“And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.”
(Matthew 1:21)
“I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”
(Revelation 22:16)
The name of a person is about the most important thing about him. The name is that by which a person is identified. A person may go by several names. Usually a man has at least two names which are given to him at birth, his first name and his surname. But it is rare to see a person with only those two names. They usually go by at least three names. Donald Trump for example is Donald John Trump. John Kennedy is John Fitzgerald Kennedy. People also have nicknames, for example the footballer Christiano Ronaldo is called CR7. Though it is not as smart as it looks to abandon a person’s actual name for a nickname, it is used effectively for celebrities whose personalities also serve as a brand.
There are people that are also named for their great achievements. This is used as an honour or to single people out. For example we have many Alexanders in the world at present and in history, but only one Alexander the Great. We have many Richards, but only one Richard the Lionhearted. We have two popular Martin Luthers in history, but only one Martin Luther the Reformer. And people are also named by the place they came from or served prominently, for example we have two prominent Augustines in history, but only one Augustine of Hippo the second being Augustine of Canterbury. People can also be called according to the dearness of the person to them. That we call pet name. People call their spouses darling, honey, sweetheart, and maybe even chewing gum.
I pointed out in my book, THE CHRISTIAN LIFE OF SACRIFICE, that God gives names too, but he gives in an entirely different way. Different from how we humans give names. I wrote:
“God gave a new name to Abram when he said, “Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.” (Genesis 17:5). God gave him a name with the reason of what he has now made him. A father of many nations…
“He gave a name to Jacob, “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.” (Genesis 32:28). The glorious people of Israel were not called after Abraham, Isaac, or even Jacob, but by that new name which God bestowed on Jacob…
“God also gave a name to our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The angel delivering the message to Joseph said, “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.” (Matthew 1:21). Because he was to save man from their sins he was called Jesus…
“There is something common with the way God gives names to people. It always has to do with power, glory, honour, prestige, etc. he is bestowing on the one he is naming…”
So God doesn’t give names at random, expression of a desire for a person, or just out of any kind of feeling. He gives names with a purpose and as a promise or prophecy, and it always comes with power, glory, honour, etc. that he shall bestow.
There are many ways a person may get a name, but about the most important thing about a name is the ability to identify a person without confusion of who’s being referred to, and therein lies the power of the name. The name without the person it identifies isn’t meaningful. As Thomas Aquinas wrote, “we can give a name to anything in as far as we can understand it.”
A person says, “I like Augustine…” but which Augustine does he like? Is it the Augustine of Hippo, Augustine of Canterbury, or the Augustine that got fired last week for beating up his boss in the office? Funny enough both Augustines are called St. Augustine, so calling one saint doesn’t differentiate him from the other, so the places where they did their most prominent service is necessary to be added if we wish to know for sure which Augustine is liked. Where there is no clarity in identification there is a problem with the name of a person and something needs to be done about it. For example we have so many James in the Bible so we had one called “James the less” (Mark 15:40). Where proper identification is a must, proper naming is essential. We see this wisdom in the field of botany where every single plant and all species is given a name that can’t be confused with that of another.
The name of a person in ideal cases defines a person but this is not all the time. Calling a spouse honey doesn’t make him or her a sweet brown sticky liquid and calling someone sweetheart doesn’t make him or her a sweetened cardiac muscle. But the names Jesus and Christ defines the person of Christ, though the name the Lion of the tribe of Judah identifies him with reference to his qualities but doesn’t define him, for he’s no actual lion. He was born a man and not a lion. What is important is we know who has the name and are not confused about it.
So in knowing about a person his name and his person must go side by side. In the key texts of this chapter we see two introductions of Christ. The first is the angel of God introducing him by his name and what he shall accomplish. The second is Christ introducing his person. The entire Bible is full of texts talking about his name and his person from the mouths of prophets, angels, his very self, his apostles, strangers, and even demon possessed and Satan himself, however we shall not exhaust them here. His name as Christ in the flesh all pertains to his mission as a Saviour, and his person presented as true God of true God, very God of very God.
Trifles Against The Most Holy Name Of Christ
“For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.”
(2 Corinthians 11:4)
I have been seeing of late some people arguing that Jesus should not be called Jesus but Yeshua. Many like arguments have been coming to the fore and it is quite disturbing at how such people would seek to disturb the tranquil of the church over insignificant, unverified, and unverifiable trifles.
We know how dear this sweet name is to us who believe in him. The hymn writer wrote these words, “How sweet the name of Jesus sounds in a believer’s ear! It soothes his sorrow, heals his wounds, and drives away his fear.” We have seen many sweet and worthy things said about that most noble name. It is this most noble name we love that people desire to cast the slur of vain trifles at.
I may not have a full knowledge or understanding of this argument, but what I have heard is this, the letter J was not in use at the time of Christ so his name couldn’t have been Jesus. They make a diligent search and trace the root of the letter J and say it was about fifteen centuries after Christ that the letter J was invented. Since it is written in the Bible, “For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.” (2 Corinthians 11:4), therefore, say they, Jesus whose name starts with a J is another Jesus, and since his name (the real Jesus) is the only name by which we could be saved (Acts 4:12) we must therefore not believe in a Christ whose name starts with the letter J. The messiah whose name starts with the letter J is a false Messiah. So they claim the right and correct name of the true Jesus is Yeshua. Not sure when the letter Y was invented, maybe it was invented in Eden, but they somehow are convinced that that is his true name. So for example, when you baptise, claim they, you must baptise in the name of Yeshua, not Jesus. That is the argument as I have heard it.
Language: A Confounded Shifting Sand
“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech… Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
(Genesis 11: 1, 9)
“And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right…”
(Judges 12:5 – 6)
Before I go on to talk on the core of the matter I’d like to point out some things to us about language. Language since man’s rebellion at the tower of Babel has been a confounded shifting sand. This is how God ordained it to be as a punishment to our race. But just as we live with death which is a curse and let wisdom guide us as we face its realities, as the psalmist says, “teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.” Psalm 90:12, so also must we live with the fact that language is a confounded shifting sand which is a curse and let wisdom guide us as we face its realities. To pretend that we are not under such a curse is to be foolish.
Nations have different languages almost as varying as their geographical coordinates. The only uniform languages across a wide geographical space are those of colonial nations such as English, French, etc. To maintain the uniformity it has to be propped up by the educational systems in the colonised nations and with the help of a uniform dictionary. Even with such things meant to assist in maintaining uniformity in the English Language for example, we still have seven types of English languages in the world. And despite all these efforts to ensure uniformity, the force of the evolution of language is so strong that even dictionaries are now forced to evolve. Older dictionaries are extremely hard to use in getting meaning of things, and from time to time new words are added and removed from dictionaries, and some words that were in use before are now tagged archaic or obsolete in newer dictionaries.
Not only do languages change from place to place, nation to nation, people to people, etc., it also vary from time to time. Not many people who read and understand modern English Language thoroughly can understand old English, for example the English of the King James Bible is not readily understood by the modern reader. That is why many fall prey to the nonsense written in contemporary English translations of the Bible. Not being able to understand the King James English they opt for contemporary easy-to-read translations which does the Christian faith a major disservice.
I have read writings in English Language written before the King James Bible and they vary from the King James English. I have also read writings written in periods between the time of the first publishing of the King James Bible to this present time and they vary from the King James English and vary from our modern English. Their differences are so striking, that should you take it as it is written and apply the meaning of the present time to them, you’d be shocked at why people would be writing such things. For example, in old English the word breast is used instead of chest, and so we see expressions such as, “And the publican, standing afar off… smote upon his breast…” (Luke 18:13). Does it mean that men of the past had breasts like women? And even if they did, why did the publican have to smite his own? What a foul and bizarre thought it brings to mind if we have to apply modern meaning to expressions of antiquity. However when you read it giving meaning to what you read according to the understanding of the sense of the time in which it was written then would you be able to get what the writer really meant. There are many languages in the world that also have their old versions. There is old Spanish for example and old Turkish that many modern Turks and Spanish don’t understand. So we see that languages vary in both dimensions of time and space. It varies in chronological space as much as it varies in geographical space.
In his book, THE INTERESTING NARRATIVE OF THE LIFE OF OLAUDAH EQUIANO, Olaudah wrote that everywhere he went to in Africa people spoke different languages but could still understand each other. But today in Nigeria alone we have hundreds of languages and ethnic groups that can’t understand each other. I watched a video of a completely different language which may not even be in Nigeria, and when they wanted to tell the driver to press the brake, they said it in their language, “tieh brake,” but if you were to say it in my language, it will be “teh brake.” I also watched a video of what was most likely an East African setting. In it two men were trying to dig with a stick and the stick broke, then they lamented saying, “o bajieh.” Again I was surprised because in my language it would be said, “o bajeh.” And one word I see as a proof of all languages being connected is onions. Quite strangely, in languages starting in Nigeria to all the world onions is called, “alubosa” or something similar. In Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, etc. it is called, “alubosa,” or “alubasa,” or something similar. I was surprised during the times we lived in Pakistan to find that even there onion is pronounced “alubasa.” Even in Arabic it is the same. And probably in so many other languages. I won’t go on in this long gist, but the point is all languages are connected. The fact that we don’t understand ourselves despite all being connected shows that languages have changed a great deal even from how it was spoken in times of antiquity. Languages were not just scattered once and for all. It was scattered with an ever increasing degree. From one language springs a thousand new languages, which of the thousand new languages is identical to the original? Probably none. But all would have one thing or the other that has been preserved from the original. Something like “alubosa.”
Shall we then say people living in a widely different chronological space speak one language just because they are in the same geographical locations and are called by the same name of their nativity? Shall we judge old writings of such languages with the meanings of the present? No! To do so would be folly.
So to pretend we are not under such a curse and so bring such arguments as though they even know what people of the past spoke is foolishness.
It is worthy of note that even though death is a curse God used it efficaciously to the blessed end of the salvation of man. The same way, even though it is a curse that languages must vary in every geographical and chronological space, yet shall it abound to the glory of God through his wise and providential workings.
Evolution Of Names: A Natural Phenomenon
“… he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.”
(1 Samuel 9:9)
“… the name of Debir before was Kirjathsepher.”
(Joshua 15:15)
“In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar…”
(Daniel 10:1)
The change in names over time is a natural phenomenon and it can be seen clearly in the Bible. And provided the thing identified by the name is well understood it is never a problem. As we see in the verses above, a prophet was once called a seer, and that wasn’t a problem as long as we understand the office both words define. That which was called Debir was once called Kirjathsepher, it’s not a problem so far the names don’t create a confusion as to which geographical location is referred to.
When talking about whose name is written in the Old Testament as, “Elijah” he is called “Elias” (Matthew 17:10). Elisha is called, “Eliseus” (Luke 4:27). He is referring to one and the same person, not a person exactly like Elijah in words and deed, only with a different hairstyle. Even Joshua in the Old Testament is called, “Jesus” in the New Testament (Hebrews 4:8). Shall we then say Jesus, the Christ, was a minister to Moses? Of course not.
Not only does the changes in names occur when a name in the Old Testament is referred to in the New Testament. We see that Jesus changed some of the names of his apostles, particularly that of Peter. Peter was originally called Simon but Jesus changed it to Peter meaning rock. This same Peter was called Cephas because that was the Greek meaning of his name. So Simon, Peter, and Cephas were the names of one person in the same New Testament. Accepting the gospel preached by Peter is not rejecting the gospel preached by Cephas. Saul was later called Paul. Accepting Saul into your house as a Christian is not accepting a different Paul. Judas the brother of James introduced himself in his epistle as Jude, not Judas. Reading the epistle of Jude is not reading an unauthorised gospel of a non-apostle just because in the list of apostles his name was spelt differently. Elijah when he walked on earth was written as “Elijah.” When he was referred to in the New Testament he was called “Elias.” But in the same New Testament, the same Elijah is called “John,” that is “John the baptist.” That he is called John does not mean he is not the Elijah and/or Elias who was to come. The list goes on.
If we read meanings to things this way the damaging effect this will have on our understanding of the Bible would be great. The testimony of Paul wouldn’t be complete. The testimony that says, “But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And they glorified God in me.” (Galatians 1:23-24). That is he was called Saul when he persecuted the church, but called Paul as an apostle of Christ, meaning the person who persecuted the church is different from the one who built and edified the church. If his testimony was not complete because of the change of name, seeing that the argument is that a change of name implies a change of person, how shall then glory be given to God for his sake?
Now we are faced with differing geographical locations, differing people of differing history, differing languages with almost absolutely nothing in common, and differing times, all these are we faced with all at once. Names are sure to change in such circumstances. Peter for example in my own native language is spelt Peteru. Pronounced Pay-Tay-Ru. Quite interestingly in my language, the name for rock (which Peter means) is spelt apata which sounds like Peter. Maybe there is a connection between my language and ancient Hebrew, but there wasn’t enough reason to call his name Apata and we rather call him Peteru. Maybe for example the original name of rock was “pata” then evolved into apata in Yoruba and Peter in Hebrew, then the two languages converge again in the Biblical context, but rather than move towards the original, it evolved further into “Peteru.” In Latin he is called Petri. In some languages including mine John is called Yohana. The letter J is also pronounced as Y in many languages, for example, the name spelt Jancker in German is pronounced Yancker. In such languages even if it is spelt Johana it is still pronounced as Yohana. All these for one John.
So language is never static and it is ever changing. We must accept it and not bring up trifles over the complexities of language.
The Incomplete Reasoning Of Such Propounders
“For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.”
(Isaiah 28:11)
“There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.”
(1 Corinthians 14:10)
“And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
(Philippians 2:11)
Also we are to know that while all the wrath of the propounders of these arguments of trifles have been angrily vented on the letter J, the whole of the letters of the English alphabet was introduced about five centuries after Christ. That is in the earliest forms. But how we have it today has also been altered greatly from that time. So if we say that Jesus should not be called so because the letter J was invented 15 centuries after Christ, then we ought not to have anything of our faith written or read with the English alphabet. Everything should be written and read in the Hebrew alphabet. If Jesus is another Jesus from which Paul preached, then the English Bible is another Bible, and the gospel in it is another gospel. And the preachers of this gospel should be forever accursed, for it is written, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8-9).
Shall the men who risked their lives and shed their blood that the message of salvation should be available in English language be accursed for such noble sacrifices they made? Our beloved Tyndale, John Wycliffe, the Lollards, the translators of the King James Bible, Cyril and Methodius who translated the Bible to other languages, and their most noble company. Shall all these be accursed for these propounders of trifles to be right? Are they not trying to reestablish the folly of the court of Rome, in the times of the Lollards, that deemed everyone who read or quoted the text of the Bible in English Language to be worthy of death, and that the Bible must be read only in Latin by people who understood Latin? So if we are to bring the argument of these propounders of trifles to a logical conclusion, all Bibles and reading of the Bible in any other language apart from the Hebrew language would be anathematised as reading another Gospel. Any person who has ever glanced at church history cannot fail but notice the sublime holy love that moved men to work tenaciously to ensure that people of diverse languages have the good news available to them in their native languages. And seeing such a holy divine love that moved men to such acts of love, when he hears these theorists speak he cannot but fail to hear the voice of an angry Devil expressing his fury through these propounders of evil conspiracy. And hearing the Devil vociferate through them he knows they’re mere mouthpieces of God.
It is written, “As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” (Romans 14:11). In that it says every tongue, it means people of every language shall confess to God. And we know that if he says every tongue, he means people shall confess him in their own tongues, not in the Hebrew tongue alone. There are several verses that also tell us about people praising God in diverse tongues, all being accepted and acceptable by him, and others about the gospel being preached to people of different nations and tongues. Some are, “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.” (Revelation 14:6 – 7). “And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.” (Revelation 10:11). “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.” (Revelation 7:9 – 10). “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.” (Revelation 5:9 – 10).
On the day of Pentecost it was said, “Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born.” (Acts 2:6 – 8). And again, “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.” (Acts 10:44 – 46). All this reflects first, how God accepts people of all languages to praise him and relate with him in their own languages, and secondly, since no man speaks the heavenly language there is no sacred language exclusively acceptable to God for his worship. As it is written, “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2). So the language of the Spirit is not even Hebrew for it says, “no man understandeth him [the person speaking in tongues]… in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.”
Hebrew is no mystery. You can take a class in Hebrew and understand and speak it fluently. Hebrew was just one of the many languages spoken in the world long before Abraham was even called. Abraham was not called then given a heavenly language. The Hebrew tongue was already in use before he was called. Flavius Josephus wrote, “Sala was the son of Arphaxad; and his son was Heber, from whom they originally called the Jews Hebrews.” So it was from the name Heber (spelt Eber in the Bible) that the language Hebrew got its name.
And finally, the great commission of the Lord states, “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” (Mark 16:15). The command to go into all the world is not to teach them Hebrew but to preach the gospel. It is therefore expedient to teach them in their own languages. And the way that people of these languages give names to each person according to their tongues differs from language to language. Like Yoruba there are languages that do not and will never have, as long as the sun and moon exists, a word that ends with a consonant so much that the mouth would be closed or the air passage obstructed. All the words in the Yoruba language for example ends with the mouth wide open. Someone once joked that that is why Yorubas have big mouths. But Yorubas don’t have mouths bigger than other mouths anyways. That’s by the way. I suspect the Italian language may be that way too. For the little I’ve heard makes me think so and they call their own language “Italiano” ending with a vowel and the air passage unobstructed unlike English “Italian” which ends with a consonant and the air passage obstructed. There could be many others like that. How shall people of such a language ever, as long as the sun and moon exist, call names like Jesus, John, Judas, Philip, Joseph, Simon, and like names. In Italian for example, still holding to my suspicion, Philip is called Filipo and Simon is called Simone, pronounced Simon-ay. In my language, Jesus is Jesu, John is Yohana, Judas is Judasi, Philip is Filipu, Simon is Simoni, as in “see money.” For sure, they’ll never call such names in the language in which the gospel was brought to them. Languages that are like this must by all means alter names when receiving the gospel.
Christianity is not in any way a religion tied to any language. The faith in Jesus originates in the heart, not on the tongue as it is written, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:10). No matter the language or tongue by which the mouth confesses that which the heart believes, that confession is acceptable to God to salvation. What is important is that the confession is a true and accurate expression of the belief in Christ in the heart, the Son of God, who was born of the virgin Mary, crucified for our sins, raised to life on the third day, ascended to heaven, and is at the right hand of God. Faith in his person brings salvation.
So, the Christ we believe in is not another Christ, neither is it another gospel which we have received, but the one true gospel, only presented to us in our languages. Why should we be seen as people that should be accursed? That they even reject the name “Jesus” and not the entirety of the Bible shows either their double standards in judgment or their incomplete reasoning.
Let these people say anything they want to say, it is obvious that it is important that we should have the good news of the gospel in our native languages that we may share in that salvation. We ought to also understand with clarity the gospel of Christ, as it is written, “So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.” (1 Corinthians 14:9). And if the whole world is to be preached to for their salvation, why would the world be burdened with a language that is hard to be understood when everyone could easily learn that truth in their own languages? And if in each language, names of persons differ according to the tongue of the speakers yet the persons are the same, how does that affect the truth that is being preached?
Hope Of Salvation In The Name Of The Person Of Christ
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
(Acts 4:12)
Now upon what is our Salvation to be anchored? On the sound of a name or on the person identified by the name? On the person of course. It is not upon the sound of his name that we hope but on the name that defines his person. Now names may vary but the person remains constant. As we had seen earlier, when we also look at the difference in names as they vary from language to language, we see that they don’t mean different people, lest we think that the writers of Biblical books were deceived as the propounders of this argument of trifles think people are deceived to be worshiping Jesus as the Messiah. So also is our faith, hope, and salvation not found in the name of a sound or spelling but in the person who was begotten, crucified, risen, and enthroned. It is he who said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6), that we hope upon. It is he who was prophesied that should come. It is he who is called Emmanuel. It is he by whose stripes we are healed. It is he of whom we read in our Bibles, “and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.” (Matthew 1:21). This is the anchor of our hope of salvation; the person of Christ.
When the Bible says, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12), lest we think that the emphasis is on his name than on his person, we see that it says first, “Neither is there salvation in any other.” We are first introduced with very special emphasis to his person, and the name mentioned later was in reference to his person not to the sound or spelling of the name.
Now here is the truth about this argument. It is an argument trying to shift our hope from a person to a sound or a spelling. It is an idolatry of having hope in a sound or spelling the way witches and wizards believe in the words they speak in their incantations. Our salvation is not built on an incantation. It is built not on a spelling or sound but on that most noble person of Christ. It is the people who practice incantations that are concerned about sounds. They are the ones that must curl their tongues in a particular way if their incantation is to work. But we are not of such. To have a hope on the sound or spelling of a name is to have hope on sinking and shifting sand. They who think their hope and salvation are found in the name of a sound or spelling have their hope and salvation lost in the confounded sands of time for even they who say his name is Yeshua cannot tell us with all certainty (except maybe for vain signs of presenting us with marks on old scrolls or wall carvings) that the Yeshua they say was not originally pronounced Yashua, Yishua, Yushua, Yoshua, Yaoshua, Yeoshua, Yisha, or anything of that sort. If the name Elijah could be transformed to Elias with time, how do we know that this hope of salvation has not been buried in the sands of time leaving us with nothing to hope on for salvation?
Christ says, “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” (Matthew 24:5). If it were just by his name without reference to his person that deceivers shall deceive many, then we ought to be careful. By identifying with Christ, that is his very person, deceivers also deceive many. So must we yet be careful.
Wisdom must therefore guide us not to have our hopes of salvation planted on that which is a shifting sand. Woe to them who have their hope of salvation anchored on the sound of a name rather than in the person of Jesus Christ the begotten, crucified, risen, and enthroned. The name of his person is what is important, not the sound or spelling of it.
In the name of Christ we have all things. We have answers to prayer, we have wisdom, we are identified by his name, and we have eternal life, amongst a host of other benefits. This most noble name of Christ isn’t something we should trifle with.
Conclusion
“For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?”
(1 Corinthians 14:8)
So Christ, whose name may differ from language to language, is the author and finisher of our salvation. He is the Almighty. He is our maker. We shall not be able to exhaust all there is to say about him. But he is the one on whom the hope of our salvation is found. The sound and spelling of his name differs from language to language, but his person remains the same.
In this first section we shall be taking our time to look at the different aspects of the person of Christ. May God guide us along as we explore the person of his Son. Amen.
Prayer: Dear Father and Lord, as we study the different aspects of the person of your Son, we request that you keep guiding us into all truths. Help us to know him better, and in knowing him better draw closer to him, and in drawing closer to him witness about him to the world clearer, louder, and more efficaciously. This we ask in Jesus’ name. Amen.
