Paul and Yahuwah

Introduction
In the thirteen letters of the Pauline literature of the New Testament, the title Jesus is Lord plays a very significant role. For example in 1Corinthians 12:2 Paul says

“no man can say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Spirit”[1]
oudeis dunati eipein Kurious Iesous ei meh en pneumati agio[2].

Also in Romans 10:9 Paul states

“If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised from the dead, thou shalt be saved”

“Hoti ean homologeses to rema en to stomati sou oti Kurious Iesous kai pisteuses en to kardia sou hoti ho Theos auton egeiren ek nekron sotheseh

So we see that the this confession and this saying Jesus is Lord is a source of salvation and a saying which is so important to Paul, that only by the Holy Spirit can it be said. So the task of this investigation is to see what Paul means when he takes the noun Kurious and applies it as an absolute title to Jesus.

Context of the Words
In the first century there were two main empires prevalent in the regions of Europe, Asia and Africa where Paul and the early Church operated. The first is the Roman Empire whose languages were Latin and Greek with Greek being the lingua franca of the day. From the days of Alexander the Great (336-323 BC) Greek was being spoken from Greece southward to Egypt and eastward all the way over to India. Also in the first century the Parthian Empire had inherited the lands east of the River Euphrates. In this Parthian world the language was that of Aramaic which had a literary branch which was Syriac. There are many dialects of Syriac even as there were many dialects of Hellenistic Greek. In Palestine we can add the language of the Masoretic Text of the Bible which was Hebrew. These are the three main languages which in the world which Paul ministered in. And so in trying to understand what a man was saying when he said Jesus is Lord or Kurious, will require us to take into account the languages of Hebrew and Aramaic, which lay behind the Greek confession Kurious Iesous. The confession in Hebrew could be Adon Yeshua, Adon Yehoshua, Adonai Yehoshua[3] or Adonai Yeshua[4] could it also read Yahwah hu Yeshua?[5] or words to that effect. In Aramaic, which both Paul and Yeshua spoke[6], the confession could be Mara Yeshua.[7]

Kurious, Yah’wah and Jewish tradition
It is apparent that there are a number of possibilities as to what Paul meant when he said Kurious Iesous. The first is that the person would be saying Jesus is Yahwah. That is Kurious here represent a translation of the Hebrew name of God, the tetragrammaton. This would be the highest use of the title Kurious. In the Christian copies of the Septuagint Kurious [8]is the word used to transliterate the tetragrammaton. Clearly for someone to say Jesus is Yahwah in the hearing of a Jew in the first century would be considered blasphemy. The Mishnah, although redacted in the third century, contains within it information on this matter. And the accepted position is that if someone used the name it would be considered blasphemy and worthy of death[9]. The evidence we have from this period appears to there were differing position of the used of the Tetragramaton during the second temple period.
There appears to be at least tradition where the name is actually used.
The first is by the high priest on Yom Kippour, second it was used at baptism by the Hemerobaptists (Morning bathers) after immersion, thirdly it was used by the Pharisees without immersion and fourthly it was used to greet people except in the case of the Minim who refused to use it. In all these cases the Expressed name Yahwah is referred and as we see the ideas behind using the name are in subject matter linked with the ideas in Paul’s mind when he speaks of confessing Jesus is Lord.

1 The High Priest on Yom Kippour and the Tetragrammaton
the confession of the High priest at Yom Kippor are recorded in Mishna Yoma 3 and 4.The high priest is said to say the name 10 times on Yom kippour. “ten times …the high priest mentioned the Expressed name on the Day of Atonement” (Alon 1977 p.237). And in his prayer he was beseeching Yah’wah to atone for his sin and the sins of Israel. This could help us to understand why Paul considers that there is so much power involved in the confession. Jesus is Lord. For if by confessing Jesus is Lord salvation is effected for “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation”[10] and we know that salvation in early Christian thought is tied to forgiveness of sins[11] just as Yom Kippor into do with confession and the forgiveness of sin.
According to Jewish tradition from this period the name was only spoken by the high priest once a year on Yom Kippour in the holy of holies[12].

Interestingly enough this would tie the name with the idea of atonement and the forgiveness of sins which are connected with the day of atonement, and this is what Paul connects the name with in Romans 10. For there it is connected with salvation. And if we compare this spiritual connection with the idea that belief in the resurrection is demonstrated through baptism[13], which is connected with the forgiveness of sins[14].



The Background to the Title Kurious Iesous Jesus is Lord
In the studies at present to understand where the early Christian community derived the absolute title Kurious for Iesous from the focus of the scholars has been the cultural environment of the proclamation of the gospel. Fitzmyer (1997) has summarised the four main positions relating to the source of the title Kurious.[15] The four main positions he outlines are
(1) It has a Hellenistic Pagan Background. As perhaps illustrated by Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 8:5-6[16] The case is that the title is taken over from the use of Kurious as a title for gods in the near east of that period. Fitzmyer gives a list of scholars present in this case.
(2) It has a Hellenistic Jewish background. The case here is that the title Ho Kurious (The Lord) developed out of the Greek equivalents of Biblical titles of Yah’wah whether in Hebrew or in Aramaic. So we have Adon and its from with suffix Adonai which literally means My lords but became an absolute title for Yah’wah[17].So in translating this in the Old Greek or the Septuagint Kurious would have been used.
(3) It has an Israeli Semitic Religious Background. Here the title is said to have “originated in the post-Easter Jewish-Christian community of Palestine” (Fitzmyer 1997 pg 117) In this case Yeshua would have been confessed as Adon in Hebrew or Marah in Aramaic. And these title would have arisen from the use of these title for Yah’wah in Israel among Israeli Jews of the first century. The case is based on the evidence of the use of the term Marah (Lord) in Aramaic with its suffixes as in Marai (my Lord) or Maron (our Lord). Often in the construct for giving a title of Yah’wah
(4) It has an Israeli Semitic Secular Background
That is it developed in the context of the use of Adon or Marah as “Sir” or as terms of respect. These develop into their forms with suffixes i.e Adoni (my Lord) and Marai. We see this then in Marks gospel 7:28 where Kurie is used and Yeshua addressed as “Sir”.

Our task is not to see where the early Church got the title from, rather our task is to understand what Paul understood the believer was saying when he confessed or said Kurious Iesous. We know that Paul when speaking or writing used both Greek and Aramaic.[18] We know that he quoted the Septuagint and when sharing in Synagogues he would have heard either the Masoretic Text, The LXX, and the Targumim. And we know these three sources would have represented the scriptures in most places where Paul would have preached. My contention is that the understanding of the confession Kurious Iesous. In the Pauline literature comes not simply by seeing how Paul quotes the scripture to refer to Yeshua but seeing how he views the Apostolic ministry and the postion of Yeshua in his reflections on Scripture. Much scripture is reflected in his writing although not a direct quote it can be seen as commentary on the fulfilment of scripture and points us to Paul’s understanding of the confession Kurious Iesous.
T H R E E
Adonai and Yah’wah and Kurious and in the Septuagint (LXX)
What is the confession Kurious Iesous Christos since two Hebrew words lie behind the common noun Kurious? The first is Yah’wah[19] the proper name and eternal and personal name of the God of Yisrael[20]. The second is Adonai a common Hebrew noun meaning Lord or Sir. The blurring of the two words was originally felt to have come with the Jewish Hellenistic translation of the Hebrew Scriptures in Greek in the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus[21]. However with discoveries of manuscripts in the last century it is by no means certain that the LXX (Septuagint) did not maintain the distinction between Yahwah and Adonai in translation. Royse (1991)[22] in the Hebrew scriptures, there is a clear difference in the use and the importance of the name Yah’wah and the title Adonai and the terms are used many times as a title of God as in Adonai Yahwah[23], the Lord Yahwah[24]. The Septuagint manuscripts of the 4th century and much of the Greek New Testament manuscripts we had up until 100 years ago, translated both words as Kurious. However it is now certain that many Greek manuscripts of the Tanakh, including both the LXX and Aquila’s translation included a specific representation of the Tetragrammaton distinct from Kurious. A number of scholars have gone as far as to try to chronicle the movement in translation policy towards Kurious[25]and they suggest four stages in the process. First Yah’wah was transliterated as Iao (iota, Aleph, Omega) And this is witness by Diodorus the Sicilian[26] from the first century BC. Then they transliterated Yah’wah into Aramaic script. Then they used Paleo-Hebrew and finally Kurious substituted Royse (1991 ibid). A discussion of the evidence is found in (Metzger, 1981) [27], for support of the idea that Kurious was in the LXX see N.A. Dahl and A. F Segal (1978)[28]. Back in 1959 Kahle could confidently say “We now know that the Greek Bible text as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the divine name by Kurious, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such Mss”[29] Now if this is the case and the first century manuscripts of the Greek Bible had a form of Yah’wah in the text different from Kurious what of Paul’s letters back in the first century? Some have said the Christians translated Yah’wah to Kurious when the Hebrew was not understood any more (in Royse 1991). Well at the time of Paul they did know the name and it was understood and Paul was a Jew. It is quite possible that if we found Paul’s manuscripts from the first century and he was quoting as he often does the LXX we would find that Jesus is Lord could be Jesus is Iao (Yah’wah). And that this was as Edwin Blackman states “The irreducible minimum of Christian faith” (TIOCB 1971 pg 787) and a part of the “earliest baptismal confession” (ibid)[30].
The Role of the Words as a Confession at Baptism

Romans was written from Corinth around AD 55/56 winter (Murphy O Connor pp 104-105) or in AD 57 Barker(1985 p1665).

Romans 10:9
“Hoti ean homologeses to rema en to stomati sou oti Kurious Iesous kai pisteuses en to kardia sou
That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart
Hoti ho Theos auton egeiren ek nekron sothese. Kardia gar pisteuetai eis dikaisunen stomati de omologeitai eis soterian
That God raised from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses resulting in salvation.”

The passage draws our attention again because of the apparent simplicity of the action to believe that Yeshua had risen from the dead by God’s power and to confess or say the words Kurious Iesous. The result being salvation. There are a number of issues raised by this text in the context of Pauline Theology and the New Testament. For example where is the Christ and him crucified of I Corinthians? What does it means to confess Kurious Iesous? What does it mean to be saved? Saved from what and perhaps even saved for what? Our need however is really to understand what we are confessing when we say “Kurious Iesous” and what is the significance of saying or confessing in the mind of the first century Church of AD 52- AD 57.

The Role of Confession
At least three aspects of the confession Kurious Iesous need to be explained. The first is the significance of confession in the New Testament and first century Church as opposed to the thinking of the words Kurious Iesous. Secondly the meaning of the words actually expressed and why those words carry so much significance. And what perhaps are they equivalent to in Paul’s pre Apostolic Pharisaism? What did those words mean to the Jews who they were confessed by or among and what did they mean to the Greeks and the Barbarians who confessed them. Thirdly how is it that by saying them salvation could operate in the confessor. And why is it that to Paul the whole universe and plan of God is moving towards the confession Kurious Iesous Christos.

Confession, Proclamation, Speech and Sayings
The early Church had as Scripture the Torah, the Prophets and the Psalms[31]. The Church had a message the life death and resurrection of their Lord Jesus Christ. Before the letter to the Philippians around AD 52-54, it would appear that very little literature had gone out into the Church[32]. Even if we accept AD 45 as a possible date for James it still represents a miniscule amount of literature for the 15 years since the birth of the Church of Mashiach on Shavuoth AD 30. The reason for this is clear the Church was sent to make disciples (matheteusate) to baptize them (baptitzontes autous) teaching (didascontes) the same disciples to observe the commands Yeshua had given the disciples by the words of his mouth[33].
According to Mark (16:16) the Apostles were commissioned to preach (cherutsate) the good news to all creation (paseh teh chtisei) and everyone who believed and was baptised would be saved [34](sothesetai[35]) would person not believing would be condemned (katachrithesetai) or judged against[36]. Again in Luke(24:44-9) we have the idea that the Church is sent to proclaim (herald) the message which would usually go beyond mere writing into speech. Luke’s words again have parallels with Roman (10:9) and are worth seeing
“Thus it is written that Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead the third day; and repentance for forgiveness and (for) forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in (on the bases of) his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.” Here in common with Romans10 we have the resurrection and a notice of the name, salvation is missing and baptism is missing . We may ask is this the name simply as in authority? Or is it the name as in the name he received after the resurrection which Paul gives us in Philippians 2:9 which most scholars hold to be the tetragrammaton, Yah’wah[37] This name then on baptism would be confessed, the person then would not be judged against, but saved[38]. In Matthew and Mark baptism is seen as an essential ingredient of the Apostolic proclamation. But in Luke it is missing altogether. Luke in early Church tradition[39], in the book of Acts (see chapter 21-where Luke uses We when travelling with Paul) and 2 Timothy 4:11, is considered a close associate with Paul. And Paul distinguishes between preaching, which he considered his mission and baptizing which he did but was not sent to do. As he said in 1 Corinthians “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel” So for Paul words (admittedly not clever or eloquent words 1 Cor 1) were very important.
The Church then of the first century saw preaching, sayings, speech, combined with Baptism and faith, as very powerful and it was the means appointed to build the Church and spread the gospel.





The Role of the Words as a saying in the Spirit a “prophetic level” saying
1 Corinthians O Connor (1996) dates as April / May, AD 54 and was written from Ephesus, towards the end of Paul’s residence in there
I Corinthians 12
“Peri de ton pneumatikon adelphoi ou thelo umas agnoein…gnoritzo umin hoti oudeis en
Now concerning spiritual gifts brethren I would not have you ignorant. Wherefore I give you to understand that no man
pneumati Theou lalon legei Anathema Iesous , kai oudeis dunati eipein Kurious Iesous ei meh en pneumati agio”
speaking by the spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: that no one can say that Jesus is the Lord , but by the Holy Ghost”
This passage draws our attention not because they who are speaking by the Holy Spirit will not say Jesus be accursed, because this would appear quite naturally. Indeed it is very likely that Paul is giving this instruction because some one carried away in the Corinthian meeting cried out “Anathema Iesous”. And the Church not being wise in the discerning of spirit’s accepted it as a word in the Holy Spirit. However at least one person got upset and reported to Paul along with the complaints about every one speaking in tongues and no one interpreting. So even as Moses gave instruction how to judge whether a word came from Yah’wah or no[40] so Paul gives instructions to discern whether a word came from the Spirit or no. John gives similar instruction about discerning the Spirit of Antichrist[41]. What draws out attention is when Paul states “No one is able to say Kurious Iesous” except in Pneumati Agio. We also know that people can mouth the word “Jesus is Lord’ and walk away the same way they came. So the problem here is what does Paul mean by this statement. His advice is to inform the Corinthians about spiritual activities.
It is the absoluteness of Paul’s statement that leaves a problem which needs addressing. What does it actually mean to say Kurious Iesous. And is it as W Harold Mare in his comment in the NIV Study Bible pg1750, notes that someone is saying not “Jesus is master” or “Jesus is Lord” using the word Kurious to reflect the Hebrew word Adonai (emphatic form of Adon) or Adon (from an unused root meaning to rule, sovereign or controller[42]) but rather that some one saying Jesus is Yahwah that is to say Jesus is “God of Israel the Creator of the heavens and the earth. That when a Jew proclaims “Shema Yisrael Yahwah Eloheinu Yahwah Echad” They are referring to Jesus the Messiah who was crucified, buried rose again on the third day and ascended into heaven? For a Hellenistic Greek are they saying that the man Jesus who walked the earth in material flesh is the same “To On” (The Existent[43]) of Philo or the same deity who Josephus in his conservative Pharisaism refuses to talk about for his name is ineffable. To be sure to Philo as a Hellenistic Greek coming from a philosophical background influenced by Plato, the Stoics and even the Sophists, name was not a glorifying thing for his ‘To on’ but a concession to the weakness of material man. To Josephus it was too holy to be uttered. If indeed Paul is saying Kurious Iesous means Jesus is Yahwah it would mean there was a time that to say such a thing would to him be blasphemous on two counts. The first would be to say the name[44] and the second would be to identify the man Jesus with the creator. to Once he was a Pharisee and to them the name of Yah’wah could only by used once a year by the high priest in the temple on Yom Kippour. If someone used the name elsewhere they would be accused of blasphemy and could be stoned to death[45], Stephen is a case in point. He was stoned to deaf however it is not certain if it was the legal process or mob violence which brought this about[46].The fact that he was tried and witnesses brought and the fact that he was taken outside the city and stoned all point to legal procedure. The fact that they rushed together upon him and dragged out of the city suggest a mob in action. But looking at is from the legal angle. For what was he stone? Blasphemy. But Klausner(1944)[47] makes a very pertinent point the death penalty should only be applied if he named the name itself.

Stephen is a case in point. He was stoned to deaf. However it is not certain if it was a the legal process or mob violence which brought this about[48]. The fact that he was tried, witnesses brought in, taken to the edge of the city and stoned all point to a due legal process. Baird (1971 pg 739) believes the fact that the mob “cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears, and they rushed upon him with one impulse” suggests mob violence. He was taken out and stoned. And why then was he stoned for according to Klausner (1944 pg 292) the Mishnah (in the Talmud) [49]asserts “the blasphemer is not culpable unless he pronounces the name itself”[50]. According to record of Luke, Stephen had just said “Behold I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God”. So there were no grounds for his conviction. However it appears possible that the confession about “The Son of Man being at the right hand of God” may have reached the level of blasphemy in first century Judaism because Yeshua on making the same confession, not long before, was convicted of blasphemy[51] by the Sanhedrin[52].
The point is clear, although our launching point was the Church in Corinth in southern Greece or Achaia, the Church in Phillipi northern Greece or Macedonia, both places outside Eretz Yisrael and not part of the seven Toparchies of Judea proper[53] where the Sanhedrin would have had authority, we can still say that if in Hebrew the early Church made as the Confession, Yeshua is Yahwah, this would have been counted as blasphemy. This would go far to explaining why the Pharisees and Paul persecuted that name to the death and sought to have the disciples blaspheme.

The Role of Kurious Iesous as a confession of the whole creation
Philippians 2: 9-11[54]
. We hold that Philippians was written, not in Paul’s Roman[55] or Caeserian imprisonment, but in his inferred Ephesian imprisonment, during the years AD 52-AD 54[56].
“Dio kai ho Theos auton uperupsosen Kai echarisato auto to onoma to uper pan onoma
Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name
Ina en to onomati Iesou pan gonu kampse Epouranion kai epigeion kai katachthonion
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of the things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth
Kai pasa glossa exomologesetai hoti “Kurious Iesous Christoseise” doxan Theou
Patros” [57]
And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father

To Paul then this confession is the ultimate confession of the entire heavens, earth, and under the earth. The whole result of Yeshua’s incarnation, humiliation on the cross, resurrection and ascension[58] is the glory of God the Father. And when all the universe confesses Kurious Iesous Christos God the Father gets the glory. So this text is here because it very universal scope challenges ask to ask the question Why is the confession “Kurious Iesous Christos” so important?
















[1] King James Bible
[2] Westcott and Hort Text which I have transliterated very basically. The words underlined are the verbs in the sentence.
[3] In the Greek New Testament Iesous is used to translate the name Yehoshua in Hebrews 4:8 which is referring Yehoshus son of nun
[4] The name Yeshua is used of Yehoshua son of Jehozadak after the exile by Ezra (3:2) but in Zechariah 3 he is called Yehoshua.
[5] The Translation of the Peshitta Aramaic Text into Hebrew (Jerusalem: The Bible Society 1986) in Philippians 2:11, translates the Aramiac Marya hu Yeshua Meshicha as Yahwah hu Yeshua ha Mashiach. Admittedly the “Aramaic in which the Bible called “Assahta Peshitta” is written , known as the Peshitta text, is in the dialect of northwest Mesopotamia as it evolved and was highly perfected in Orhai, once a city-kingdom, later called Edessa by the Seleucids” and may not have been the same used in Israel but the Eastern Church claim that they got the Gospel especially in Aramaic from the Apostles. Aramaic has many dialects and for a survey read pp i-v Ibid. As for the translation of the Philippians 2:11 this is in modern Hebrew and so not directly relevant to our case but the translators “attempted to follow the Aramaic as closely as possible, even at the expense of somewhat forcing the Hebrew”. I introduce the quote to illustrate the possibility among scholars of this interpretation. Yahwah hu Yeshua.
[6] Acts 21: 40 Here the Greek read Ebradi which the commentators explain is the “Aramaic vernacular”. NBCR 1971 and Interp ovc 1971
[7] These Hebrew and Aramaic titles Adon and Marah are title which Jews in first century Israel used for Yah’wah. Paul also writes Maranatha (1 Cor 16 which can be interpreted as a prayer O Lord Come (Zodhiates NASB), or as a confession AV Maran our Lord atha has come or Our Lord comes. There are many discussiona about its rendering. See NBCR (1971) p1074 and see Fitzmyer (1991) The Semitic Background of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan/ Cambridge UK: William B Eerdman’s Publishers pp115-141 for a general discussion of Jesus is Lord including Maran atha.

[8] Joyce (1991), Metzger 1981
[9] According to Klausner (1944) the death penalty was only due if the name itself was actually spoken
[10] Romans 10:10
[11] So Jesus is name Yeshua because he shall save his people from their sins Matt 1:21
[12] [12] Gedalyahu Alon point to a mishnaic tradition in the second temple which permits or rather enjoins the use of the name in greeting one another during the second temple period. “It may be desireable to examine the tradition in m. Berakhotix, 5: ‘And it was ordained that a man should greet his fellow with the Divine Name’etc. For Geiger deduces from it that the later Halakhists , reacting against the Minim who were merticulous in observing ancient Halakha, decided to permit the use of the Expressed name (even in salutations)
[13] Romans 6:4, Colssians 2:12
[14] cf Rom 10:9 with Mark 16:16 and Luke 24 :46-47
[15] Fitzmyer J. A (1997) The Semitic Background of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan/ Cambridge UK: William B Eerdman’s Publishers
[16] (ibid pg 117)
[17] See Isaiah 6:8
[18][18] I Cor 16:22, Acts 22:2
[19] David Weisberg a lecturer from Hebrew Union College Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincnatti pronounced the Tetragrammaton Yod Heh Vav Heh as Yah’wah basing his pronounciation on Cuneiform Inscriptions from 5th or 6th century BC Babylonia. He presented this in a lecture in Jerusalem University College on Thursday, May 4th 2000 “The Impact of Assyriology on Biblical Studies”.
[20] See Exod 3:15ff , 6 and Isaiah 43-45
[21] See Letter of Aristeas and New Catholic Encyclopedia “Septuagint”.
[22] J Royse (1991). Philo, Kurios, And the Tetragrammaton. The Studia Philonica Annual 1991Vol 3 “Heirs of the Septuagint” Ed’s Runia, D., Hay, D., Winston, D.
[23] See Ezekiel 34-36
[24] In a rare case the title Adonai is used as a proper name for Yahwah and it is also used as his title as “Lord” or “My Lord”.
[25] Martin Hengel (1989) “The Interpenetration of Judaism and Hellenism in the pre Maccabbean” Period. The Cambridge History of Judaism 2
[26] in Stern Vol 1974 pg 192/172), Menachem Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism, 3 vols (1974-1984)
[27] B. M, Metzger Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (New York: Oxford)
[28] N.A. Dahl., A. F. Segal Philo and the Rabbi’s on the names of God. Journal for the study of Judaism 9 1978. There arguments are based on Philo’s etymological notes and don’t change the fact that many manuscripts have the name represented differently to Kurious by paleo Hebrew or a transliteration of some kind.
[29] P.E Kahle The Cairo Geniza (Oxford 1959) in Royse 1991pg 169
[30] However according to Meztger (ibid) “No New Testament manuscript contains the Tetragrammaton written in Old Testament quotations” (Metzger 1981, p35 footnote 70)
[31] Luke 24:44
[32] The only literature we really have record of from that time would have been the Letter from the council of Jerusalem held somewhere between AD 44 (New Cath Encl, and Oct AD 51 Murphy O Connor pg 105 Ibid. Then 1 an 2 Thessalonians in AD 52. There may be others but it it not much and most scholars hold 1 Thessalonians as Paul’s first letter
[33] Matthew 28:18-20
[34] The Mark16:16 can shed light on the Romans 10:9 passage. They both begin with believing and end with being saved. However in the place on confessing Kurious Iesous the make passage has the act of being baptised. This then would suggest that the confession Kurious Iesous in the Romans 10:9 was spoken at Baptism. A comparison also helps up with what a person is being saved from. The hearer of the gospel in Mark, who responds is being saved from being judged against or condemned.

[35] The word here is a future tense from of the verb Sozo. Zodhiates in Lexical aid to the New Testament says “Sozo; to save, and the noun soteria salvation. Salvation in regard to (1) material and temporal deliverance from danger, suffering etc…sickness.”
Preservation; (2) “the spiritual and eternal salvation granted immediately by God to those who believe on Christ”. (3)” the present experience of God’s power to deliver from bondage to sin”. (4) “the future deliverance of believers at the second coming” The Strongs Greek Dictionary of the New Testament says it is from a primitive root saos (safe) and means to save that is to deliver or protect.
[36] From the Strongs Greek Dictionary of the New Testament. This last word is made up of the word Kata a preposition with the primary meaning of down. When it is used with the Genitive it means a movement from a higher place to a lower place. And Krino a verb meaning to divide or separate, make decision, make a distinction. The two words combined making Katakrino meaning to pronounce a sentence against as in a court of law.

[37]. After his death Paul says “God highly exalted him , and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven , and on the earth , and under the earth, and every tongue should confess” Kurious Iesous Christos “to the glory of God the Father”. C F Moule hold the name to be Jesus with exalted respect because of his obedience. Most Scholars hold the name to be Yah’wah see FF Bruce on Good News Commentary on Philippians
[38] The idea of salvation being tied to acquittal or not being condemned is not just a Biblical idea. It is illustrated by a papyrus from 218 BC in Egypt. Where a dealer in wool writes to King Ptolemy with a complaint about a shepherd saying “I am being wronged by Seos a Jew living at Alabanthis. He sold me …” He complains that the wool he was sold was taken by the Jew before he had the chance to shear the sheep. The Jew then refused to return the wool. The merchant act so that he could get his wool back. He continues “If this happened I shall no longer be wronged…And thus we shall obtain justice by our appeal to you, impartial saviour of all men” from L Feldman and M Reinhold (1996) Jewish Life and Thought among Greeks and Romans Minneapolis: Fortress Press pg 29
[39] Hippolytus of Rome on the Seventy whom Yeshua sent out says Luke left Jesus after he told the disciples they had to drink his blood and eat his flesh but was won back to the faith by Paul (page 255 Hippolyus in the Ante Nicene Fathers Edinburgh 1896 Vol ? pg 255. Ireneus of Lyons says The Gospel Luke wrote was the gospel Paul preached Ireneus Against Heresies BkIII Chp I ANF Vol ? page 414



[40] Deu 18:21-22
[41] 1 John 4:1-3
[42] from Strongs Concordance dictionary in Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible Spiros Zodhiates (1990) AMG
[43] See Philo and his comments on Exodus 3:15ff
[44] This naming the name of Yah’wah would occur at least every time a Hebrew speaker became a believer perhaps beyond that.
[45] Gedalyahu alon point to a mishnaic tradition in the second temple which permits or rather enjoins the use of the name in greeting one another during the second temple period. The authority is the story of Boaz and when he greeted his workers with the greeting Yah’wah be with you and they responded Yah’wah bless you. This may inidicate that there was stream of Judaism which did allow the use of the name in ordinary life.
[46] William Baird in The Interpreters one volume commentary of the Bible pg 739
[47]
[48] William Baird in “The Int
erpreters One Volume Commentary of the Bible pg 739
[49] The Mishnah was only redacted early in the third century and the Talmud in the fifth century so we can only apply it rules of first century Judaism with great reservations. Certainly the rules for blasphemy applied while the temple was standing although in their redacted version they may be changed.
[50] Joseph Klausner (1944) From Jesus to Paul pg 292 he refers us to Mishnah, Sanhedrin 7:4
[51] See Matthew 26:63-65, Mark 14:61-63 for other angles see Luke 22:67-70. The case is helped by the fact that it is Matthew and Mark who confirm the idea that saying Yeshua is the son of Man at the right hand of God was considered equivalent of saying Yah’wah or perhaps even worse Jesus is Yah’wah.
[52] Alfred Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah 1889(reprinted 1987 pp585-587 in a one volume abridged edition) states that it was not a formal trial nor was their a formal conviction but the preparation of a case to give to Caiaphas.
[53] See Murphy O Connor Paul a Critical life pg 66
[54] These lines are the final words and climax of a Christian Hymn starting in Phil 2:6. Some Scholars maintain that these words are pr Pauline and that the hymn “could hardly be composed by Paul” Keck 1971 TIOCO pg 850 other maintain that the words came from the Pauline Churches (see FF Bruce Good News Commentary on Philippians for discussion pg 51.
[55] Spiros Zodhiates The Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible NASB pg 1570
[56] So K Barker (1985 pp1664-1665) Gen Ed The NIV Study Bible (1985) Michigan: The Zondervan Corporation
[57] The Greek Transliteration is my own and based on Westcott and Hort Text (1881) 1948 Macmillan Company Edition.
[58] The resurrection and ascension are seen as one event in this Hymn