Hebrew characters. . . . We find recollections of the name in the
writings of the Church Fathers".
Dr. P.Kahle says: "We now know that the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far
as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine name by kyrios,
but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such
MSS [manuscripts]. It was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by
kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood any
more". - The Cairo Geniza, Oxford, 1959, p. 222.
Further confirmation comes from The New International Dictionary of New Testament
Theology, that says: "Recently discovered texts doubt the idea that the
translators of the LXX have rendered the Tetragrammaton JHWH with KYRIOS. The
most ancient mss (manuscripts) of the LXX today available have the
Tetragrammaton written in Hebrew letters in the Greek text. This was custom
preserved by the later Hebrew translator of the Old Testament in the first
centuries (after Christ)". Vol.2, pag.512.
Consequently, we can easily deduce that if the writers of NT in their quotations
of the OT used the LXX they would surely have left the Tetragrammaton in their
writings the way it recurred in the Greek version of the OT. To confirm the
correctness of this conclusion it is interesting to note the following
declaration made before the finding of the manuscripts proving that the LXX
originaly continued the Tetragrammaton:
"If that version (LXX) would have kept the term (YHWH), or had used the Greek
term for JEHOVAH and another for ADONAY, such a use would have surely been
followed in the discourses and in the reasonings of the NT. Therefore our Lord,
in quoting the 110th Psalms, insteand of saying: 'The LORD has said to my LORD'
could have said: "JEHOVA has said to ADONI". Supposing that a Christian student
was translating in Hebrew the Greek Testament: every time that he met the word KYRIOS, he should have had to consider if in the context there was something
that indicated the true Hebrew correspondent; and this is the difficulty that
would have arisen in translating the NT in whatever language if the name JEHOVAH
would have been left in the Old Testament (LXX). The Hebrew scriptures would
have constituted a standard for many passages: every time that the expression
"the LORD's angel" recurs, we know that the term LORD represents JEHOVA; we
could come to a similar conclusion for the expression "the LORD's word",
according to the precedent established in the OT; and so it is in the case of
the name "the LORD of armies". On the contrary, when the expression "my LORD" or
"our LORD" recurs, we should know that the term JEHOVA would be
inadmissible,
when instead the words ADONAY or ADONI should be used". R.B.Girdlestone,
Synonyms of the Old Testament, 1897, p.43.
For a stronger support of this argument there are the words of the professor
George Howard, of the University of Georgia (U.S.A.) who observes: "When the
Septuagint Version that the New Testament Church used and quoted, contained
the Divine Name in Hebrew characters, the writers of the New Testament included
without doubt the Tetragrammaton in their quotations". Biblical Archeology
Review, March 1978, p.14.
Consequently several translators of the NT have left the Divine Name in the
quotations from the OT made by the New Testament writers. It can be noted, for
example the versions of Benjamin Wilson, of Andrč Chouraqui, of Johann Jakob
Stolz, of Hermann Heinfetter,in Efik, Ewe, Malgascio and Alghonchin languages.
2)The Tetragrammaton in Hebrew version of the NT.
As many know, the first book of the NT, the gospel of Matthew was written in
Hebrew. The proof of this is found in the work of Girolamo De viris inlustribus,
chap. 3, where he writes:
"Matthew, that is also Levi, that became an apostle after having been a tax
collector, was the first to write a Gospel of Christ in Judea in the Hebrew
language and Hebrew characters, for the benefit of those who where circumcised
that had believed. It's not know with enough certainly who had then translated
it in Greek. However the Hebrew one it self is preserved till this day in the
Library at Cesarea, that the martyr Pamphilus collected so accurately. The
Nazarenes of the Syrian city of Berea that use this copy have also allowed me to
copy it". From the Latin text edited by E.C.Richardson, published in the series
Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschicte der altchristlichen Literatur, vol.14,
Lipsia, 1986, pp.8,9.
External evidence to the effect that Matthew originally wrote this Gospel in
Hebrew reaches as far back as Papias of Hierapolis, of the second century a.C.
Eusebius quoted Papias as stating: "Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew
language". - The Ecclesiastical History, III, XXXIX, 16. Early in the third
century, Origen made reference to Matthew's account and, in discussing the four
Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the "first was written . . .
according to Matthew, who was once a tax-collector but afterwards an apostle of
Jesus Christ, . . . in the Hebrew language". - The Ecclesiastical History, VI,
XXV, 3-6.
Was this really Aramaic? Not according to documents mentioned by George Howard.
He wrote: "This supposition was due primarily to the belief that Hebrew in the
days of Jesus was no longer in use in Palestine but had been replaced by
Aramaic. The subsequent discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, many of which are
Hebrew compositions, as well as of other Hebrew documents from Palestine from
the general time period of Jesus, now show Hebrew to have been alive and well in
the first century".
It is therefore natural to conclude that when Matthew quoted passages from the
OT in which the Tetragrammaton appeared (thing that occurred both in the Hebrew
OT and in the Greek one then available) he would have surely left YHWH in his
gospel as no Jew ever dared to take away the Tetragrammaton from the Hebrew text
of the Holy Scriptures.
To confirm this there are at least 27 Hebrew versions of the NT that present the
Tetragrammaton in the quotations of the OT or where the text requires it. (see
app.2) Three of these are the versions of F.Delitzsch, of I.Salkinson &
C.D.Ginsburg , of the United Bible Societies, ed.1991 and of Elias Hutter.
3) The Tetragrammaton in the Christian Scriptures according to the Babylonian
Talmud.
The first part of this Jewish work is called Shabbath (Sabbath) and it contains
an immense code of rules that establishes what could have been done of a
Sabbath. Part of it deals with if on the Sabbath day Biblical manuscripts could
be saved from the fire, and after it reads:
"The text declares: 'The white spaces ("gilyohnim") and the books of the Minim,
can't be saved from the fire'. Rabbi Jose said: 'On working days one must cut
out the Divine Names that are contained in the text, hide them and burn the
rest'. Rabbi Tarfon said: 'May I bury my son if I don't burn them together with
the Divine Names that they contain if I come across them". -From the English
translation of Dr. H.Freedman.
The word "Minim" means "sectarians" and according to Dr. Freedman it's very
probable that in this passage it indicates the Jewish-Christians. The expression
"the white spaces" translates the original "gilyohnim" and could have meant,
using the word ironically, that the writings of the "Minim where as worthy as a
blank scroll, namely nothing. In some dictionaries this word is given as
"Gospels". In harmony with this, the sentence that appears in the Talmud before
the above mentioned passage says: "The books of the Minim are like white spaces
(gilyohnim)."
So in the book Who was a Jew?, of L.H.Schiffman, the above mentioned passage of
the Talmud is translated: "We don't save the Gospels or the books of Minim from
the fire. They are burnt where they are, together with their Tetragrammatons.
Rabbi Yose Ha-Gelili says: "During the week one should take the Tetragrammatons
from them, hide them and burn the rest". Rabbi Tarfon said: 'May I bury my
children! If I would have them in my hands, I would burn them with all their
Tetragrammatons'". Dr. Schiffman continues reasoning that here "Minim" is
referred to Hebrew Christians.
And it's very probable that here the Talmud refers to the Hebrew Christians. It
is a supposition that finds agreement among the studious people, and in the
Talmud seems to be well supported by the context. In Shabbath the passage that
follows the above mentioned quotations relates a story, regarding Gamaliel and
Christian judge in which there is an allusion to parts of the Sermon on the
Mount. Therefore, this passage of the Talmud is a clear indication that the
Christians included the Tetragrammaton in their Gospel and their writings.
Because of all we have said there are valid reasons to assert that the writers
of the New Testament reported the Tetragrammaton in their divinely inspired
work.
Matteo Pierro Salita S. Giovanni 5, 84135 Salerno, ITALY. e-mail cdb@supereva.it
Appendix 1
List of LXX versions that have Tetragrammaton:
1) LXX P. Fouad Inv. 266.
2) LXX VTS 10a.
3) LXX IEJ 12.
4) LXX VTS 10b.
5) 4Q LXX Levb.
6) LXX P. Oxy. VII.1007.
7) Aq Burkitt.
8) Aq Taylor.
9) Sym. P. Vindob. G. 39777.
10) Ambrosiano O 39 sup.
Appendix 2
List of Hebrew versions of the NT that have the Tetragrammaton:
1) Gospel of Matthew, a cura di J. du Tillet, Parigi, 1555
2) Gospel of Matthew, di Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut, 1385
3) Matthew and Hebrews, di S. Munster, Basilea, 1537 e 1557
4) Gospel of Matthew, di J. Quinquarboreus, Parigi, 1551
5) Gospels, di F. Petri, Wittemberg, 1537
6) Gospels, di J. Claius, Lipsia, 1576
7) NT, di E. Hutter, Norimberga, 1599
8) NT, di W. Robertson, Londra, 1661
9) Gospels, di G. B. Jona, Roma, 1668
10) NT, di R. Caddick, Londra, 1798-1805
11) NT, di T. Fry, Londra, 1817
12) NT, di W. Greenfield, Londra, 1831
13) NT, di A. McCaul e altri, Londra, 1838
14) NT, di J. C. Reichardt, Londra, 1846
15) Luke, Acts, Romans and Hebrews, di J. H. R. Biesenthal, Berlino, 1855
16) NT, di J. C. Reichardt e J. H. R. Biesenthal, Londra, 1866
17) NT, di F. Delitzsch, Londra, ed.1981
18) NT, di I. Salkinson e C. D. Ginsburg, Londra, 1891
19) Gospel of John, di M. I. Ben Maeir, Denver, 1957
20) A Concordance to the Greek New Testament, di Moulton e Geden, 1963
21) NT, United Bibles Societies, Gerusalemme, 1979
22) NT, di J. Bauchet e D. Kinnereth, Roma, 1975
23) NT, di H. Heinfetter, Londra, 1863
24) Romans, di W. G. Rutherford, Londra, 1900
25) Psalms and Matthew, di A. Margaritha, Lipsia, 1533
26) NT, di Dominik von Brentano, Vienna e Praga, 1796
27) NT, Bible Society, Gerusalemme, 1986
Reviews
Matteo Pierro after his article about God's Name in New Testament appeared on
catholic magazine "Rivista Biblica" published a book about this subject. It is
in Italian language. You can see here a preview: http://utenti.tripod.it/matteopierro
To contact author: cdb@supereva.it
Here is some reviews about this book:
a)
GEOVA E IL NUOVO TESTAMENTO (Jehovah and The New Testament) Matteo Pierro (Sacchi
Editore Via Bonvesin de la Riva,8, 20027 Rescaldina [MI] Italy, 2000) 174pp.
Tel: 0331-57.76.28.
One intractable factoid that faces every Bible translator centers on what to do
with the regular appearance of the Divine Name in the Hebrew text. For those few
that read the Introduction or Preface of Bible translations ,invariably they
will see that there is comment on how this problem was addressed. In the popular
New International Version we discover: "In regard to the divine name YHWH,
commonly referred to as the Tetragrammaton, the translators adopted the device
used in most English versions of rendering that name as "LORD" in capital
letters to distinguish it from Adonai, another Hebrew word rendered "Lord" for
which small letters are used." The American Translation produced by renowned
scholars in the second decade of the 20th Century alerts the reader: "In this
translation we have followed the orthodox Jewish tradition and substituted 'the
Lord' for the name 'Yahweh' and the phrase 'the Lord God' for the phrase 'the
Lord Yahweh.'" Viewed from a broad perspective, the truth is that around the
world some translations render the Tetragrammaton as "Yahweh" or "Jehovah"
regularly or in a few instances and others completely replace the personal name
of God with a generic title like "Lord" or "God." Clearly, there has been an
ongoing inconsistency. But what about the place of the Tetragrammaton, the
personal name of God, in the New Testament? A small but increscent number of
scholars and critics are arguing that the personal name of God has a place in
the New Testament. Matteo Pierro is one of those and he diligently essays to
make his case in an attractively packaged work headed GEOVA E IL NUOVO
TESTAMENTO (Jehovah and The New Testament.)
The author is well aware of the scant manuscript evidence supporting his
conclusion but he demonstrates a solid knowledge of both sides of the issue and
critically analyzes the available data.
Pierro documents Jewish and Christian practices affecting the appearance and
disappearance of the Divine Name in Bible translations and copies in the
original languages. He reviews the debate over the Hebrew pronunciation of the
Divine Name. Careful attention is given to scholars who reject the pronunciation
"Yahweh" and cogently argue for a trisyllabic Divine Name. His survey of
evidences for the appearance of the Tetragrammaton in the New Testament includes
the testimony of the Talmud and interesting New Testament texts that only seem
to make sense if the Greek text's "Kurios" ("Lord") was really "Jehovah/Yahweh"
in the original Greek text.
The reader will be treated to a lengthy list of New Testament translations from
around the world that incorporate the Divine Name in their texts. A wide range
of scholarship is consulted and referenced. If you are fluent in Italian, I
recommend that you add this work to your "must read" list.
Hal Flemings Instructor in Hebrew Language San Diego Community College San
Diego, California
b)
Matteo Pierro's book "Geova e il Nuovo Testamento" (Jehovah and the New
Testament) is a bibliographic novelty worth of researchers' most serious
attention. Theonymy has been in the last three centuries a subject neglected by
most Christian theologians. Reformation and contra-reformation theological
disputes focused mainly on the surface level of the Scriptures, putting aside
esoteric aspects, such as theonymy and its mystical implications. Most
contemporary studies on theonymy are of laic nature, adopting a
scientific-historical approach. They usually regard the theonyms Elohim, YHWH
and others as denominations of different deities that eventually, out of
political reasons, merged into one. Such phenomena were usually the result of
tribal alliances, religious syncretism, etc. Of course, the
scientific-historical approach, no matter how tempting it might be, leaves the
religious aspects of the problem uncovered. The originality of Mr. Pierro's book
resides in the fact that it is one of the very few books written by a modern
Christian author that treats the problem of theonymy, mainly of the theonym YHWH,
from a religious and philological point of view.
By discussing the usage and importance of the Ineffable Name among early
Christians, Mr. Pierro brings to light new common elements shared by Judaism and
Christianity alike and opens new perspectives for interconfessional dialogue.
Unlike most modern specialists, Mr. Pierro considers that the Ineffable Name was
originally pronounced Yahowa and not Yahwe. The author's arguments are certainly
worth of the attention of specialists and might represent a contribution to the
solution of the problem: how was the Tetragrammaton pronounced?
Mr. Pierro analyses as well the causes that lead to the replacement of the
theonym YHWH by the theonym Kuvrio" (< ynado<á /adonay/) in early Christian
texts in Greek. A very tempting explanation, proposed in the book, is the
possible intention of the Christian Church to create a textual identity between
Kuvrio" (in Hebrew ynado<á /adonay/, literally "my Lords"), that referred to the
Christian God Father and the Jewish One God, and Kuvrio" (in Hebrew ynido<á /adoni/
"my lord", "my lordship" or in Aramaic yrima /mari/ with the same meaning), that
referred to Jesus of Nazareth.
Mr. Pierro's book is a fresh and important contribution in a field which, in
spite of its huge importance, has been neglected by most modern Christian
theologians. Mr. Pierro's book constitutes one of the few theological and
philological alternatives to the scientific-historical approach that has so far
predominated in the research of Christian theonymy, opening thus new
perspectives for interconfessional dialogue and for further and deeper
understanding of early Christianity.
Gustavo Adolfo Loria Rivel Romanian specialist on Biblical philology and
Balcanic linguistics. Born in San Jose, Costa Rica on June 27 1970. In 1996
received a degree in English and Latin by the "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University
from Iasi, Romania. Nowadays, doctorate student at the University of Iasi,
Romania, under the guidance of prof. Traian Diaconescu (the professor who
coordonates his doctorate). The subject of his doctorate thesis, to be presented
in 2002, is "Pentateuch: Problems of translation of the Biblical text". He have
participated in two International Congresses on Balcanistics: Piatra Neamt,
Romania (1995) and Constanta, Romania (1996). He have published on Balcanistics
mainly in the Thraco-Dacica Review of the Romanian Academy of Sciences and the "Anales"
of the "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iasi.