The Name YAUA in Baptism
Fossum notes in his The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord that Moses is imaged as one vested with God's name. In being vested with the divine name he is regaining the glory which had lost in the garden. Moses is vested with God's name on his ascension to Mount Sinai. This was seen as a heavenly enthronement and a restoration of divine glory. The idea is compared with an idea of Jesus recieving the divine name as described in the Gospel of Philip. Here the Father gave the Son his name which is exalted above all (Fossum, 1985, 95). Fossum asserts "The secret name which is given to Jesus is identical with the Name of the Father obviously is the proper name of God. Jesus is then believed to have been vested with the name of God.However the question is when did this investiture take place. J. Quispel in "Gnosticism and the New Testament", , in J. P. Hyatt, ed., The bible in modern scholarship, Nashville &New york , 1965.;p 266Quispel believes the crowning took place at baptism. This is based on his understanding that the "Valentinians thought that at that moment the Name of God descended upon Jesus... . ibid p.52 This is interesting because in the period names and baptisms were definitely connected. For example the disciples were baptising people in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:2). Paul took precautions so that no one would think they were baptised in his name. Paul says to the Corinthian Church “Were you baptised in the name of Paul. I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." Menander the disciple of Simon Magus who is supposed to be the disciple of John the Baptist baptised people in his own name. The baptism of Jesus however was performed by John the Baptist. The pertinent question is in which name would John baptise in? We need only look at his credentials to see. He came to prepare the way of Yaua (Mark 1, Isa 40). He came as a prophet. Now if John was a true prophet, and few seems to have doubted that at the time, he could only have come in the name Yaua. For the Torah stated very clearly that a prophet had to speak in the name of Yaua, and if he came in the name of another god he was to be put to death (Deu 18). John the Baptist came preparing the way of Yaua and therefore if he baptised in any name it had to be that of Yaua. Do we have evidence of others in the period baptising in the name of Yaua? The answer is again affirmative although late. There is a toseftah which relates a dispute between Pharisees and a Morning baptisers or hemerobaptists. In this dispute there is a disagreement as to when the name Yaua should be spoken during the baptism process. Whether before the person entered the water or afterwards. The Article in Jewish Encyclopedia on the Hemerobaptists relates that they were a
Division of Essenes who bathed every morning before the hour of prayer in order to pronounce the name of God with a clean body (Tosef., Yad., end; the correct version being given by R. Simson of Sens: "The morning bathers said to the Pharisees: 'We charge you with doing wrong in pronouncing the Name in the morning without having taken the ritual bath'; whereupon the Pharisees said: 'We charge you with wrong-doing in pronouncing the Name with a body impure within'"). In the time of Joshua b. Levi (3d cent.) a remnant still existed, but had no clear reason for their practise (Ber. 22a). The Clementina speak of John the Baptist as a Hemerobaptist, and the disciples of John are accordingly called "Hemerobaptists" ("Homilies," ii. 23; comp. "Recognitions," i. 54); similarly, Banus, the teacher of Josephus ("Vita," § 2), was a Hemerobaptist. Hegesippus (see Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl." iv. 22) mentions the Hemerobaptists as one of the seven Jewish sects or divisions opposed to the Christians. Justin ("Dial. cum Tryph." § 80) calls them simply "Baptists."
According to the Christian editor of the "Didascalia" ("Apostolic Constitutions," vi. 6), the Hemero-baptists "do not eat until they have bathed, and do not make any use of their beds and tables and dishes until they have cleansed them." This obviously rests upon a misunderstanding of their true character. Epiphanius ("Panarion," i., heresy xvii.) goes still further, and says that the Hemerobaptists deny future salvation to him who does not undergo baptism daily.
Thus we see that according to this evidence both the Pharisees and the Hemerobaptists, contemporaries of Jesus Christ and the early Church, used to speak the name Yaua, regularly and repeatedly. They did not only speak it but spoke it every day. The Pharisees do not appear to have any ritual behind the utterring of the name, whereas the Hemerobaptists believed one should be immersed or baptised before using it. The Clementina of the second and third century, place John the Baptist among the hemerobaptists. Although this can not be taken as conclusive it does support the possibility of the belief among the Valentinians that Jesus recieved the name of God at baptism. For John here is said to be in a group who specifically immersed themselves so that they could utter the name Yaua. As we have already noted John the Baptist was considered a prophet and just a glance through the masoretic text indicates that throughout the Law and the Prophets all prophets came in the name Yaua. The mantle of the name Yaua is then seen as descending on Jesus at the baptism. There is other evidence in the New Testament to support this position. Firstly we know that Jesus himself claimed to come in the name of his Father. He like John was called a prophet by his contemporaries. They even compared him with Jeremiah and Elijah or one of the prophets. This being the case what we find conspicous about all these with whom Jesus was compared is that they came in the name Yaua. Jesus pictured John the baptist as Elijah. Elijah was expected to return because of the prophecy of Malachi. An earlier prophecy of Malachi is applied to John by the Gospel of Mark: “Behold I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee". We see in the case of Elijah and his successor, Elisha, that the succession took place at the river Jordan. Jesus initiation under the ministry of the levite priest John the baptist is also recorded as taking place at the river Jordan. When Elijah left Elisha ripped up his mantle, picks up Elijah’s mantle and struck the water and says “Where is Yaua the God of Elijah?”. When the waters opened the prophets said “The Spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha” (2 King 2). In one sense they recognised the anointing of Elisha with the Spirit of Yaua even as John the baptist recognises the ministry of Jesus when the heavens opened up. John bore witness
I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it aboad upon him.And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me , Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost (John 1:29ff)
If John were practising hemerobaptist baptism as indicated by the Clementines then the name Yaua could be uttered after the immersion at the same time that Jesus saw the vision and heard the voice. The parallels are quite general:
Eliyahu/Elisha Yochanan/ Yeshua
People Two prophets Two prophets
Place: Next to Jordan In the Jordan
Event: succession and initiation initiation, baptism for all righteousenss After event Yaua’s Spirit acts Heavens open Spirit comes as a dove
Prophets recognize Elisha Prophet recognizes Jesus as his successor
As successor to Elijah
Elisha miracle ministry Temptation
Yeshua (Yehosha) begins miracle ministry
There may not be parellels to show that the gospel writers were modelling the succession in the two cases but in both cases a succesion ministry was begun and and old ministry was drawing to a close. Yaua is conspicously present in the case of Eliyahu and Elisha and it Jesus who compared John with Elijah (Matt 17:12) and his own connection with Eliyahu and Elisha (Luke 4:25,26)
If indeed the name Yaua was used at the baptism of Jesus as seems very likely we would expect a memory of the idea in the collective memory of the early Church. For Jesus is the the one whom the Church follows. Has the Church then any recollection of the connection between baptism and the name Yaua.
Baptism in the name of Jesus and Calling on the name Yaua
Our first evidence that the early Hebrew Nazarenes saw a connection between the name Yaua and baptism comes from the scriptures the early Church refers to in preaching the gospel and baptising Jews and later Gentiles. In Acts 2:21 Peter says regarding the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the attendant effects that this was a fulfilment of Joel 2. He notes “And it shall be that every one who calls on the name of Yaua shall be saved”. Here he cites a passage in which contains the name Yaua. Later on when the people asked what they need to do, Peter tells them:
Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)... Be saved from this perverse generation...And the Lord was adding to their day by day those who were being saved 2:47” Thus we have the prophecy, Yaua shall save those who will call on his name. They are baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to be saved. Thus to call on the name Yaua is to repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ. It is practically certain that Peter was not speaking Greek and that when he cited scripture he cited them in Hebrew. Thus there is no escaping that he was referring to the name Yaua. Even the term Lord here seems almost certainly to refer to Yaua for Peter notes the promise is to all those whom “the Lord our God” shall called. This phrase is almost definitely referring to Yaua eloheinu, of approximately 96 occurences of this phrase in MT 96 refer directly to Yaua eloheinu and 2 in Daniel to adonai eloheinu, but Daniel does use both phrases. This was not a synagogue so there is no need to assume that he was using adonai in this context. On the other hand we are not certain if he was speaking Aramaic or Hebrew and we do not know with certainty which word he used when he referred to Yaua but we know Yaua was in mind. Paul makes the same connection in Roman’s although he does not refer directly to baptism. He asserts “If you confess with you mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart God raised from the dead, you shall be saved...for whoever calls on the name of Yaua shall be saved” Roman 10:9, 13).
It is the literature of the Aramaic speaking Church and the Gnostics where the connection between the name Yaua and baptism has been retained most clearly. The chart below will document some of the important Christian and Gnostic references to the name and the elements seen in Jesus baptism:
Excerpta ex Theodoto xxii.5 In the beginning, the angels were baptized in the redemption of the Name which came down upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. (Clement of Alexandria) “The Gnostic ...was baptised in the same Name as that in which his angel was baptized before him”
Acts of Thomas (27:49f.) “the Name is equated with the Spirit” (Fossum, 1985,96)
Exc ex Theodoto xxvi.1) Jesus’ “invisible part was the Name, which is the only begotten Son”
Ireneus on Valentinus Others refer to the redemption as follows: “The Name which is hidden (to onoma to apokekrummenon) from every deity, dominion, and power, which Jesus the Nazarene put on (o enedusato) in the spheres of light , [the Name] of Christ, the Christ who lives through the Holy Spirit for the angelic redemption” (I.xx.3)
Acts of Thomas “Come Holy Name of Christ that is above every name!” (Ch 27 Greek version ; cp . ch 132;157)
A most surprising connection is found between the sign of the cross as a seal of the
believer being baptised and the name Yaua, the tetragrammaton. In the Western Tradition the repentant was first baptised and then given the sign of the cross as a seal of the unction following. Fossum describes it as a “post baptismal signatio crucis of the forehead associated with an unction and performed with or without oil” (Fossum 1985, 101). However in the Syriac speaking Church the tradition was different and connection the seal of the sign of the cross with the name Yaua. According to Fossum in Syriac Christianity the sealing of the untion came before the actual baptism. And whereas in the Western Tradition the sign of the cross was a symbol of the name cristos or the cross upon which he died in the Syriac speaking Church this was not the case. “It had retained its significance as an emblem of the Divine Name” (Fossum 1985, 101).
Narsai, a fifth century Nestorian Church Father who lived in Edessa, illustrates this in his Liturgical Homilies. When the priest anoints the candidate, asserts Narsai: He “signs the flock with the sign of the Lord, and seals upon it His Hidden Name by the outward look” Homiliy 22 (R.H. Connolly trans. The Lirturgical Homolies of Narsai (TS, VIII/1), Cambridge, 1909). Narsai also writes “the Name of the Divinity looks out from the sign on the forehead” (Connolly p.45). The sign is the cross and here the divine name is said to look out from the cross. Fossums argument is that although Narsai is quite late he reflects an earlier tradition. This tradition is reflected in the Syriac Odes of Solomon and the Acts of Thomas. Here the untion is called a “sealing” and the seal is the Name. Firstly in the Acts of Thomas we see that as Thomas begins the rite he calls on the Name. He says
“...Jesus , let [your] victorious Power come, and let it settle in this oil [...] and let it dwell in this oil, over which we name your holy Name! (Ch 157) (Fossum 1985, 102) Fossum makes the observation that the Power is “identical with the Name”. In chapter 27 and 132 the Divine Name is called the “Power of the Most High” and the Power established in Christ”.
It is very important for us to give attention to the words used by Thomas in the rite. Such words of ritual are for the most part missing from the New Testament but will help us to understand what people actually said and when the name may have been used and how. We note that Thomas claims to name Jesus name over the oil. A pertinent question is how does one name a name over the oil? However this is not our purpose now. Narsai gives some insight as to how the Name and its Power enters the catechumen:
The “Secret Power” which is contained in the oil is the Hidden Name: “The name of the Divinity he mixes in his hands with the oil[...]...Through the anointing the believer recieves the Name: “With the Name hidden in it [i.e. the oil] he signs the visible body, and the sharp power of the Name enters even into the soul”.
This connection between the three synonyms Name, Power and Spirit can give great insight into the understanding of the New Testament and the place of the name in it.
An additional evidence that some thing occur in the baptism which was connected with the name is the clear New Testament evidence that Jesus refered to and ministered and acted in that name. Firstly before at the baptism the declaration of the Father is “This is my beloved son”.
Matthew 1 outos estin o uios mou o agaphtos, en w eudokhsa
mark su ei o uios o agaphtos, eudokhsa
luke uios mou ei su, egw shmeron gegenhka
In all cases the coice refers to Jesus as the Son. This declaration harps back to Psalm 2, where the Psalmist says I will declre the decree of Yaua. He said to be bni atah, my son you are. Luke rendering in Luke holds closet to the text in Psalm 2.
This states in the standard printed edition:
διαγγελλων το προσταγμα κυριου κυριος ειπεν προς με υιος μου ει συ εγω σημερον γεγεννηκα σε
Which agrees with the Lukan records of the evnts. The key point is that in the Hebrew it is Yaua alon who speaks. The synoptics then move into the temptation. In Matthews case Jesus uses mouth of God, where the torah uses mouth of Yaua, You shall not tempt Yaua thy God, You shall worship Yaua thy God and him only shalt serve. In Luke he states every word of God, You shall worship Yaua thy God and You shall not tempt Yaua thy God. It is interesting that in both cases the command about living from the words proceeding from the mouth of Yaua, Yaua is changed to theos implying that in the text Jesus was citing or Luke and Matthew were referring had Elohim in the text. However in both the other text the form Yaua thy God is retained.
και εκακωσεν σε και ελιμαγχονησεν σε και εψωμισεν σε το μαννα ο ουκ ειδησαν οι πατερες σου ινα αναγγειλη σοι οτι ουκ επ' αρτω μονω ζησεται ο ανθρωπος αλλ' επι παντι ρηματι τω εκπορευομενω δια στοματος θεου ζησεται ο ανθρωπος
The printed LXX based on Vaticanus, Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus speak of dia stomatos theou. Matthew has the same. Luke has panti remati theou. The MT refers to Pi Yaua, mouth of Yaua. The Lhamsa translation from the Aramaic has mouth of Yaua the OT but Mouth of God in Matthew. Thus Matthew 4:4 represents a seperate tradition over whose mouth the word comes from by which man may live. However both Matthew and Luke indicate it is the Lord your God in the other two cases.
Matthew Luke LXX
kurion ton theon kurion ton theon kurion ton theon
kurion ton theon sou kurion ton theon kurion ton theon
We may notice something in the way kurion is witten which may indicate something special in its treatment. It is not given with any definite article as theos is. This ungrammatical treatment may be there to draw the readers attention to something. The point however which we want to make is clear. In Jesus first words after his baptism the name Yaua occurs at least two times. The converstaion is completely private and it is the son of God who is speaking. There would appear to be no reason why he would not have spoken the name whatsoever.
The anointing took place at baptism. The voice was that of his Father. He recieved the Spirit which is sometimes called the Name or the Power. Jesus then goes forth and later claims “I have come in my Father’s name.” We remember the discussion on the seal and how it is connected to the Name. Jesus says in John 6:27, the Son of Man...for on Him the Father, God has set his seal”. The seal can be seen in the light of what we have said above but also in relation to the Gospel of John. In this gospel John the Baptist states he knew who Jesus was because he saw the Spirit, come down on him. Perhaps the voice of the Apocalypse can also speak here. Firstly there is the group in chapter 9 who are protected because they have the seal of God on their forehead. However under the fifth trumpet we are not told what the seal of God is. However in chapter 14 we find the 144000 have the Lambs name and his Father name’s written on their foreheads. The Son of Man came in the name of his Father. But this was the name which the Father also gave to him (John 17).
Excursus
The idea that the Name Yaua may be seen as synonymous with Power can perhaps be seen as forshadowed in the words of Jeremiah, where Yaua saysHe will cause them to know his yad (power) and his gvorah and they shall now that his name is Yaua. This recognition that Power was synonymous with name in some texts from the early Church period and that Spirit was synonymous with Name in the same period will help us to understand better the role of the name Yaua in the eraly Church period
Division of Essenes who bathed every morning before the hour of prayer in order to pronounce the name of God with a clean body (Tosef., Yad., end; the correct version being given by R. Simson of Sens: "The morning bathers said to the Pharisees: 'We charge you with doing wrong in pronouncing the Name in the morning without having taken the ritual bath'; whereupon the Pharisees said: 'We charge you with wrong-doing in pronouncing the Name with a body impure within'"). In the time of Joshua b. Levi (3d cent.) a remnant still existed, but had no clear reason for their practise (Ber. 22a). The Clementina speak of John the Baptist as a Hemerobaptist, and the disciples of John are accordingly called "Hemerobaptists" ("Homilies," ii. 23; comp. "Recognitions," i. 54); similarly, Banus, the teacher of Josephus ("Vita," § 2), was a Hemerobaptist. Hegesippus (see Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl." iv. 22) mentions the Hemerobaptists as one of the seven Jewish sects or divisions opposed to the Christians. Justin ("Dial. cum Tryph." § 80) calls them simply "Baptists."
According to the Christian editor of the "Didascalia" ("Apostolic Constitutions," vi. 6), the Hemero-baptists "do not eat until they have bathed, and do not make any use of their beds and tables and dishes until they have cleansed them." This obviously rests upon a misunderstanding of their true character. Epiphanius ("Panarion," i., heresy xvii.) goes still further, and says that the Hemerobaptists deny future salvation to him who does not undergo baptism daily.
Thus we see that according to this evidence both the Pharisees and the Hemerobaptists, contemporaries of Jesus Christ and the early Church, used to speak the name Yaua, regularly and repeatedly. They did not only speak it but spoke it every day. The Pharisees do not appear to have any ritual behind the utterring of the name, whereas the Hemerobaptists believed one should be immersed or baptised before using it. The Clementina of the second and third century, place John the Baptist among the hemerobaptists. Although this can not be taken as conclusive it does support the possibility of the belief among the Valentinians that Jesus recieved the name of God at baptism. For John here is said to be in a group who specifically immersed themselves so that they could utter the name Yaua. As we have already noted John the Baptist was considered a prophet and just a glance through the masoretic text indicates that throughout the Law and the Prophets all prophets came in the name Yaua. The mantle of the name Yaua is then seen as descending on Jesus at the baptism. There is other evidence in the New Testament to support this position. Firstly we know that Jesus himself claimed to come in the name of his Father. He like John was called a prophet by his contemporaries. They even compared him with Jeremiah and Elijah or one of the prophets. This being the case what we find conspicous about all these with whom Jesus was compared is that they came in the name Yaua. Jesus pictured John the baptist as Elijah. Elijah was expected to return because of the prophecy of Malachi. An earlier prophecy of Malachi is applied to John by the Gospel of Mark: “Behold I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee". We see in the case of Elijah and his successor, Elisha, that the succession took place at the river Jordan. Jesus initiation under the ministry of the levite priest John the baptist is also recorded as taking place at the river Jordan. When Elijah left Elisha ripped up his mantle, picks up Elijah’s mantle and struck the water and says “Where is Yaua the God of Elijah?”. When the waters opened the prophets said “The Spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha” (2 King 2). In one sense they recognised the anointing of Elisha with the Spirit of Yaua even as John the baptist recognises the ministry of Jesus when the heavens opened up. John bore witness
I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it aboad upon him.And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me , Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost (John 1:29ff)
If John were practising hemerobaptist baptism as indicated by the Clementines then the name Yaua could be uttered after the immersion at the same time that Jesus saw the vision and heard the voice. The parallels are quite general:
Eliyahu/Elisha Yochanan/ Yeshua
People Two prophets Two prophets
Place: Next to Jordan In the Jordan
Event: succession and initiation initiation, baptism for all righteousenss After event Yaua’s Spirit acts Heavens open Spirit comes as a dove
Prophets recognize Elisha Prophet recognizes Jesus as his successor
As successor to Elijah
Elisha miracle ministry Temptation
Yeshua (Yehosha) begins miracle ministry
There may not be parellels to show that the gospel writers were modelling the succession in the two cases but in both cases a succesion ministry was begun and and old ministry was drawing to a close. Yaua is conspicously present in the case of Eliyahu and Elisha and it Jesus who compared John with Elijah (Matt 17:12) and his own connection with Eliyahu and Elisha (Luke 4:25,26)
If indeed the name Yaua was used at the baptism of Jesus as seems very likely we would expect a memory of the idea in the collective memory of the early Church. For Jesus is the the one whom the Church follows. Has the Church then any recollection of the connection between baptism and the name Yaua.
Baptism in the name of Jesus and Calling on the name Yaua
Our first evidence that the early Hebrew Nazarenes saw a connection between the name Yaua and baptism comes from the scriptures the early Church refers to in preaching the gospel and baptising Jews and later Gentiles. In Acts 2:21 Peter says regarding the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the attendant effects that this was a fulfilment of Joel 2. He notes “And it shall be that every one who calls on the name of Yaua shall be saved”. Here he cites a passage in which contains the name Yaua. Later on when the people asked what they need to do, Peter tells them:
Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)... Be saved from this perverse generation...And the Lord was adding to their day by day those who were being saved 2:47” Thus we have the prophecy, Yaua shall save those who will call on his name. They are baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to be saved. Thus to call on the name Yaua is to repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ. It is practically certain that Peter was not speaking Greek and that when he cited scripture he cited them in Hebrew. Thus there is no escaping that he was referring to the name Yaua. Even the term Lord here seems almost certainly to refer to Yaua for Peter notes the promise is to all those whom “the Lord our God” shall called. This phrase is almost definitely referring to Yaua eloheinu, of approximately 96 occurences of this phrase in MT 96 refer directly to Yaua eloheinu and 2 in Daniel to adonai eloheinu, but Daniel does use both phrases. This was not a synagogue so there is no need to assume that he was using adonai in this context. On the other hand we are not certain if he was speaking Aramaic or Hebrew and we do not know with certainty which word he used when he referred to Yaua but we know Yaua was in mind. Paul makes the same connection in Roman’s although he does not refer directly to baptism. He asserts “If you confess with you mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart God raised from the dead, you shall be saved...for whoever calls on the name of Yaua shall be saved” Roman 10:9, 13).
It is the literature of the Aramaic speaking Church and the Gnostics where the connection between the name Yaua and baptism has been retained most clearly. The chart below will document some of the important Christian and Gnostic references to the name and the elements seen in Jesus baptism:
Excerpta ex Theodoto xxii.5 In the beginning, the angels were baptized in the redemption of the Name which came down upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. (Clement of Alexandria) “The Gnostic ...was baptised in the same Name as that in which his angel was baptized before him”
Acts of Thomas (27:49f.) “the Name is equated with the Spirit” (Fossum, 1985,96)
Exc ex Theodoto xxvi.1) Jesus’ “invisible part was the Name, which is the only begotten Son”
Ireneus on Valentinus Others refer to the redemption as follows: “The Name which is hidden (to onoma to apokekrummenon) from every deity, dominion, and power, which Jesus the Nazarene put on (o enedusato) in the spheres of light , [the Name] of Christ, the Christ who lives through the Holy Spirit for the angelic redemption” (I.xx.3)
Acts of Thomas “Come Holy Name of Christ that is above every name!” (Ch 27 Greek version ; cp . ch 132;157)
A most surprising connection is found between the sign of the cross as a seal of the
believer being baptised and the name Yaua, the tetragrammaton. In the Western Tradition the repentant was first baptised and then given the sign of the cross as a seal of the unction following. Fossum describes it as a “post baptismal signatio crucis of the forehead associated with an unction and performed with or without oil” (Fossum 1985, 101). However in the Syriac speaking Church the tradition was different and connection the seal of the sign of the cross with the name Yaua. According to Fossum in Syriac Christianity the sealing of the untion came before the actual baptism. And whereas in the Western Tradition the sign of the cross was a symbol of the name cristos or the cross upon which he died in the Syriac speaking Church this was not the case. “It had retained its significance as an emblem of the Divine Name” (Fossum 1985, 101).
Narsai, a fifth century Nestorian Church Father who lived in Edessa, illustrates this in his Liturgical Homilies. When the priest anoints the candidate, asserts Narsai: He “signs the flock with the sign of the Lord, and seals upon it His Hidden Name by the outward look” Homiliy 22 (R.H. Connolly trans. The Lirturgical Homolies of Narsai (TS, VIII/1), Cambridge, 1909). Narsai also writes “the Name of the Divinity looks out from the sign on the forehead” (Connolly p.45). The sign is the cross and here the divine name is said to look out from the cross. Fossums argument is that although Narsai is quite late he reflects an earlier tradition. This tradition is reflected in the Syriac Odes of Solomon and the Acts of Thomas. Here the untion is called a “sealing” and the seal is the Name. Firstly in the Acts of Thomas we see that as Thomas begins the rite he calls on the Name. He says
“...Jesus , let [your] victorious Power come, and let it settle in this oil [...] and let it dwell in this oil, over which we name your holy Name! (Ch 157) (Fossum 1985, 102) Fossum makes the observation that the Power is “identical with the Name”. In chapter 27 and 132 the Divine Name is called the “Power of the Most High” and the Power established in Christ”.
It is very important for us to give attention to the words used by Thomas in the rite. Such words of ritual are for the most part missing from the New Testament but will help us to understand what people actually said and when the name may have been used and how. We note that Thomas claims to name Jesus name over the oil. A pertinent question is how does one name a name over the oil? However this is not our purpose now. Narsai gives some insight as to how the Name and its Power enters the catechumen:
The “Secret Power” which is contained in the oil is the Hidden Name: “The name of the Divinity he mixes in his hands with the oil[...]...Through the anointing the believer recieves the Name: “With the Name hidden in it [i.e. the oil] he signs the visible body, and the sharp power of the Name enters even into the soul”.
This connection between the three synonyms Name, Power and Spirit can give great insight into the understanding of the New Testament and the place of the name in it.
An additional evidence that some thing occur in the baptism which was connected with the name is the clear New Testament evidence that Jesus refered to and ministered and acted in that name. Firstly before at the baptism the declaration of the Father is “This is my beloved son”.
Matthew 1 outos estin o uios mou o agaphtos, en w eudokhsa
mark su ei o uios o agaphtos, eudokhsa
luke uios mou ei su, egw shmeron gegenhka
In all cases the coice refers to Jesus as the Son. This declaration harps back to Psalm 2, where the Psalmist says I will declre the decree of Yaua. He said to be bni atah, my son you are. Luke rendering in Luke holds closet to the text in Psalm 2.
This states in the standard printed edition:
διαγγελλων το προσταγμα κυριου κυριος ειπεν προς με υιος μου ει συ εγω σημερον γεγεννηκα σε
Which agrees with the Lukan records of the evnts. The key point is that in the Hebrew it is Yaua alon who speaks. The synoptics then move into the temptation. In Matthews case Jesus uses mouth of God, where the torah uses mouth of Yaua, You shall not tempt Yaua thy God, You shall worship Yaua thy God and him only shalt serve. In Luke he states every word of God, You shall worship Yaua thy God and You shall not tempt Yaua thy God. It is interesting that in both cases the command about living from the words proceeding from the mouth of Yaua, Yaua is changed to theos implying that in the text Jesus was citing or Luke and Matthew were referring had Elohim in the text. However in both the other text the form Yaua thy God is retained.
και εκακωσεν σε και ελιμαγχονησεν σε και εψωμισεν σε το μαννα ο ουκ ειδησαν οι πατερες σου ινα αναγγειλη σοι οτι ουκ επ' αρτω μονω ζησεται ο ανθρωπος αλλ' επι παντι ρηματι τω εκπορευομενω δια στοματος θεου ζησεται ο ανθρωπος
The printed LXX based on Vaticanus, Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus speak of dia stomatos theou. Matthew has the same. Luke has panti remati theou. The MT refers to Pi Yaua, mouth of Yaua. The Lhamsa translation from the Aramaic has mouth of Yaua the OT but Mouth of God in Matthew. Thus Matthew 4:4 represents a seperate tradition over whose mouth the word comes from by which man may live. However both Matthew and Luke indicate it is the Lord your God in the other two cases.
Matthew Luke LXX
kurion ton theon kurion ton theon kurion ton theon
kurion ton theon sou kurion ton theon kurion ton theon
We may notice something in the way kurion is witten which may indicate something special in its treatment. It is not given with any definite article as theos is. This ungrammatical treatment may be there to draw the readers attention to something. The point however which we want to make is clear. In Jesus first words after his baptism the name Yaua occurs at least two times. The converstaion is completely private and it is the son of God who is speaking. There would appear to be no reason why he would not have spoken the name whatsoever.
The anointing took place at baptism. The voice was that of his Father. He recieved the Spirit which is sometimes called the Name or the Power. Jesus then goes forth and later claims “I have come in my Father’s name.” We remember the discussion on the seal and how it is connected to the Name. Jesus says in John 6:27, the Son of Man...for on Him the Father, God has set his seal”. The seal can be seen in the light of what we have said above but also in relation to the Gospel of John. In this gospel John the Baptist states he knew who Jesus was because he saw the Spirit, come down on him. Perhaps the voice of the Apocalypse can also speak here. Firstly there is the group in chapter 9 who are protected because they have the seal of God on their forehead. However under the fifth trumpet we are not told what the seal of God is. However in chapter 14 we find the 144000 have the Lambs name and his Father name’s written on their foreheads. The Son of Man came in the name of his Father. But this was the name which the Father also gave to him (John 17).
Excursus
The idea that the Name Yaua may be seen as synonymous with Power can perhaps be seen as forshadowed in the words of Jeremiah, where Yaua saysHe will cause them to know his yad (power) and his gvorah and they shall now that his name is Yaua. This recognition that Power was synonymous with name in some texts from the early Church period and that Spirit was synonymous with Name in the same period will help us to understand better the role of the name Yaua in the eraly Church period
posted by Evangelist Edi Nachman Bsc. PGCE @ 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home