Name of God and John

The name of God is applied to Jesus in the gospel of John in the light of Scripture

I I Am in relation to Jesus
“I am” in its relative use
“I am” in it absolute use
“I am” in its uses as divinity
II Onoma in relation to Jesus
Onoma of the Father
Onoma of the Son
Onoma of the Father and the Son
II Yahwah in relation to Jesus by John
Yahwah as the name of the Father
Yahwah as the name of the Son


Introduction

The idea of Jesus being God has been disputed ever since Jesus came to earth. One of the greatest witnesses for the case of Jesus being God is that of the author of the gospel of John[1]. Felt almost unanimously to be written by John brother of James by the early Church witnesses, his position as author of the gospel has been challenged by many modern scholars.[2] Most scholars agree that the gospel was written by an eyewitness to the events of the life of Jesus and was then redacted by the later community in being brought into the form in which we have it today. Whoever wrote it there has been a case that the name of God is applied in the Gospel to Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The eyewitness witnesses that Jesus used the name “I am” for himself. The term “I am” or “ego eimi” appears in the Greek of the Septuagint in places where it is referring to Yahwah, God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The first case of this is in Exodus 3 where Moses is told that the name of God is “Eheyeh asher Eheyeh” or “Ego Eimi ho On” in the LXX and he is told the name is “Yahwah”.[3]
The other way the term “I am” is used of God in the Old Testament is in the prophecies of Isaiah. Here we see the Septuagint translating such phrases as “Ani Yahwah” as “Ego Eimi”[4] Brown presents evidence that in the so called Second Isaiah in the Septuagint “Ego Eimi” was clearly used as a name. An example is given from Isaiah 43:25 where “ I, I am he who blots out your transgressions” sees the LXX using “Ego Eimi” twice for I. Which could therefore be interpreted as I am “I AM” who blots out your transgressions”. “Ego Eimi” is then used in the LXX as a name peculiar to the God of Israel.
The name Yahwah in the later manuscripts of the LXX and in the writings of Philo is often substituted by Kurios. In the Hellenistic synagogues it would also be read Kurios when the Torah was read on Mondays, Thursdays and Shabbats. Again we can see evidence in the Gospel of John of this name Yahwah being applied to Jesus of Nazareth and this name according to the Old Testament is the eternal and proper name of the God of Israel[5]. This being so such a name being applied to Jesus by an eyewitness of his ministry will have very serious theological implications as to the faith of the earliest church. It is important in reviewing our evidence to recognize the importance of the fact that the writer of the Gospel is evidently an eye witness. There is much evidence in the Gospel supporting this position. The big dispute is how much did later ideas influence the writing of his gospel? This is not our issue but I believe that the fact of him being an eyewitness needs to be given a lot of weight in deciding whether what he says was really said by Jesus or was an interpretation of a later Church generation. And ceteris paribus it should be assumed that the words he says he heard from Jesus were heard unless there is clear evidence calling that position into question. We are not of those like Randel Helms who think
The Gospels are, it must be said with gratitude, works of art, the supreme fictions in our culture, narratives produced by enormously influential literary artists who put their art in service of a theological vision[6]
No, as one scholar has shown the limitation of literary criticism in ignoring historical reality and its influence on the story means they can miss the point entirely. Westcott has shown how brilliantly historical John is and how accurate is his presentation of Jewish practices and customs of first century Jerusalem, so accurate is he that they believe he is a priest who knew Jerusalem and Jewish customs very well . And it is this very point, his accuracy on these very point which makes it clear that we need to take his record of the sayings of Jesus seriously and not merely a vague later interpretation of a later community. He was 60 years and a number of countries away when he wrote the details of Jerusalem’s geography and Jewish customs accurately and there is no reason to believe that his recollection of the sayings of Jesus are not accurate as well. Whereas the Synoptics are focused mainly on the Galilean ministry, John is on the Jerusalem ministry as the teaching in the two cases may be expected to be different. It is clear that any teacher will adapt his teaching according to the audience he is communicating with and so we see this is the case with the teacher of teachers in the Gospels.
Let us now turn to our subject, did Jesus really claim the names of God, Eheyeh, Ani Hu and Yahwah, the God of Israel according the John the eyewitness.
[1] I will call the author John but there is nothing in the gospel which tells us directly the name of the author but the early Church was all but unanimous in asserting that a John was the author, whether John the Apostle or John the Elder or even John the Priest as Schonfield will have it.
[2] See Raymond Brown in Anchor Bible Dictionaries for the case against the Author being John the Apostle, see Westcott’s commenatary on John for the case for the author being the Apostle John.
[3] Some scholars see in the Theophany of the burning bush an attempt to avoid applying a name to God, by the authors or redactors. For Yahwah answers Moses with a verb. The verb to be in the 1 common singular imperfect “Eheyeh” usually translated “I will be” an in the beginning of Exodus 3 where Yahwah says to Moses “Ki eheyeh imaqa” “Certainly I will be with you”. These people also argue that Yahwah the name given second is actually an ancient for of the verb to be but now in the third person, Yihweh which was either a corruption of yihyeh he will be or an ancient form of the meaning to cause to be, either from the root hayah or ancient root hawah.
[4] Isaiah 45:8 from Brown, R., p536
[5] Exodus 3:14-16
[6] p 11 Helms, R., Gospel Fictions