Back to Alphabetical Index | Back to Chapter Index

There are some people who hold the belief that salvation is dependent on the ability to recognize and vocalize the names of God the  Father and Jesus Christ as they appear in the original text of the Bible.

Does your salvation depend upon how you pronounce the name of the Creator of the physical universe? Is  there divine inspiration in the  phonetic representation of the names of God the  Father and Jesus Christ?  Does an individual who can recognize and  pronounce these names correctly have access to supernatural powers?

This belief is commonly referred to as the 'Sacred Names' doctrine. And the adherents of this doctrine are often called Yahweists, because Yahweh is one of the Hebrew names for God.

The following are the major tenets of the Sacred Names belief:

Is This Doctrine Important?

The Sacred Names teaching is so important to many of its believers, that most of their worship toward God and their literature surrounds this one issue.  It is  also evident  from the literature  that they produce concerning their beliefs that all other doctrines of  their  belief system take second place to this one issue.

The belief in the Hebrew Sacred  Names doctrine may seem unimportant to some people and even ludicrous to others.   However, it is of such a major concern to some groups that they have spent a great deal of time,  money,  and effort writing books,  pamphlets, and study papers about this subject.


There is merit in researching the names of God; however, this research has  given rise to the dangerous belief that the  recognition and pronunciation of the name of God is a prerequisite for salvation.

Editors Note:

There  is  absolutely no way to give a quick and easy  answer  to confirm or deny the validity of the Sacred Names  doctrine, because those who teach this belief  use many scriptures in their attempt to prove  their point.  Because of this, it  will be necessary to examine each foundational point in detail so that there will be  enough information on which to base  an intelligent conclusion in regard to this false doctrine.

Specifically, this study answers the following questions in order to show the impact that belief in this doctrine can have on one's salvation:

1. Are people required to worship and serve the Sovereign Father and his Son or their names?

The answer to this question is of utmost  importance to our salvation. Moreover, the  question of whether or not to follow the Sacred Names doctrine is even more basic than  the ability to correctly recognize and pronounce the name of the Ones who English speakers recognize as 'God the Father' and 'Jesus Christ.' The  basic  issues  of the Sacred Names doctrine  revolve  around three foundational questions:

Once  these three basic questions are answered it is easy to see the fallacy of the Sacred Names doctrine.

2. Is  the  meaning of a name important, or is it the pronunciation that is important?

3. What was God's name before the Genesis Flood?

4. Is the Hebrew name of God a 'mantra' or 'talisman' to the Sacred Names believer?

5. Is there some power in the Hebrew name of God when it is pronounced correctly?

6. Do the Sacred Names believers worship the Supreme Sovereign or do they worship his name?

The answers to these questions are important in order to understand the seriousness of  the Sacred Names doctrine and its potential impact on those who are truly seeking to worship the true Supreme Sovereign of all that exists.

There is nothing inherently wrong with people using the Hebrew or Greek name of the Sovereign Father or his Son  as a part of their language.  The problem is not whether   the  name  is  'Yah', 'Yahwey', 'Elohim', 'Theos', 'Logos'  or  any  other derivation of what is thought to be the correct pronunciation  of their sacred names; the problem is the importance some people place on the phonetic sound of the name in relation to salvation and  the teaching that the inability to recognize or pronounce their names' adversely impacts on  one's relationship with the Sovereign Father and his Son.

The Sacred Names doctrine states clearly that, unless a person  knows the exact name of God and its pronunciation,  there is no salvation for that person.  If this teaching is correct, there  are  many questions about how a  person can and cannot gain salvation. This  teaching  leaves  the  following people  without hope of salvation:

If the usage of the phonetic sound of the name of  the Savior is the only way a person can obtain salvation,  Abraham,  Moses, King David and a host of others will be left out of Kingdom of God, because none of these people ever heard the name of the Savior.


Was  Hebrew the universal language before the Flood?  Many of the Sacred Names groups believe it was.  However, there is no proof to substantiate this belief.

Let Us Confuse Their  Language

"And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower,  which the children of men built. And the Lord said,  Behold, the people are one, and they have all one language;  and this they begin to do: and  now nothing that they have imagined to do will be impossible for them. Let us go down  and confuse their  language, so that they may not  understand each other. So the Lord scattered them upon  the face  of  all the earth:  and they stopped building  the  city" (Gen.11:5-8 Para.).

Here,  we  learn  four  major things about these people who were building this city and a tower:  

1. They all spoke the same language

2. This language was confused by the Creator

3. The people were scattered throughout the earth

4. This confusion of the language gave rise to other languages

Nowhere in this account is there any reference to these people's language being  a universal language or a language that was spoken before the Great Flood.  It is entirely possible that there were many different pre-Flood languages, and that Noah and his family brought any number of them to the post-Flood world.  The thing that precipitated God's intervention was the explosion of  knowledge and technology among the people who lived in this one area of the world, and the need to stop their technological progress in order for God's plan for the salvation of humanity to proceed as scheduled (Gen.11:1-6).


There is abundant proof that the Great Flood of Noah's time did happen. However, there is no evidence that the language that Noah and his family spoke before this flood was Hebrew, because the flood destroyed the evidence.  However, artifacts have been discovered that seem to indicate that a written language different from Hebrew existed before the Great Flood.

In  the  spring of 1891 a farmer named J.H.  Hooper discovered  a buried wall many thousands of feet long, this wall extends from the Hiawassee river north of Chattanooga southward, where it dips under the Tennessee river.  Upon this wall a number of blocks were discovered  which were covered with hieroglyphs of  a strange language  interspersed  with small pictures of  the  sun, crescent moon, and animals, many of which were unidentifiable. All together,  872 individual characters were noted with many  being repeated,  which  indicates that these hieroglyphs were indeed  a written  language (Translations of the   New  York  Academy  of  Sciences  (11:26-29) written by A.L.Rawson).

Tennessee Wall Hieroglyphs:   

At  Lawn  Ridge north of Peori,  Illinois,  in August 1870  three workmen who were  drilling  a well brought up from a depth of 114  feet a  coin-medallion  in  the drilling  mud. This  coin-medallion was  about the size of a U.S.  quarter and made  of  a copper alloy,  machine rolled and acid etched with the picture of a  woman on one side and the picture of a crouching animal on the other.  Around the outer edges of both sides were found glyphs of very  definite  character,  that  show  all the signs and form  of alphabetic  writing  (Sparks  From  a Geologist Hammer by Professor Alexander Winchell).

While these two discoveries do not prove that Hebrew was not one of the languages of the pre-flood world; their discovery does document extremely ancient languages of unknown origin that bear no resemblance to ancient or modern Hebrew, or any other known script.


Eber,  the father of the Hebrews,  was not born until  about 73  years after the Flood and at least 60 years after the  Tower of Babel incident.  If he was the father of the Hebrew  language, what was God's name before Eber?   Did the Hebrew language exist before Eber? What  does  history show to be the language in existence  at  the time of Babel?   Some historians say that the Hebrew language only  dates back to about 2,200 B.C.  Of course some feel  it  is much  older.  The problem with any of the dates discussed is that there are just as many opinions as there are dates, and there is no totality of agreement among the various historians.

However, it is known that Sumerian history antedates that of  the Hebrews  by  about  a thousand years.  Therefore,  it  seems likely that, if there was a single  language in use at the time of the Tower of Babel, it would have been Sumerian, which is definitely not Hebrew.   Some point to  the ancient Moabite Stone to prove Hebrew was  the universal language,  but the writing on the stone only proves two things:  It shows that the name of  the Hebrew God was different from the heathen god Baal,  and that  Hebrew  was  one among many languages in use during that time.

According  to the Encyclopedia Judaica,  article 'Alphabet',  the Hebrews adopted the alphabetic script along with cultural  values from the Canaanites during the eleventh and  twelfth  centuries B.C.. They  followed and used the Phoenician script until the ninth century B.C. when they began to develop their own national script.  So, the Hebrew alphabet, as we know it today, had  its origin  in the proto-Canaanite  alphabet  and is  not 'sacred' in any sense of the word.


Why  would God find it necessary to bring a new pure language  to the earth if Hebrew is that pure language. The  necessity of a pure language should raise questions as to the  validity  of  Hebrew being the language of the future.  It should also bring into question the Hebrew pronunciation of God's name as being the purest. The  following scripture leaves no doubt as to when the Lord will restore or institute a pure language:

"Therefore wait  on  me, says the Lord,  until the day that I will rise up to the  prey: for  my determination  is  to gather the  nations,  that  I  may assemble the kingdoms, to pour on them my indignation, even all my  fierce anger:  for all the earth shall be devoured  with  the fire  of my jealousy.  For then will turn to the people  a  pure language,  that they may call on the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent" (Zeph.3:8-9 KJV).


One of the reasons for discussing the Old and New Testaments separately in this study is to expose the fallacy of one of the major tenets of the Sacred Names doctrine that states that the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. If this were true, where are  the original Hebrew documents kept? And can they be viewed and authenticated like the Greek documents?  If this claim were true, where is this canonization of the  New Testament in the Hebrew language? God says that he would preserve his word, so if it was preserved, where is it?  There is no physical proof of this supposition?

If indeed there is an original text,  it has been hidden extremely well from those whose life work is to discover and publish such findings. Most importantly, why do the Sacred Names  groups use and quote from the  Greek New Testament to try to prove many of their doctrinal positions, if they do not believe it is a valid text?


In the article   Exploding  The  Inspired  Greek  New Testament Myth by Assemblies of Yahweh, we find the following statement:

"We believe that although the original text was  inspired,  there is  no such thing as an inspired translation.   Therefore,  until such  time as the original documents are unearthed,  we must base all doctrine on the Old Testament. We should utilize  the  New Testament,  however,  and  always allow the  Old Testament to interpret  the  New . . .The oldest manuscripts extant  with  the exception of some Syriac fragments are Greek . . .The first point we  would  like to establish is  that  there are no original manuscripts of any book or portion of the New Testament  extant today."

It is interesting that all of the Sacred Names groups seem to agree that the original New Testament was inspired.  However, they say  there are no  inspired or accurate translations of these original texts in  existence  today.   If the New Testament  is  not  the inspired Word of God, there is no reason to use it for spiritual guidance or quote from it. Moreover, if  there  are no accurate translations,  we do not  have  a guide  to  salvation.  And if there is no guide, we are  all without hope of eternal life, because in this age we do not have a means of   atoning for our sins, which those of ancient Israel had (i.e., the sacrificial system and the priesthood).

Many of the Sacred Names groups attack the King James translation by  saying  its  translators were only  mortal  men.  Yet,  they recommend  and  quote from the Sacred Name  translation, the Moffat, Rotherham,  Smith,  Goodspeed,  Jerusalem Bible and many  other translations,  which were all translations by   mortal men.

Most  scholars  who support the idea that there  is  evidence  of Aramaic  influence behind the New Testament Scriptures limit this influence to only a few books.  Some Sacred Names advocates carry this to the extreme by teaching that the entire New Testament was written  in Aramaic.  However, there is absolutely no proof that  the New Testament was written in any language other  than Greek.

It  is  not  the intention of this study  to defame anyone's  character.  However,  one  can only wonder about  the credibility  of  a person's or a group's research  when  they  openly state that they do not believe the Greek New Testament translation is valid  and  proceed  to use a  scripture  from the Greek translation as support for one of their major doctrines.

If Sacred Names adherents feel that the Greek New  Testament is  not the inspired word of God, they should not use it to try to prove  their beliefs,  because it is  not  logical or scholarly. Furthermore, if these researchers want to be consistent in  their logic and scholarship, they should not use the Greek New Testament to prove any  of  their beliefs.

To accept the belief that there is no inspired New Testament,  requires  the view that the early Christians were  so indifferent  and careless that they allowed the original writings of  the apostles and others to be completely replaced  without  a word  of protest.   Such an assumption is preposterous.


Many individuals in the Sacred Names groups believe that the authorized Bible  of the  Church  of the East (i.e., the Peshitta)  is the original canonized New Testament.  Many quote from a  translation of the Peshitta by George M. Lamsa and believe that Lamsa's  translation was taken from an original Aramaic text; therefore, it should be used in place of  the King James Version.  

There  is  no doubt that the Peshitta exists and is the Bible  of the  Church of the East but was it translated from the original  New Testament text?

In regard to the source of Lamsa's translation of the New Testament, one of the leaders of the Church of the East says, "The Church of the East received the scriptures from the hands of the blessed Apostles themselves in the Aramaic originals, the language spoken by  our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and that the Peshitta is  the text  of  the  Church of the East which has come  down  from the Biblical times  without any change or revision" (Catholicos Patriach of the East, Preface, Lamsa Bible, by Mar  Eshai Shimun).

Christ reprimanded the disciples saying:  

"These twelve Jesus sent out,  and charged them,  and said, Keep away from pagan practices and do not enter a Samaritan city;  But above all go to the sheep which are lost from the House of Israel" (Matt.10:5-6, Lamsa).

"And he answered, saying to them,  I [Christ] am  not  sent,  except  to the sheep which went astray from the house of  Israel" (Matt.5:24, Lamsa).

"James  a  servant of God and of our Lord Jesus  Christ,  to  the twelve   tribes   which  are scattered   among   the   Gentiles; Greeting." (Jms.1:1 Lamsa).

Lamsa translates the name of the Savior as 'Jesus Christ' and not 'Yahweh' or 'Yahshuah.' Moreover, the  above scriptures in the Lamsa translation say that the original apostles were to  go only to the descendants of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.  If the  apostles did deliver the canon to those of the Church  of  the East,  they disregarded the clear instructions of Christ, because these people are not Israelites.

Additionally, the  Peshitta  is written in Aramaic,  not  Hebrew. And this is documented by Lamsa and other scholars. If  Aramaic, which is not Hebrew, was the  language  in which  the  original New Testament was  written,  why  would  the Aramaic version use many Greek and Chaldean words in its text?


During the time of Christ and the apostles, Greek was  the  language of the Roman  world.   The vast majority  of the Diaspora (scattered Israelites) could not speak Hebrew or Aramaic. It  is interesting that Jesus came from that section of Palestine that was  regarded as corrupt in the eyes of the Jews in Jerusalem, because Greek was the common language there (Matt.4:15; 12:18; Jn.1:46). It is also interesting that neither Hebrew or  Aramaic were suited for the proclamation of the gospel message, because they could not easily express the abstract concepts that are found in the New Testament.

Christ  commanded the apostles and disciples to preach the Gospel to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem (Lk.24:47). Greek was the inter- national  language of the day; therefore, it was the most appropriate language in which to preach the gospel message.

Acts  6 shows that the Jerusalem Church was comprised of Greek  and Aramaic  speaking  Jews. In fact,  the seven men  appointed  to oversee  the  needs  of the widows all  had  Greek  names, which indicates that they  probably spoke the Greek language.   

Aramaic   versions   of  the  New  Testament  extant  today   are translations  from  the Greek, and it is well known that the origin  of the Peshitta is unknown beyond the fact that it is a  close translation from the Greek. Lamsa claims that the Peshitta Gospels preserve the words of Jesus better than  the Greek Gospels; however, other scholars disagree and say that the Aramaic version does not preserve God's sacred name.  


In  1947  a  young  Arab shepherd boy named Mohammed discovered  a  small cave that contained what are called the Dead Sea Scrolls. And from 1947 to 1955, many more caves were found to contain scrolls.  What makes these scrolls so exciting  is that some of them were written as early as 150  B.C., which gives further  proof that the Old Testament we have today is  textually correct.

The astounding discovery of the  first  six  caves establishes  that  the Essene people of Qumran were a part  of  the Jewish  culture.  However, a more startling find  was made  in  mid-march of 1955 in cave number seven, which  indicates that  some of these Essenes were Christians.  What people are not generally told  is that the seventh cave contained portions of the books of Acts, Romans, Timothy, II Peter, and James, which were all  written in the Greek language. Apparently, some of the Essene  Jewish scholars  who lived at Qumran around 70  A.D. had been converted to Christianity.

The discovery of these New Testament fragments among these Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls proves that the Greek language  was the language of the New Testament.  These fragments of the New Testament constitute authentic evidence that the words of  Jesus were widely known and recorded throughout the first century in Palestine.  It is  also evident that, as early as  70  A.D.,  the writings of the early church leaders were  being  compiled  and collected in the Greek language  of the day.


Bible  numerics  are  a  tremendous proof that the  Old  and  New Testaments are both the inspired Word of God.   Hebrew and  Greek are  two  languages  in which each letter of the alphabet  has  a numerical value.  A number of books have been written to  explain the  numerical sequence of the subject matter of the Bible.  This numerical system is so precise that it is exact to the  primes of numbers.  Both the Old (Hebrew) and New (Greek) Testaments fit together in this numerical structure no matter what the  subject may  be.  However,  the  Chaldean/Aramaic cannot be made to work within this design.  This is a dramatic and  demonstrative proof  that  the  New Testament was originally  canonized  in  the Greek language.


History shows us that Hebrew gave way to Aramaic by  the time of our Savior.  Although Hebrew had ceased to be used, the  Aramaic that was used was called 'Hebrew'.  Historians also agree that Greek was the language that united people in the Roman Empire.  

The Jewish historian Josephus shows in his writings that  the Greek  language was understood well by Jews living in and out  of  Palestine.  In fact, the Mishna shows  there were synagogues in which the Jewish  law  permitted Greek to be spoken:  "May be read  in foreign  tongue  to them that speak a foreign  tongue"  (Megillah 2:1).   And  it further permitted:  "That the books [the law, the writings, Psalms, etc.] may be written in any language."  However, at the time of Christ these  books were "only permitted to be written  in  Greek" (Megillah  1:8 The Mishnah,  by Herbert  Dandy).

Although the majority of historians and Biblical scholars agree that Aramaic (not Hebrew)  was  the primary language of the Jewish  inhabitants  of Judea, and that Greek  was  the  universal second language  of  the  day, Josephus says:

"I have taken a great deal of pains to  obtain  the  learning of the Greeks  and  to  understand  the elements  of the Greek language,  although I have long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue [Aramaic], that I cannot pronounce Greek with such exactness." (Josephus spoke Greek with an Aramaic accent).

"For  our nation does not encourage those who learn the languages of  other  nations,  and  so  adorn their  discourses  with  the smoothness of their periods;  because they look upon this sort of accomplishment [learning Greek] as common,  not only to all sorts of  freemen,  but to as many of the servants as pleased to  learn them. But they give him the testimony of being a wise man, who is fully acquainted with our laws [which was rare among  the  Jews!] and is able to interpret their meaning" (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XX, chapter XI, Section 2).

Josephus says it was a rare Jewish scholar (i.e., wise man) who  understood Hebrew well enough to be versed in the  law. This is not only because Hebrew was extremely difficult to learn but also because  Aramaic was the language of the Jews, not Hebrew.  It was  very common for the ordinary person to learn and  speak Greek during the time of Christ.

The books  of  Hebrews and Matthew are the only two  books  that historians   have   ever  claimed were  written  in  Hebrew  or Aramaic/Chaldean,  and translated  into  Greek  for canonization. Even the Aramaic version of the New Testament that we have  today  is freely admitted to be translated from Greek, despite what Dr. Lamsa of the Lamsa Bible claims.  

The  idea  that Hebrew is a sacred language is  not  valid. The Sacred Names argument rests primarily on the assumption that  the Hebrew language is some sort of sacred language to the exclusion of all other languages. There is no valid  proof that there has ever been a pure language  on the  earth. God  recognizes  the  various languages  of  the world, which was demonstrated on the day of Pentecost in 30 A.D., when the holy spirit was given to the apostles and disciples (Acts 2:1-11).

Both the  Old  and New Testaments have words from  many different languages spread liberally throughout (e.g., Chaldean, Latin, and Aramaic). It is not necessary to list the many words from the different languages that were used in the Bible, because the documentation  is easily accessible from Bible helps and research publications.

The  important  point  is  that  God  allowed  words  from  other languages to be used to convey his truth.  If Hebrew were to be the only language used for this purpose, there would  not be  a  Greek translation of the New Testament for the elect of God to use; God would have given a Hebrew translation.

The end-result of accepting the Sacred Name doctrine is a complete disbelief in the inspiration of the New Testament.

If  God  went to the trouble of inspiring the  New  Testament  in Aramaic,  as Sacred Names advocates say,  why would he allow it to become a  corrupt and unreliable Greek  text?   Surely, such a concept is an open denial of the power and love of God!   If  God is as concerned about the world as Sacred Names advocates say,  we can be sure he did not let his truth become corrupted.


We  are warned not to add to or take away from the prophecies  of the Book  of Revelation.  To do so will result in  the  loss  of salvation.  This is a very serious penalty for tampering with the truth  of God.  Anyone  who would assume  the  responsibility  of reconstructing a new Hebrew version of the New  Testament,  which would  include  a restored Book of Revelation, should consider  this warning:

Revelation 22:18-19

"For  I  testify  to every man that hears the  words  of  the prophecy  of this book,  if any man shall add to these  things, God shall add to him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy,  God shall take away his part out of the book of  life, and  out of the holy city,  and from the things which are written in this book" (Rev.22:18-19).  See also Deut.4:2; 12:32; Pro.30:5-6; Gal.1:6-9.


It is extremely easy  to miss the conceptual meaning of many  scriptures  unless one  understands  the difference between God the Father and the Creator God. Once  this knowledge is gained,  much of the plan and purpose  of the  God family becomes crystal clear.  Also when one is able  to prove who the Creator God was in relation to the God family,  the Sacred Names belief system can be understood for what it truly is.

The foundational mistake the Sacred  Names groups make is believing that the Sovereign God and the Creator God are the same God. This foundational  mistake is the cornerstone on which they build their Sacred Names belief.   They  repeatedly  state  in  their literature  that one should worship the Creator God as God the Father. This foundational assumption is false. In fact, the false belief that the Creator God is  the Father of the Messiah conceptually  cuts one off from God the Father who is revealed in the New Testament.

"In  the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen.1:1).  It  is very  hard  to  find a Bible scholar or a linguist who  does  not agree that the word 'God' in verse one is the Hebrew word 'Elohim' which is a plural noun that means 'Mighty Ones'.  

However,  here is where almost all agreement stops. This one word, which conveys the meaning of unity and allows for a plurality of spirit-beings, is the key to understanding what the Family of God is and who its members are.  Without this understanding, it is impossible to comprehend the real meaning of the names of these 'Mighty Ones',  the magnitude of the sacrifice of our Savior,  or much of anything else to do with their awesome plan for mankind.


In the Bible, the Hebrew word  'El'  which means 'a  Mighty  One', is often translated as 'God'.  In Exodus 17:1, 'El'  is  combined  with another  Hebrew  word 'Shaddai' ('El-Shaddai') which means 'the Almighty God' or 'God the Almighty One'.


When they first met, Moses asks God:

"And Moses said to God [Hebrew: Elohim],  Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God [Elohim] of your fathers has sent me to you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say to them?" (Ex.3:13 KJV).

God tells Moses that he is Elohim. All  of  the  documentation  available  says  that  Moses compiled the Book of Genesis and most of Exodus.   In  compiling the Book  of Genesis,  Moses uses the Hebrew word 'El'  and  its descriptive  combinations to address and describe 'A Mighty One'. Doesn't it seem strange  that for the first 2,500 years of mankind's history Moses records the name of the Creator God as being 'El' and not 'Yahweh' ('YHVH')?

"And God [Elohim] said to Moses,  I AM THAT I AM: Thus  shall you say to the children of Israel, I AM [Hebrew: Haya] has sent me to you" . . . (Ex.3:14).  The English word 'I AM' is a translation of the Hebrew word 'Haya', which means 'to be', 'to  become', 'to exist', or 'to happen.' The Creator God told Moses to tell the people  that  the 'Haya' (the 'One Who Is',  the 'Self-Existent One') is who he is.  

If the Creator God wanted to be called Yahweh, he would not have had Moses call him 'Haya.'

"And  I  appeared  to Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and to Jacob,  by the name of God  [El] Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH [YHWH] was I not known to them" (Ex.6:3).  

El confirms that he was only known to the Patriarchs by  the names of El. But what about this name 'Jehovah' in  the King James translation?


Although many people have been taught that 'Jehovah' is the correct name of  God,  it  is not.  A quick and easy search  of  Bible concordances, references, dictionaries  and  word study books will show that the word 'Jehovah' is  a totally incorrect translation of the Hebrew word  used for this deity:

"This  word  'Jehovah' is generally held to be the  invention  of Pope Leo X's confessor, Peter Galatin . . . who was followed in the use  of  this hybrid form by Fagius.   But it seems  that  before Galatin, the name Jehovah had been in common use . . . since it is found  in Raymond Martin's 'Pugio Fidei' written in 1270" (Jewish Encyclopedia,  article, Jehovah, volume VII, Page 88).

This and many  other  sources  leave no doubt  that  the word 'Jehovah' is an incorrect translation of the Hebrew word 'YHVH.'


Why is there so much confusion about the name of God? The reason is that the true pronunciation of the Hebrew word 'YHWH' has been lost. Because the Hebrew  language  uses consonants  and semi-consonants and does not use vowels, it was easy for the exact pronunciation of 'YHWH' to become lost.

After  the  days  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah,   the  Jews  became very superstitious and  decided that the name YHWH was too holy to be spoken.  Instead, they used the word 'Adonai', which means 'Lord' or 'Master'. Over time, the proper pronunciation  of YHWH became lost.   No one today knows exactly how to pronounce YHWH; therefore, there is much confusion about this  name.


Translation and Pronunciation

Many people have done a lot of  research concerning the tetragrammaton  (YHWH) and they have assumed that by  strength of mind,  intellect, or divine guidance they would be able to discover the correct pronunciation of the tetragrammaton.  However,  even with  the thousands  of hours  of scholarly research, labor, and reams and volumes of  research papers and books written on the subject,  the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton seems to  be as elusive as ever.

There  are many who think that they have found the answer and can give a very convincing argument. But, so can their opposition.  Where does this leave the non-scholar?  Which researcher, scholar, body of theologians, or historians is one supposed to believe?

The Name YHWH

"And I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, and by my name YHWH I never made myself known to them" (Ex.6:3).

The  Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament by Harris, Archer, and Waltke gives the following  explanation of the  mysterious word 'YHWH' that is used in Exodus  6:3:

"The tetragrammaton YHWH, the Lord, or Yahweh, the personal  name  of  God  and the  most frequent  designation  in scripture,  occurring  5,321 times . . .  in the O.T.  except  seven times where the name is particularly stressed [Ex 6:3; Ps 83:18 . . . Isa 12:2; 26:4] . . . or combined with other elements,  such as Jehovah  Jireh  [Gen 22:14;  Ex  17:15;  Judg.6:24;  consistently Jehovah]" (page 210).

Although  The  Theological Wordbook has about two and a half pages  of  some of the best scholarly work to be found on  this subject,  it  is  not the final authority. There are  many  who disagree  totally with the conclusions reached by the authors of this book. However, the most important authority on this subject is the Bible.


In John 1:1-14 there are some very difficult  scriptures, which cannot  be understood  without  the knowledge of who and what  the Family of God is. If one believes in Monotheism,  Dualism, or Trinitarianism, one  cannot understand what is being said in the first chapter of John.  But,  if one knows that the Family of God consists of two members—God the Father and the Creator God (God the Son)—these scriptures can be understood.

John 1:1-3 KJV

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (v1).

In this context, the 'Word' (Greek: 'Logos') does not mean a part of speech or language.  It is a title of the Son of God: "Logos, the Word, the personal manifestation, not of a part of the Divine  nature, but  of  the  whole  Deity"  (Vine's  Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 1253).

At the beginning of creation there was one  called the Word  and  this  Word  was  with  God (Greek: 'Theos' which means 'Deity').   Not only was this Word with the Deity (God)  but also the Word was  a Deity.

"The  same  was in the beginning with God" (v2).  John  makes  a further distinction between these two spirit-beings (the Logos and the other Deity) by restating the fact that this Logos  was with the Deity.Why would John  emphasize  this distinction if there is only one God?

"All  things were made by him [The Word,  i.e.,  The  Logos];  and without him was not any thing made that was made" (v3).

John  says all things that exist were made by the Logos who was with the Deity.  Why did John have to explain this?  We know that he was writing to Christians and Israelites who should have known the identity of God. So  why was he  expounding  on  this  fundamental principle?

The Mystery of God

The apostle Paul spoke of God the  Father and Jesus  Christ as  a mystery that was understood by the  Colossians and the Ephesians. When this mystery is  understood,  it becomes  much easier to comprehend the gospel message and its importance to the plan of God for the salvation of humanity:

"For I want you to know how  great a struggle I have concerning you, and those in Laodicea, and those who have not seen my face in the flesh; That their hearts may be comforted, being joined together in love, and to all the riches of the full assurance of the understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God, even of the Father, and of Jesus Christ" (Col.2:1-2).

"And to make all see what the  fellowship of the mystery,  which from the beginning of  the world has  been  hid in God,  who created all  things  by  Jesus Christ:  To the intent now to the principalities and powers  in heavenly  places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of  God,  According  to the eternal wisdom which he  purposed  in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph.3:9-11). See also verses 3-6.

Paul also makes the same distinction that John  did regarding these two distinct, individual spirit-beings  and the relationship between them.

Paul also substantiates the writings of John in stating that there  is one  God who is in charge (the Supreme Sovereign) and  directed Christ  to create all that exists:  " But to us there is but one God, the Father,  of whom are all things,  and we in him; and one Lord Jesus  Christ,  by whom  are  all things,  and  we  by  him"  (1.Cor.8:6 KJV).

John 1:4-14 KJV

"In  him was life;  and the life was the light of  men.  And  the light shined in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not" (vs.4-5).

Simply put, the vast majority of the people who saw and heard Jesus did not know or understand who he was or why he came  to earth.  The  same can be said for the generation in which we live today; very few people really know who he was and the truth and purpose of his coming.

This  powerful spirit-being came to earth to perform a mission of great  importance,  and  the vast majority of the people he  came into contact with did not even know who he was:   "He was in the world,  and  the  world was made by him,  and the world knew  him not" (Jn.1:10 KJV).   This may seem sad on the surface; however, it was  part of the plan that was made before the foundation of  the earth by the one called 'Logos' and the One called 'Theos.'

John further explains who our Savior was:  "And the Word [Logos] was  made flesh,  and dwelt among us and  we beheld  his  glory,  the  glory as of the only  begotten  of  the Father. . ." (v14).

Here, John introduces the reality of the spirit-being called 'the Father,' and  there is  no  doubt  from the context that  this spirit-being  is  distinctly different  from the Word.  The Father is the one whom John says the Word  was  with. The Father is also the one who Paul says made all  things  by Christ.

If Jesus Christ is the Mighty One who created all that is,  which is plainly stated by John and Paul and a  multitude  of scriptures, who is this spirit-being John calls 'the Father'?


The Sacred Names groups assume that the Mighty One of ancient Israel is the one we  call  the Messiah, and that he and his  Father are the  same spirit-being. This assumption contradicts what Jesus and the  apostles said about the Father. The truth is that the scriptures speak of two separate spirit-beings—God the Father and God the Son.  


"No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him" (Jn.1:18 KJV).

"And the Father himself, which has sent me, has borne witness  of me.   You have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen  his shape" (Jn.5:37 KJV).

Many people believe that these two scriptures refer to the Creator God when they say that no man has seen God. However they actually refer to God the Father, who sent the Creator God to become his physical son and to reveal him as the Sovereign Father of all that exists and to teach his message of salvation.

John clearly says that no man has seen God, and Jesus  says  that no one has heard the Father's voice or seen his shape; therefore, there should be no question that the God spoken of by John and Jesus is not the same God that walked and talked with humans on earth.

Adam and Eve Walked and Talked with God

"And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat" (Gen.2:16 KJV).

Some try to justify their monotheistic belief by explaining that the spirit-being people saw and talked with was only an angel who represented God. However, the scriptures plainly state in the accounts where God met  and talked with people that it was actually God who spoke with people, not an angel:

"And  they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the  garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the  presence  of  the Lord God among the trees  of the  garden" (Gen.3:8 KJV).

Not  only  did Adam and Eve hear the voice of God but also they  were afraid to stand in his presence.

"And  the Lord God called to Adam, and said to him,  Where  are you?  And  he said, I heard your voice in the garden, and  I  was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.  And he said,  Who told you that you were naked?  Have you eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded you that you should not eat? And the man said, The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the Lord God said to the woman, What is this  that you have done?  And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me,  and I  did  eat. . .To the woman he said . . .And to  Adam he said. . ." (Gen.3:9-21 KJV).

After  speaking at some length to Adam, Eve, and  the  serpent, the  Creator makes a statement that proves he was not the only God.

"And the Lord God  said, Behold the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" (Gen.3:22).

To whom was the Creator referring when he said "as one of us"? Was he talking to an angel or was he talking to someone else?  Remember,  the  One  we call our Savior was the One  who  createdall things  (Jn.1:1-5;  Eph.3:9).  This reference to a  plurality  of God-beings becomes very important in reaching a conclusion as to the Father and Son relationship.

Cain Spoke with the Creator

"And  the Lord said to Cain, Where is Abel your brother?  And  he said, I know not:  Am I my brother's keeper? And he [the Creator] said, What have you done?. . ." (Gen.4:9-10 KJV).

There is no mention of an angel speaking for the Creator here. It is clear that the Creator is the one speaking.

God Spoke to Noah

"And  God said to Noah, The end of all flesh is come  before  me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and,  behold, I  will  destroy them with the earth" (Gen.6:13 KJV). See also Gen.7:1; 9:1.

Conversations with Abraham

The Creator appeared to Abram and also sat down and ate a meal with him and his wife Sarah:

"Now  the Lord had said to Abram, Get you out of your  country, and  from your kindred, and from your father's house, to  a  land that I will show you" (Gen.12:1 KJV). "And the Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre:  and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day" (Gen.18:1 KJV).

"And  Abraham  ran to the herd,  and fetched a calf  tender and good,  and gave it to a young man; and he hastened to dress it. And he took butter,  and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree,  and they  did  eat" (Gen.18:7-8 KJV).

Because this type of food preparation takes  a considerable  amount of time, there would have been ample time for conversation  while waiting for the food to be cooked and served. During  this meeting God reveals to Abraham why he came:

"And  the Lord [YHWH] said, Shall I hide from Abraham that  thing which  I  do . . ." (Gen.18:17 KJV).

The rest  of  chapter eighteen details the conversation between the Creator and Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Jacob and the Creator

"And  Jacob  was left alone; and there wrestled a  man  with  him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he  prevailed not  against  him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and  the hollow  of  Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he  wrestled  with him. And he said, Let me go, for the day breaks.  And he said,  I will  not  let you go, except you bless me. And he said  to  him, What is your name?  And he said, Jacob.  And he said, Your  name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:  for as a prince  have you  power with God and with men, and have prevailed.  And  Jacob asked  him,  and said, Tell me, I pray you, your  name.   And  he said,  Wherefore  is it that you do ask after my  name?   And  he blessed  him there.  And Jacob called the name of the place  Peniel:  for I have seen God [Elohim] face to face, and my life  is preserved" (Gen.32:24-30 KJV).

The common belief is that Jacob  wrestled  with an angel, but this is not true; it was actually the Creator  who wrestled with Jacob:

"And God [Elohim] appeared to Jacob again, when he came out  of Padanaram,  and blessed him. And God said to him, Your  name  is Jacob:  your name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be your name:  and he called his name Israel. And God  said to  him, I am God Almighty:  be fruitful and multiply;  a  nation and  a company of nations shall be of you, and kings shall  come out of your loins" (Gen.35:9-12 KJV).

Moses, Aaron, and Israel

Exodus chapters 3 and 4, show that the Creator personally spoke to  Moses and Aaron and he appointed them to be his  servants. Moreover on one occasion, he spoke  to the entire nation of Israel on one occasion:

"And  the Lord said to Moses,  Lo,  I come to you in a  thick cloud,  that  the  people  may hear when I speak  with  you,  and believe  you  for ever.  And Moses told the words of  the people to the Lord. And the Lord said to Moses, Go to the people,  and sanctify  them  today and  tomorrow, and  let them  wash  their clothes,  And be ready against the third day:  for the third  day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai" (Ex.19:9-11 KJV).

In Exodus chapter 20, God speaks to the people of Israel, which was a very frightening experience for the Israelites. In fact, it was so frightening to them that they requested that the Creator speak to them through Moses, not directly to them.

Moses and the Elders

Moses  and the Elders of Israel not only had a meeting  with  the Creator but also they ate a meal with him on Mount Sinai:

"Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy  of the elders of Israel: And they saw the God of Israel:  and  there was  under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire  stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. And upon  the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand:  also they saw God, and did eat and drink" (Ex.24:9-11 KJV).

Face to Face

"And  the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks  to his friend. . ." (Ex.33:11 KJV).

This  is  a very clear statement, which shows the  kind  of  close, personal  communication the Creator had with Moses. Most people seem  to think  that the Creator hid himself from mankind and only dealt with  his creation through visions or angles. However,  this  was not the case.

The Creator's Glory

"And he said, I beseech you, show me your glory.  And he said,  I will  make all my goodness pass before you, and I  will  proclaim the  name of the Lord before you; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show  mercy. And he said, You cannot see my face:  for there shall no man  see me, and live.  And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and  you  shall stand upon a rock:  And it shall  come  to  pass, while my glory passes by, that I will put you in a cleft of  the rock,  and  will cover you with my hand while I pass by:   And  I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back parts:  but my face shall not be seen" (Ex.33:18-33 KJV).

It  is  apparent from the biblical evidence, that many people have  seen  the Creator in the physical form of a man, and some people were allowed to see a small glimpse of his glorified form. Without a doubt, the scriptures show that humans have talked to  and seen the Mighty One who created all that exists. Therefore, who is  the being  that Jesus and the apostles continually refer  to  as 'the Father' whom no one has seen nor heard?


"All things are delivered to me of my Father:  and no man knows the  Son, but the Father; neither knows any man the Father,  save the  Son,  and  he  to  whoever  the  Son  will  reveal him" (Matt.11:27 KJV). See Jn.17:25-26.

Only  Christ  can  reveal who the Father is  and  he  does  this through  the Bible for those who are sensitive to the  things  of the spirit. See Psa.111:10.

"I am one that bears witness of myself,  and the Father that sent me bears witness of me. Then said they to him,  Where is  your Father?  Jesus answered, You neither know me, nor my Father:   if you had known me, you should have known my Father also" (Jn.8:18-19 KJV).

Jesus says that if they had really known the God whom they  professed to obey, they would have known that Jesus was the God of their fathers, whom they prophesied would come in the flesh. And if they knew that, they would have been able to know that Christ came to reveal the Father to them and they would know both Jesus and his Father.

"I speak that which I have seen with my Father:  and you do  that which you have seen with your father" (Jn.8:38 KJV).

"These  things  have  I spoken to you, that you should  not  be offended.  They  shall put you out of the synagogues:   yes,  the time comes, that whosoever kills you will think that he does God a service. And these things will they do to you, because they  have not known the Father, nor me" (Jn.16:1-3 KJV).

Christ  Did  Not  Send Himself

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten  Son, that whosoever believes on him should not perish, but have  everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the  world;  but  that  the world through  him  might  be  saved"  (Jn.3:16-17  KJV).

Christ  did  not  send himself, as some people teach.  The  scriptures clearly  say the One who  is called 'God the Father' sent him  to become the Savior of humanity.

"That  all men should honor the Son, even as they honor  the  Father.  He that honors not the Son honors not the Father which has sent him" (Jn.5:23 KJV).

"I  can  of my own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge:   and  my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which has sent me" (Jn.5:30 KJV). See also verses  36-38.

"I  am  come in my Father's name,  and you receive  me  not:   if another shall come in his own name, him you  will receive"  (Jn.5:43 KJV). See also Jn.5:30-37; 6:44,57.

Jesus clearly says that he came to earth as a representative of his Father. Just  as the people did not believe the clear statements  of  the Savior then, they do not believe his written word today:

"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is  one that  accuses  you, even Moses in whom you trust.  For  had  you believed  Moses, you would have believed me: for he wrote of  me. But  if  you believe not his writings, how shall you  believe  my words?" (Jn.5:45-47 KJV).


The Savior was the Mighty One who created all that exists,  which is plainly stated by John, Paul, and in a multitude  of  scriptures. But, who is this Father who  sent  him  to earth?  Who is this being John calls 'the Father'?

"At  that time Jesus answered and said,  I thank you,  O  Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them to babes. Even so, Father:   for  so it seemed good in your sight.  All  things  are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knows the Son, but the Father; neither knows any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him" (Matt.11:25-27 KJV). See also Mk.4:11-12.

It is Jesus who is able to reveal the  things concerning  the Father and the mystery surrounding their Father-Son relationship.

Why did Christ have to reveal certain things about the Father? The only logical answer to why the Father sent Jesus to reveal his existence and so many things about himself (e.g., who he is, what his name is, and what he is doing), was that  humanity did not know of his existence and it was time to reveal himself in order for the next phase of his plan for humanity  to go forward.

John 17:1-8 KJV

"These words spoke Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify your Son, that your Son also may glorify you: As you have given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (vs.1-3).

At this point in history, there were very few people who had any knowledge of  who the Father and Jesus Christ were.

"I have glorified you  on the earth: I have  finished the work which you gave me to do. And now, O Father, glorify you me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world was" (vs.4-5).

Here, Jesus asks God the Father to return him to his former state of existence as  an immortal  God in the  Family and Kingdom of God.

"I have manifested your name to the men which you gave me out of the world: yours they were, and you gave them to me;  and they have kept your word. Now they have known that all things whatsoever you have given me are of you. For I have given to them the words which you gave me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from you, and they have believed that you did send me" (vs.6-8).

Jesus had fulfilled his mission to prepare those whom the  Father had called to salvation and to be taught the truth of God concerning the Family and Kingdom of God and their plan for humanity.


"Jesus said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona:  for flesh and blood have not revealed it to you, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matt.16:17 KJV).

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" (Matt.23:9 KJV). See Matt.18:35.

"I thank you, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them to babes. Even so, Father:  for so it seemed good in your sight. All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knows the Son, but the Father; neither knows any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him" (Matt.11:25-27 KJV). See also Mk.11:25-26; 4:10-12; Jn.17:25-26; Eph.6:19.

These are just a few of the many scriptures that reveal the Father  is in heaven. A small amount of study  will  reveal that  the Father will not come to the earth to reside  until  the final phase of the plan for humanity. See our study concerning the Festival of the Eighth Day for details about the coming of the Father to earth.

It is extremely important to understand that, unless a person knows who the Father is, there can be no understanding of the gospel message that Jesus taught, because it is the Father's message.


"Thomas said to him, Lord, we know not where you go; and how can we know the way? Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:  no man comes to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you should have known my Father also:  and from henceforth you know him, and have seen him. Philip said to him, Lord, show us the Father, and it suffices us. Jesus said to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how say you then, Show us the Father?" (Jn.14:5-9 KJV). See 2.Cor.4:3-4.

In reply to Thomas and Philip, Jesus says that he had revealed what the Father was like to them. Jesus revealed the Father's existence, attitudes, thoughts, desires, love, and personality through his own example and teaching.


The next few pages contain many of Jesus' references to the Father. Through these scriptures, it is possible to know what the  Father is like and what he wants to be called:

"These  things have I spoken to you in proverbs: but  the  time comes,  when  I shall no more speak to you in proverbs,  but  I shall show you plainly of the Father.   At that day you shall ask in my name:  and I say not to you, that I will pray the  Father for you: For the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father,  and  am come into the world:  again,  I  leave  the world,  and go to the Father.  His disciples said to  him,  Lo, now speak you plainly, and speak no proverb" (Jn.16:25-29 KJV).

"I  have manifested your name to the men which you gave me  out of  the  world: yours they were, and you gave them me;  and  they have kept your word" (Jn.17:6 KJV).

"O  righteous  Father, the world has not known you:  but  I  have known you, and these have known that you have sent me. And I have declared  to them your name, and will declare it: that the  love wherewith  you  have  loved me may be in them,  and  I  in  them" (Jn.17:25-26 KJV).

"And when you stand praying,  forgive,  if you have ought against any:   that  your Father also which is in heaven may forgive  you your  trespasses.  But if you do not forgive, neither will  your Father  which is in heaven forgive your trespasses"  (Mk.11:25-26 KJV).

"In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank you,  O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hid these  things from  the  wise and prudent, and have revealed them  to babes:  even so, Father; for so it seemed good in your sight. All  things are  delivered to me of my Father:  and no man knows who the  Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him" (Luke 10:21-22).

Why  did Christ have to reveal the Father and  the  Father's name if the Father was the Creator God? The nation of Israel knew the Creator God's name. Therefore, it should be obvious that, if God the Father found it necessary  to send someone to  reveal who he is, he is not the God the Israelites had known.   

His Name is Father

Our  Savior said to call upon our 'Father' who is in heaven.  The Greek  word used in the New Testament to refer to the  Father  is 'Pater', which is from a root word, that means 'nourisher', 'protector', and 'upholder'. See Matt.6:9; Lk.11:12; Jn.14:13; 15:16.  

Some  who believe in a monotheistic, dualistic,  or a triune God  think that somehow our Savior was praying to a part of  himself,  which he left in heaven while he was on  earth.  Confusing? Yes, it is confusing and it is not very logical in light of all the very clear scriptures that state  Jesus prayed to a being  called the Father.


"And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and  prayed, saying,  O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup  pass  from me:  nevertheless not as I will, but as you will. . .He went away again  the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if  this cup  may not pass away from me, except I drink it, your  will  be done. . And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out  his  hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant  of  the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus to  him, Put  up again your sword into its place:  for all they that  take the sword shall perish with the sword. Think you that I cannot now  pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more  than twelve legions of angels?" (Matt.26:39-53 KJV).

"And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased,  one of his disciples said to him,  Lord, teach us to pray,  as John also taught his disciples.  And he said to them, When you pray, say, Our Father which is in heaven, Hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come.  Your will be done, as in  heaven, so in earth" (Lk.11:1-2 KJV). See also Matt.6:9.

Mark records a very revealing statement that our Savior made just before his death:

"And  at  the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud  voice,  saying, Eloi,  Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being  interpreted,  My God,  my  God, why have you forsaken me?  And some of them that stood  by,  when  they heard it, said, Behold,  he  calls  Elias" (Mk.15:34-35 KJV).

Jesus quotes a prophetic Psalm (quoted below) that foretold  what the Messiah's thoughts and words would be in the last moments of life as a human:

"My God,  my God,  why have you forsaken me?   why are you so far from helping me,  and from the words of my roaring?   O my God, I cry  in the day time, but you hear not; and in the night season, and am not silent" (Psa.22:1-2 KJV).

In Mark 15:34-35,  when Jesus  speaks   to the Supreme Sovereign, he calls him 'God'. It makes no sense whatsoever for Christ to pray to a part of himself, as the doctrines of Monotheism, Dualism, and Trinitarianism  teach. All of the scriptural evidence  shows Jesus  praying to  a spirit-being who had authority and power over him. See Jn.14:28.


Our Savior gave instructions on how to ask the Father for what we need in what is commonly called the Lord's prayer: "After this manner therefore pray you: Our  Father which is in heaven, Hallowed be your name" (Matt.6:9 KJV).

"And  he said to them, When you pray, say, Our Father which  is in heaven, Hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come.  Your  will be done, as in heaven, so in earth" (Lk.11:2 KJV).

"And  whatsoever you shall ask in my name, that will I  do,  that the Father may be glorified in the Son" (Jn.14:13 KJV).

"Whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he  may give it you" (Jn.15:16 KJV).

Christ says that his followers should pray to the Father who he came to reveal.  Conceptually, if a person prays to the God of ancient Israel, they are  praying  to the wrong God. The Father was not the Sovereign God of ancient Israel; he is  the Sovereign Father of all that exists. This  concept  can only be understood if one understands that the Father and the Son are two separate and distinct individuals in the Family of God.


The good news that Jesus Christ was sent to proclaim was not his message. He was the messenger, just as John the Baptist was the messenger who foretold and prepared the way for the  coming of the Messiah. Jesus Christ did not send himself as some teach; he was sent by God the Father to bring his message to humanity:

"The word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me" (Jn.14:24). See also Jn.1:1-15; Rom.1:1-3;  2.Cor.4:4-6.

"That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.  He that honors not the Son honors not the Father which has sent him" (Jn.5:23 KJV).

"I can of my own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge:  and my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which has sent me" (Jn.5:30 KJV). See also verses 36-38.

"I am come in my Father's name, and you receive me not:  if another shall come in his own name, him you  will receive" (Jn.5:43 KJV). See also Jn.5:30-37; 6:44,57.

Clearly the good news message that Jesus brought is from God the Father who is the Sovereign of all that exists.

The apostle Paul also says that the good news message that he preached as a servant of Jesus Christ was not his message but was a message sent from God the Father (2.Thes.1:1-12):

"Paul a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the good news of the Sovereign God that  he had promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, that was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of the Sovereign God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead" (Rom.1:1-4 Para.).

The  Message

Since the life, death, and resurrection of the Father's Son, there has been much preached solely about Jesus as a person. As a result, millions do not believe that the message the Father sent his Son to proclaim is the Father's good news.

The Sovereign Father sent his Son bearing his GOOD NEWS of how to become a part of  his divine Family and Kingdom, and that his Family and Kingdom are coming to earth to bring peace and happiness to this troubled world.  

The Father's message is a message of hope for a wonderful, peaceful, and happy existence  under his care and protection for eternity. This is the good news that Jesus, the apostles, and the early Church proclaimed. This  is the  message  that has not been preached in its totality for centuries. Moreover, this is the message that Jesus said would be proclaimed and published to all of the world just before his return as King of kings and Lord of lords. See our study papers concerning the gospel message.


"And the Word was made flesh,  and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of  grace and truth" (Jn.1:14 KJV). See also Heb.2:9; 1. Jn.1:5-7; Jude 1.

"No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him" (Jn.1:18 KJV).


Some of the Sacred Names groups teach that the spirit-being who came  as the Savior was an angel sent from the Creator. They believe that the Savior was not God incarnate,  but a spirit-being of lesser status and  power.   If  this were true mankind  would be without a Savior,  because  an inferior being cannot be the ultimate sacrifice for our sins as long as there is a spirit-being who is superior in quality of life.  Only a spirit-being who was the Supreme Sovereign or equal in status and power to the Supreme Sovereign could fulfill the position of the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of humanity.

The Supreme Sovereign (God the Father) directed the Creator God (Jesus Christ) to create all that exist and to reveal him as his Father and God the Father (Jn.1:1-18; 1.Cor.8:6; Eph.3:9;  Heb.1:1-2, 7-10). Jesus revealed the Father and also fulfilled the requirement  of  the supreme  sacrifice, because he was superior to all that  he  had created   (Gen.1:26; 11:7).  Only when the Sovereign Creator gave up  his immortality  and became flesh was he  inferior  to  the Elohim family  (Jn.14:28; Heb. 2:9), and this inferiority was only one of mortality versus immortality and flesh versus spirit.

If  the Sovereign Creator was not the supreme sacrifice,  we do not have a Savior (Heb.9:9-28; 10:1-22;  6:4-8).  It is an abominable thing to  disdain  the sacrifice  of  our  Savior  as anything less than  the  supreme sacrifice.  The price paid for our salvation was the death of the Sovereign Creator God.  Most of Quasi-Christianity  do not understand the magnitude of  the  sacrifice that  was  made for each human.  There is no salvation  for  anyone who does not believe that the Savior  was the Son of the Father. He was  not a lesser being; he was the literal Son of the Father—THE SON OF GOD.  Humanity desperately needs to understand   this  vital  truth because without it  there  is  no pathway  to salvation.  Read Jn.1:18,34,36;  3:16-18;  Matt.3:16-17 to see  how  serious a matter it is  to  disdain  our Savior's sacrifice.


John 5:18-26 KJV Paraphrased

"Therefore the Jews intensified their efforts to kill him,  because they not only thought he  had broken  the Sabbath,  but he also said that God  was  his Father,  making himself equal with God. Then Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, The Son can do nothing  of himself,  but what he sees the Father do:   for  whatever he does,  these things the Son also does.   For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he does:  and he will show him greater works than these, that you may marvel. For as the Father raises up the dead, and makes them alive; even so the Son gives life to whomever he wants to.  For the Father judges no man, but has committed  all judgment to the Son:  That all men  should honor the Son,  even as they honor the Father.  He that does not honor  the Son, does not  honor the Father who sent  him. Truly, truly,  I say to you,  he that hears my word,  and believes on him that sent me,  has everlasting life,  and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death to life. Truly, truly, I say to you,  the hour is coming,  and now is,  when the  dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God:  and they that hear shall live.  For as the Father has life in himself; so has he given to the Son to have life in himself."

Read  the whole chapter of John 16 for a detailed explanation  of the Father and Son relationship between the two Supreme Deities in the Family of God.


The  Father  does a work and Christ does a work: "But Jesus  answered them, My Father works hitherto, and I work" (Jn.5:17 KJV). Here,  we  find  two separate  Beings  doing two separate works:  


One of the great mysteries of popular Christianity is the concept of  one  Supreme spirit-being  who is composed of  many spirit-beings (i.e., Monotheism, Dualism, Trinitarianism, Pantheism, etc.). These concepts are very confusing and they cannot be reconciled with the  Bible.

Isaiah 9:6

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given:  and  the government  shall be upon his shoulders: and his name  shall  be called  Wonderful,   Counselor,   The  mighty  God  [El], The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

Some people believe that  this scripture indicates that the Creator is also the Father who is spoken of in the New Testament.  The first chapter  of the  Gospel  of John shows that the Creator was the One who became the Christ.  However, this same Christ said that he came to reveal the Father whom no one knew.   Simply stated,  the Creator was the Father of all living,  but not the Supreme Father whom he came to reveal.  See Matt.3:13-17; 11:27; Jn.16:25-29; 17:25-26.

 Isaiah 45:21-22

"And  there is no god [elohiym: 'gods'] else beside me;  a just God  [El: 'A Mighty One' or 'The Almighty']  and a  Savior; there is none beside me. Look to me, be you saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God [El], and there is none else."

To the Israelites this Almighty One was the only Sovereign (Psa.83:18). They had no other god, because he was the One who  had created all things  (Jn.1:3;  Eph.3:9) and he had not yet come to reveal the Father.


Many times, Jesus called the  Supreme  Sovereign 'Father'  and talked about his  Father—Son relationship with him. Despite this evidence, most of the professing  Christian  world  believes there is only one God. The reason for their false belief is that Satan has  deceived the whole world into thinking the God  Family  does not exist (Rev. 12:9; 18:23; 19:20; 20:10).

There are scriptures that plainly speak of this Sovereign Family: "For  this cause I bow down my knees to the Father of our  Lord Jesus  Christ,  Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth  is named"  (Eph.3:14-15). The Family in heaven now consists of  'the Father'  and 'the Son' and in the future it will include  those  who are  called to be Sons (i.e., the true followers of God), the elect of God.     

Our  Savior  called  the Father 'ELOI,  ELOI',  when he was crucified. The apostles and writers said his  name was 'THEOS' and 'DEITY' and recorded that Christ called him 'PATER.'   Those who will be sons of the Supreme Sovereign call him 'our God' and 'our Father', which is what our Savior commanded us to do. (Matt. 6:9;  Lk.11:2; Jn.14:13; 15:16).


"All things are delivered to me of my Father:  and no man knows the  Son,  but the Father, neither knows any man the Father save the  Son,  and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him" (Matt.11:27 KJV).   Only Jesus can reveal who the Father is  and  he does  this  through  the holy spirit and the Bible to those who are sensitive to the things of the spirit:

"You  have heard how I said to you,  I go away,  and come again to you.   If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go to  the Father:   for my Father is greater  than  I" (Jn.14:28 KJV).


The  scripture most used in an attempt to prove that there is only one deity is John 10:30:   "I and my Father are one."  This scripture is true. The   problem  is  not  with  the  statement;   it  is  with the understanding of what it means.  God the  Father and Jesus Christ are one; they are of one family and one kind. They have one purpose, one thought pattern,  one attitude,  one opinion, and one spirit.  The Hebrew words used in this verse convey the concept  of 'oneness',  not the singleness  of a  being  or person. There are too many scriptures  that say there are two separate individual spirit-beings  in the Sovereign Family of God to believe that this one scripture actually says these two beings compose one being. See our study about who God is for more details on this subject.  


"No man can come to me [Jesus],  except the Father which has sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day" (Jn.6:44 KJV).

"Paul,  an  apostle  of  Jesus Christ by the  will  of  God  [the Father],  and Timothy our brother, To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse:   Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.    We give thanks  to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,  praying always for you"  (Col.1:1-3 KJV).   Paul was an apostle who was called by the Father (Jn.6:44).


There  is no contradiction whatsoever with the Creator  saying he was  the only Savior and only God. The Creator was in  absolute authority over the earth before the advent of the Messiah. Only after the Creator became the Messiah could humans gain access to the  Father who is the Most Supreme Immortal  Sovereign  (Heb.4:15-16):

"My little children,  these things write I to you, that you sin not.  And  if any man sin,  we have an advocate  with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1.Jn.2:1 KJV).

"He that overcomes,  the same shall be clothed in white  raiment; and  I will not blot out his name out of the book of life,  but I will  confess his name before my Father,  and before his angels.  He that has an ear,  let him hear what the spirit says to  the churches" (Rev.3:5-6 KJV).


"Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is anti-christ,  that  denies  the Father and  the  Son.   Whosoever denies  the  Son,   the  same  has  not  the  Father:    he that acknowledges the Son has the Father also" (1.Jn.2:22-23).


Among  those  who profess to know the exact personal names of  God the  Father and Jesus Christ, there is much  conflict as to  the exact characters used to depict the  name,  the  exact vowels  used for these symbols,  and the exact  pronunciation  of these characters and vowels.

Here  is a partial list of the names that the various groups  say are  the  correct personal names of God. Can you pick the  right one?






















In addition, the following are absolutely not the original  names of God the Father or his  Son the Messiah:  Adonai, Jesus, Christ, Jehovah,  Iesous,  Iesus,  Christos, God, Gott, Kuros, Theos, and Yod.    Perhaps  his   personal name is not even in the long  list above.   If your salvation depended on your choosing the  right name, which one would you choose? The simple fact is that we do not know the exact  pronunciation of their names.


Even though the correct pronunciation of the names of the  Mighty Ones  (the Elohim) is probably lost,   it is still important  to know the many names and titles of the  God family. Knowing  these names will help one appreciate their true  character.  The following is only a partial list of Elohim's names and titles with their meanings:


Elohim ..............................

"Mighty One(s)"

EL .....................................

"A Mighty One"

El-Elyon ............................

"Exalted One; Most High"

El-Shaddai .........................

"Almighty God"

El-Olam ............................

"God the Everlasting One"

El-Roi ................................

"God Who Sees Me"

El-Berith ...........................

"God of the Covenant"

El-Elohe Israel ..................

"God of Israel"

Emmanuel .........................

"God With Us"


Kuros ................................


Theos ................................

"Lord" "God" "Deity"

Logos ................................

"The Word"

"As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us:   yet  made we not our prayer before the Lord [YHWH] our  God [Elohim],  that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand your truth" (Dan.9:13).

After Babylon conquered the Kingdom of Judah, Hebrew eventually ceased to be the language of the Jews.  It was replaced in part by Aramaic,  which  was  spoken  throughout the  Babylonian Empire. Daniel wrote chapters 2 through 6 of the Book of Daniel  in  the Aramaic language.  And the priest Ezra wrote chapters 4 through 7 of his record in Aramaic.  When these two men referred to  the Creator  in these chapters,  they used the Aramaic word 'ELAH' seventy-eight different times. If YHWH were the only  name that is to be used to refer to the Creator God, these men would have been  careful to use  it, especially because they represented the Creator God in  an  official capacity.

The following are references to other names of God:


Anyone  who has read Sacred Names literature rapidly becomes aware of  one thing:   Scriptures are misinterpreted and literalism  is used excessively to force scriptures beyond the limits of context in order  to  substantiate their  doctrine.   Most  Sacred  Names adherents  are  absolutely locked into the concept that the  word 'name'  can only mean one thing—the correct pronunciation  of the Tetragrammaton.  However, as the following references prove, this is not  the case.

According to the Sacred Names groups, Psalm 68:4, which says we  are to extol God by his name—Yah—means that God has only one name—Yahweh.  However, this text does not say God has one name only; it says his name is Yah, not Yahweh.

Ezekiel 39:7 is quoted in an attempt to prove that the pronunciation  of  the Tetragrammaton   has not  been lost. But this  text  indicates that the events being depicted in this chapter,  including the revealing of the name of God, will occur after the return of Jesus Christ.

Psalm  111:9 is used in an attempt to support the notion that the sacred name must  be called upon and revered if one is to receive salvation.  This  text  simply  states, "Holy and Reverend [awesome]  is  his  name." It  does  not  say  what  his   name  is  or  what   its pronunciation should be, nor does it say eternal life is promised to those who use it.

Hebrews 13:15-16 is cited as a text which proves that  the use of the sacred name in the worship of God is required.  Again, this text does not say which name to  use,  nor does it say that any name other than Yahweh  displeases him.

Jeremiah  8:8-9  is used to describe how the sacred name  was removed  from the Scriptures. However, this text says nothing about a sacred name.  It simply states that wise men have rejected the Word of the Lord, not the name of the Lord.

Exodus 23:13, Joshua 23;7, and Psalm 16:4 are said to prove it is wrong to mention (use) any other title or name except Yahweh as the name of 'the  true Mighty One'.  The English word 'mention' that is used in these scriptures is translated from the Hebrew word 'zakar', which means 'to infix', 'penetrate into the mind', 'recall', or 'to preserve in memory'.  It does not refer to 'not mentioning the names of other gods', which was often done by the prophets; nor does it state that the use of any name other than Yahweh is sinful.

Exodus   20:7   and  Leviticus  19:12  supposedly   condemn   the substitution  of  any  name other than Yahweh,  because  the  word 'vain'  means 'to falsify', 'to bring God's  name  to  nought', or 'to substitute'.  The Hebrew authority Gesenius says the usage of the word 'vain' in these scriptures means,  'utter  not the name of Jehovah upon a falsehood' (i.e., do  not swear  falsely). This means that one should not use  the name  of  Yahweh  when falsely swearing, but it has no reference  to using a substitute name for God (see Gesenius, p. 807).

Malachi  1:6  supposedly condemns the priests who  despise  God's name and is a  reference to the ministers today who refuse  to  give honor to God by not using the sacred name. However, Sacred Names advocates fail  to quote Malachi 1:7-14, which shows how the priests were despising God's name.

Matthew 17:11  is  used  to support the concept  that  John  the Baptist  preached the sacred name. However, an examination of  this text  does not support the idea that John's message included  the restoration  of a sacred name.

John  17:6,26 is given as proof that Jesus revealed the sacred name  to his  followers and stirred up much controversy for doing so.  Luke 11:52 is also used to show he attacked the Pharisees for deleting the sacred name from the sacred texts. But, there is no evidence in these scripture that supports this claim or shows that Jesus  used the sacred name.

Amos 4:13,  which the Authorized Version translates as  "The Lord,  the  God of hosts,  is his name" is taken by Sacred Names advocates  to differentiate between the name and   title.   Stating that 'The Lord' (Yahweh) is the name, and 'The God of hosts' is the title.  The Hebrew text does not contain punctuation here, so there are no commas to indicate a differentiation between a name and a title.  The text literally reads, "Yahweh the God of hosts [is] his  name."

Amos  5:27  states,  "Therefore  will  I cause  you  to  go  into captivity beyond Damascus, says the Lord, whose name is The God of  hosts."  Sacred Names advocates say this text should be read: "The Elohim of Hosts, whose name is Yahweh."  This is another example  of  violating the Hebrew text. The Hebrew text says:  "Yahweh,  the  God of hosts (is) his  name."  This shows Yahweh  is not the exclusive name of the God of the Old Testament.

Sacred Names advocates insist that, in  the New Testament, Jesus  came with  his   Father's  name, Yah.  They claim that the Messiah's name 'Yahshua' is a combination of Yah  with 'shua' (salvation). John 5:43 and John 14:26  are quoted to prove their point. However, neither of these  texts  say Jesus came with his  Father's name. They state he came in his  Father's  name, which is a reference to his coming with the Father's power and authority.  These texts clearly do not prove the Messiah used the name Yahshua.


The English word 'name' is often translated from the Hebrew words 'shem' and 'shum' and the Greek word 'onoma.' None of the words are limited to  the  pronunciation  of  the Tetragrammaton as Sacred Names groups would have us believe.  The following are some of the meanings of the Hebrew words 'shem' and 'shum'  and the Greek word 'onoma'

Old Testament Hebrew

New Testament Greek

A  name is a created thing, which God commands us not to worship. We are commanded to worship God, not his name. When we ascribe power to a name, we are ascribing power to something that was created, not to its creator. A name has no significance or meaning without the person. A name only serves to identify.   Names and  titles applied  to God describe his  attributes, character,  and being. Those  who call on a name or title as the way to salvation should read Matthew 7:21-22 and Luke 6:46, which speak of people who call upon and appropriate the name of the Lord but do not do the things that he commands.

Further  examination  of  the words 'shem' and 'shum', reveals that Moses  spoke 'in' God's name, not 'of' God's name (Ex.5:23). Psalm 138:2 clearly says that God's word is magnified above his name:

"I will worship toward your holy temple,  and praise your name for your loving  kindness and for your truth:  for you have magnified your word above all your name."


"He that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out:   and I will write upon him the name of  my  God,  and the name of the city of my God, which  is  new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name" (Rev.3:12 KJV).

Revelation 19:12 shows that Jesus' new name has not yet been revealed. "He [Jesus Christ] had a name written, that no  man  knew,  but  himself" (Rev.19:12 KJV).

"In that day shall there be one Lord,  and his name one"  (Isa.14:9 KJV). Jesus will have only one name when he returns to earth with the elect of God, but he has many names now.


The  nation of Israel has the Sovereign's name imprinted  upon  it. The  name 'Israel' literally means 'He will rule as God' or 'He will reign over his  people'.  Genesis 32:28,  Numbers 6:27,  and Deuteronomy 28:10 say God's name was to be placed on the children of  Israel.   The 'El' in Israel is God's name.


The  Creator Sovereign of Israel said he would place his  name  on a  place  where  he  could be worshiped.  The scriptures that  indicate what the building should be called show that there is a new name used for God.

2.Kings 21:7

"And  he set a graven image of the grove that he had made in  the house, of which the Lord [YHWH] said to David, and to Solomon his son,  In this house, and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all tribes of Israel, will I put my name for ever."

Jeremiah 7:14,30

"Therefore will I do to this house, which is called by my name, wherein you trust,  and to the place which I gave to you and to your  fathers,  as I have done to Shiloh . . .For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight,  says the Lord:  they have set their  abominations in the house which is called by my  name,  to pollute it."

2.Chronicles 33:4,7

"Also  he built altars in the house of the Lord  [YHWH],  whereof the Lord had said, in Jerusalem shall my name be for ever. . .And he set a carved image,  the idol which he had made,  in the house of God  [Elohim],  of which God had said to David and to  Solomon his son,  In this house,  and in Jerusalem,  which I have  chosen before all the tribes of Israel, will I put my name for ever."

Notice in the above two scripture that his  house is called by two different names for God: 'YHWH' and 'Elohim.'

The  phrases 'cause his name to dwell', 'place his name  there', 'put  his name there', and 'my name shall be there'  all demonstrate that the meaning of 'shem' and 'shum' (English: 'name'), can mean to claim ownership . See Deut.12:11; 14:23;  16:2,6,11;  26:2;  12:5,21; 14:24; 1.Kgs.8:1-66; 16:29; 9:3;  2.Kgs.23:27.   "What God owns he openly  possesses by placing his  name upon it" (Toward an Old Testament Theology, by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., pp. 134,196-197).


1.Kings 5:3-5

"You  know how that David my father could not build an house to the  name of the Lord [YHWH] his God [Elohim] for the wars  which were  about him on every side,  until the Lord put them under the soles of his feet.  But now the Lord my God has given me rest  on every side,   so  that  there is  neither  adversary  nor  evil occurrent. And, behold, I purpose to build an house to the name of the  Lord  my God,  as the Lord spoke to David  my  father, saying, Your son, whom I will set upon your throne in your room, he shall build an house to my name."

1.Kings 8:16-20; 28-29

"Since  the  day  that I brought forth my people  Israel  out  of Egypt,  I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to  build an house,  that my name might be therein; but I chose David to be over my people Israel. And it was in the heart of David my father to  build an house for the name of the Lord God [YHWH Elohim]  of Israel" (vs.16-17).

Notice his name is the Lord God (YHWH Elohim) of  Israel.   Here, two  distinct  names are combined into one name, which  the Creator God says is his  name.

"And  the Lord said to David my father,  Whereas it was in your heart to build an house to my name, you did well that it was in your heart.  Nevertheless you shall not build the house; but your son that shall come forth out of your loins,  he shall build  the house to my name.  And the Lord has performed his word that he spoke,  and I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel,  as the Lord promised, and have built an house  for  the name of the Lord God [YHWH Elohim]  of  Israel" (vs.18-20).

"Yet have you respect to the prayer of your servant, and to his supplication,  O Lord my God [YHWH Elohim],  to hearken to the cry and to the prayer, which your servant prays before you today: That your eyes may  be  open toward this house night and day,  even  toward  the place of which you have said,  My name shall be there:   that you may  hearken to the prayer which your servant shall make toward this place" (vs.28-29).

1.Kings 8:42-44

"(For  they  shall hear of your great name,  and of  your  strong hand, and of your stretched out arm;) when he shall come and pray toward this house; Hear you in heaven your dwelling place, and do according  to all that the stranger calls to you for:   that  all people of the earth may know your name,  to fear you,  as do your people Israel;  and that they may know that this house,  which  I have built,  is  called by your name. If your people go  out  to battle against their enemy,  whithersoever you shall send  them, and  shall  pray to the Lord toward the city (Jerusalem)  which you have chosen,  and toward the house that I have built for your name."

A  short  study  into the word  'temple'  will reveal  what  some Israelites called the House of God.

1.Chronicles  6:10 speaks of the temple that Solomon  built  for God.  The  word used for temple here is 'bethel' or 'bet-el', which literally means 'House of God' (i.e., 'House of El').

The  prophet  Daniel wrote of the temple and called  it  "the temple  [palace] of the house of God [Elahh]" (Dan.5:3).   In his  description  of  the temple, Daniel uses a Chaldean  word  to describe God.  Now one would think that Daniel the prophet  would know what to call the temple and indeed he did.  He called it the temple of Elahh, which is another name for God.     

The House of God was not called the House of Yah or Beth-Yah; it was called Beth-El,  Temple of YHWH  Elohem,  Temple  of Elah and other descriptive  terms  that referred  to the Creator God for whom it was  built. This alone should cast a great deal of doubt upon the Sacred Names doctrine.


Thousands of years ago the prophet Agur was inspired to ask,  "Who  has  ascended  up into heaven, or  descended?  who  has gathered  the wind in his fists?  who has bound the waters in  a garment? who has established all the ends of the earth?  what is his  name,  and  what is his son's name, if you can  tell?" (Pro.30: 4 KJV). Clearly, Agur was speaking prophetically about God the Father and the One who was to become his son (the Creator God). During his lifetime, Agur revealed that there were names for the Sovereign God and his Son that no human knew.

There is also some indication in Jeremiah 23:25-27;  44:26,  Psalm 45:17,  and  Ezekiel 39:7 that the name of God was forgotten from time to time by the Israelites. Perhaps  the reason that the name of God is  so hard to  discern and  was allowed to be lost was to prevent man from worshiping it in an idolatrous way.


The Sacred Names  doctrine says that the Savior  has  only  one personal name by which he must be called.  However, scripture does not support this belief.

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is  given:   and the government shall be upon his shoulder:  and his name shall be called Wonderful,  Counselor,  the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace" (Isa.9:6 KJV).

Here, there are five different names for our  Savior and each has a different meaning and exemplifies a different aspect of his character. They all are his  names and give glory to him.

Truly, our Savior  is all of these and more.   Our Savior is so great  that  it takes these names and many more to describe his  attributes.


What  was the Savior called by his earthly parents  and  friends, while he was living in the flesh?

"Therefore  the  Lord himself shall give you a  sign;  Behold,  a virgin  shall conceive,  and bear a son and shall call  his  name Immanuel [God is with us]"  (Isa.7:14 KJV). See  also Isa.8:8-10.

What did our Savior's physical parents and friends call him? Did they call him 'Yah' or 'Yahshua'?  If they had called him any  of these names they would have probably been stoned for  sacrilege.

Almost 2,000 years have passed since our Savior walked the earth. This is a very long time, yet some people place  their entire salvation on their ability to  pronounce  and recognize an ancient name correctly.

For anyone to believe that they know the ancient pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is amazing considering that the scholarly world of  theologians  and other researchers  cannot totally agree on its exact pronunciation.

Notice  what the angel says to Mary's husband,  Joseph:

"And  she shall bring forth a son,  and you shall call his name Jesus:  for he shall save his people from their sins . [Matthew inserts  an  explanation of this dream]  Now all this  was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by  the prophet, saying,   Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son,  and they shall call his name Emmanuel,  which being interpreted is,  God with us" (Matt.1:21-23).   See also Lk.1:28-35.

Even the Lamsa Translation of the New  Testament, which  many of the Sacred Names groups look to for validation  of their doctrine, translates the name of our Savior as 'Jesus'.

Joseph and Mary were both told to call his name Jesus and that the child  would be  the Emmanuel spoken of by  the prophets (Matt.1:21-23; Lk.1:28-35).

There is absolutely no way to reconcile these scriptures with the Sacred  Names  doctrine of having one name for the Savior.  It  simply cannot be done.  Either the Bible is not inspired and is not  the Word of God or there is another explanation.

The  only  logical  explanation  is  that  the phonetic  sound  of a name is not important.  The  things that  are important are the attributes that the name describes  and the spirit-being that the name represents.  It is obvious that  one single  name cannot possibly describe the wondrous attributes  of our Savior.


"When  Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi,  he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the son of man am? And  they said,  Some say that you are John the Baptist: some, Elias;  and others,  Jeremias,  or one of the prophets.   He said to them,  But whom say you that I am?  And Simon Peter answered and  said,  You are the Christ,  the Son of the living God.   And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona:  for flesh and blood have not revealed it to you,  but my Father which  is  in heaven" (Matt.16:13-17 KJV). The  Lamsa Translation agrees with the King James translation here.

Why did Jesus ask these questions?  Most Sacred Names groups believe  that he was called by Yaho-Hoshu-wah,  Yehoshuah, or some other derivation of Yah.   If they are correct,  Peter  gave the  wrong  answer.  Peter says  that Jesus was 'the Christos', which means 'The Anointed One'. This phrase is a title not a personal name.   Notice that our Savior agreed with Peter's identification of him. Who is right?   Peter?  Our Savior?  Or the Sacred Names groups?


Some of the Sacred Names groups believe that the name Jesus is actually a corruption of the names of a number of pagan gods, and therefore should not be used to identify the Savior. The following will show that this belief is without merit.

Scholars   have  demonstrated  that  there  is  no  etymological connection  between  the names 'Jesus' and 'Zeus.'  Jesus is  the Anglicized form of the Latin word 'Iesus';   Iesus is the Latin form  of the Greek word 'Iesous.'  Iesous is the Greek form of the Hebrew word 'Yeshua.'  Zeus and Iesous are not cognates (related in origin).  Moreover, there  is no connection between the name Jesus and the god called 'Yes'.  'Yes', one of the names of Bacchus, is not connected to the name  Jesus  by adding the Latin termination 'sus'.  Bacchus  was one  of  the  names of Nimrod; therefore, there is no etymological connection between the name of the god 'Yes' and Jesus.

A  point  to  consider is that when Paul preached  to  Greeks  at Athens,  he  preached  about Jesus (Acts 17:18,31).   The  Greeks accused Paul of being a 'setter forth of strange gods'.  They did not connect the name Jesus with the Greek god Zeus.   This simply points out that there is not a single historical or scholarly source that etymologically connects Jesus with the god Zeus.  All authorities state  that Jesus is the Greek form  of  the  Hebrew word 'Joshua'  or  Aramaic word 'Jeshua'.

The  idea  that Iesous is the Ionic masculine form of  Iaso,  the Greek  goddess  of healing cannot be substantiated. In the abridged and unabridged editions of Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell and Scott there is  no such word connected with Iaso.   Iesous is listed as the  name of Jesus, which this Lexicon says is the Greek form of the Hebrew name 'Joshua'. Iesous is in no way related to Iaso, the Greek goddess of healing.


Now what about the title 'Christ'?   Sacred Names advocates  admit that they  have  been ridiculed in times past for suggesting that  the word  Christ  is  derived from the  Indian  deity  'Chrishna'  or 'Krishna.'   Their  answer to this criticism is that, in the book The  Two Babylons,  p.60,  by Alexander Hislop, there is an illustration of the serpent  Calyia  slain  by  Vishnu in the  reincarnated form  of Chrishna.  They say that this portrayal of Genesis 3:15 depicts Chrishna as the serpent-crusher of India, and that  Dr.  Ignaz  Goldhier who wrote the book   Mythology Among the Hebrews,  links the  deities  of India  and Greece together.  Therefore, the Sacred Names advocates believe that the name 'Christ' is closely  associated  with pagan worship.

It  is  admitted by both sides of  the  Sacred Names issue that the word 'Christ' ceased to be a  title and became a part of the proper name 'Jesus Christ'.


A  letter  found  in  a mound northwest of  the  modern  town  of Ta'annek written in the fifth century B.C.  proves that 'Yah' was a   deity  of  the  Canaanites.    Yah  is  associated  with  the Canaanitish Mother-goddess, Ashtart-Anat as seen by  the  Father-Mother titles of the deity of the Jews at Elephantine.  There, the title of Anat-Yaw is seen as well as Ashim-Bethel and Afat-Bethel where the titles of Astarte are combined with the Sun-god, Bethel.  At Gaza,  Yah appears as a Sun-god on a coin and coins were frequently inscribed  with the figure of  Ashtart-Yaw,  Anat-Yaw, and Anat-Bethel, which corresponds to the Phoenician Melk-Ashtart  and Eshmun-Ashtart (The Mythology Of All Races, Vol. 5, p. 44).

Yah  was identified with the Aramaic Thunder-god,  Adad.   A  coin from  of the  fourth  century B.C.  in  southern Philisti (when  the Jews were in subjection to the Persian  kings) has  the  only known representation of the  Hebrew  Deity.   The letters YHW were inscribed just above a bird which the god held on his arm.  The most likely identification of the god Yah of Gaza is the Hebrew, Phoenician, and Aramaic Sun-god  El or Elohim whom the Hebrews had long since  identified with Yah (ibid., pp. 42-43).

The collection of ancient manuscripts found at the Jewish  colony of  Elephantine  demonstrates  the use  of  Canaanite  religious terminology in conjunction with the name of Israel's God—Yahu.  Such compound names as Anath-Yahu,  Anath-Bethel,  Ishum-Bethel, and Herem-Bethel  are  found there. These names all  represent  the attempt  to combine differing philosophies and religious  beliefs that were prevalent in the centuries following the Israelite conquest of  Canaan.    For  example, Anath was  the  ancient  Canaanite goddess,  the sister of Baal (Bruce, p. 53), and Baal was one of the ancient names for Nimrod (Hislop, p. 232).

It  was from the divine name Yah that the Greeks took 'Ie' in the invocations of the gods,  especially the god Apollo.  The name 'Ie' was written from right to  left  and inscribed  over the great door of the temple of Apollo at  Delphi (Taylor,  p.  183).   Iao,  a variant of the Tetragrammaton,  was applied to the Graeco-Egyptian god  Harpocrates or Horus.   Horus was called Harpocrates by the Greeks.  The ancient Greeks had an acclamation similar to Hallelujah  (Praise you  Yah).    They used Hallulujee  in  the beginning  and ending of their hymns in honor of Apollo  (Taylor, p. 183).


From the earliest times, it was the habit of the heathen nations to  apply the appellations 'Savior', 'Redeemer', and 'Physicians of souls' to their gods,  demigods,  and heroes.  The appellation 'Our Savior' was the usual designation of the god Aesculapius  as well  as Bacchus,  Jupiter,  and Hercules.   'Son of God'  and 'Savior  of  the world' were expressions with which  the  heathen were quite  familiar.   Mercury was distinguished in  the  pagan world  by  the  title  of 'Logos'  or 'The Word'  (Taylor,   pp. 8,153,156,183).   Taylor  is correct in his observation that  the heathen  used such appellations, but he is incorrect in his  assumption that the  Christians copied these expressions from the  heathen.   The Bible reveals that it was the other way around.

Orpheus,  the earliest poet in Greek legend,  states that Bacchus was a lawgiver.  He calls him 'Moses' and says he was the one who gave  the  two  tables  of law.   In all  the  ancient  forms  of invocation to the Supreme Being similar expressions are found  such  as 'Io  Terombe', 'Io  Baccoth', 'Hehovah Evan', 'Hevoe', 'Eloah', and 'Io Nissi'.  It was from Nissi ('my banner'—one of  the  names of JHWH was JHWH-Nissi) that  the  Greeks  formed Dionysius (Taylor,  pp.  188-189). Taylor admits that the  heathen  took the names of the  true  God and applied them to their deities.   

Much  of  the confusion regarding the appropriation of names  has been  generated  by  writers  such as  Robert  Taylor who,  in recognizing  the  absorption  of paganism  into  what  is  called Christianity today, assumes the Hebrews did the same thing in the development  of  their  religion. But history and  the  Bible demonstrate  the opposite.   It was the heathen,  during the  Old Testament period,  who absorbed the names of the true  God  into their  paganism.   That the name Zeus is a corruption of one of the names of the true God, which is seen in the Aramaean account of the Flood.  When Deucalion (Noah) entered the Ark with his wife and family,  all the  beasts came to  him in couples because Zeus (Adad) had ordered it  (The Mythology of All Races, Vol. 5).

Informed  Bible  students are aware that both the  names  of  the Greek  Zeus and the Roman Jove are derived from the Hebrew  YHWH.  As Paul states,  "The heathen did not like to retain God in their knowledge"  (Rom.1:28)  and they applied the names of  God  to their idols.


History shows that  the followers  of  the  Savior  were referred  to  as  Nazarenes  by Tertullus  the orator (Acts 24:1-5) and many others of his  time. The  Romans called them Christians or followers of  Christos.  If the elect of the  early  church were  called  by  any  name associated   with   the terms followers of or  assemblies  of Yahshua, Yah, Yahweh, Yahowah or any of the other supposed names of the Savior and the Father, why  isn't there any historical evidence to this usage in reference  to  the early  church? Two excellent works  that  have many references to the early church's name  are the two books on the Sabbath by Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday and Divine Rest for Human Restlessness.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, (Vol. XIII, p.  657,  1903  edition), the Jews:

"Fancied that the real name of the founder of the new religion must be Christus or 'Excellent',  and they constantly spoke of the Christians as 'Chrestians'. . . 'If you  call us Christians', said Tertullian, 'You bear to the name of our Master;  if you call us Christians you  testify to the blamelessness of our live'."

The historian Josephus says,  

"Now was about this time Jesus,  a wise  man, if it be lawful to call him a man.  He was a doer of wonderful works,  a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure.  He drew over to him many Jews,  and many Gentiles.  He was (the) Christ." Josephus, 1849 edition, by E. Morgan and Co., p. 364.

The Roman historian Tacitus mentions Jesus specifically in  his annals in explaining the word 'Christians':  

"Christ from whom they   derive  their  name,   was  condemned  to  death  by  the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Emperor Tiberius." 1 Annals xv:44; written A.D. 115-117.

Christ who was the revelator of the Book of Revelation  says,  "I know your works: Behold, I have set before you an open door, and no man can  shut it:  For you have a little strength, and have kept my word,  and have not denied my name" (Rev.3:8).  The Sacred Names doctrine teaches that this scripture means that we must use the  correct  name for Christ or we will be denying it.

According to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, the word 'name' in verse 8 is translated from the Greek word   'onoma', which literally or figuratively  means a 'name', 'authority', or 'character'. The  Greek language shows that the true intent of verse 8 compliments true Christians for not denying the authority and/or character of  Christ.


There  are  many  questions to be asked about the Bible  and  its teachings  and  the answers may vary greatly depending  upon  the source.  If the questions are not related to one's salvation, the answers received won't really matter much.  However,  our Savior said: "Narrow is the way that leads to salvation and there be few that find it."

To  some,  the sacred name has become a magical sound that, when uttered, imparts some mystical presence with a supernatural power of  its own.  This is exactly the same kind of practice found  in the occult, which uses incantations and chants to summon the power of evil spirits.  Is there some power in the pronunciation of the name, and if so is that power really from the Mighty Ones?


Some people have confused the proclaiming of  the Savior's name with the false belief that, with the use of his name,  comes some inherent power or authority; however, a  name is inanimate and has no intrinsic power or  authority.   A  name is not the thing itself; it merely identifies the thing through symbols or sounds.

The  disciples cast out demons and performed great supernatural work in the name of the Savior. However,  they did all these works through the power and authority that is available through an authorized use of his name; the power was not in the phonetic sound of  his  name.

Even if a person were to know the correct name of the Savior and how to pronounce it correctly, they would not be guaranteed  that they would  be able to perform supernatural works or obtain salvation through this ability.  There is no magic in the name itself; the power to perform supernatural works and obtain salvation comes through an authorization to use the Savior's name to access and use spiritual power and to communicate with God the Father.

Jesus  says that many would perform supernatural  works in his  name, which is what many have done and are still doing. However, it does not mean that Jesus has sent or authorized the people who do these works. Each individual whom the Father has called to salvation during this age of the church is warned to test the spirits (1.Jn.4:1) to determine for themselves if the source of the teaching or supernatural works is good or evil:

"Not  everyone that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into  the kingdom  of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father  which is in heaven. Many shall say to me in that day, Lord, Lord,  have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name cast out  devils? and in your name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work lawlessness" (Matt.7:21-23 KJV). See also Mk.3:5-6; Lk.21:8.


To say that Sacred Names advocates are obsessed with the necessity of  using  the 'Name'  would be an  understatement.   The following statements are taken from the  The Sacred Name is it Sacred or Mystical?  (Church of God, The Eternal p.30-31).

"Before  this you have seen nothing compared to what you will see in the days ahead in the lives of true saints who witness in  the name  of Yahshua.   Now is the time for you to begin to know  and use and understand the Sacred Name . . .Great and wonderful things are  promised to the believers who are 'in' the Name  of  Yahshua . . .A blessing is pronounced upon those who think on his  name . . .It is by this means that victory over Satan can be gained.  There is only one Name given whereby the human race can be saved.  That name is exclusive,  holding salvation within itself . . .No other name  holds the quality of everlasting life  within  itself.   To trust  in another name will not save you. In order to be  saved you  will have to be in the body of the Messiah bearing the  name 'Assemblies of Yahweh' . . .While the charge is hurled against us that  we  ascribe some kind of mystical or magical power  to  the Sacred Name, this is not the case.  There is no magic to be found in any name.  However, Semitic culture has always understood the importance  of  a  Person's name,  that in some way the  one  who pronounced  it  has a special avenue of  communication  with  the individual spoken to."

Although Sacred Names advocates state that there is  no  magic  to  be found in the  name,  they also contradict themselves  by  stating that there is a special  power  given  by using the sacred name.


"In an attempt to use divine power,  magicians used various biblical names and  titles  of God in their incantations.   These  included  El, Elohim,  Eloah,  Adonai,  Sabaoth, and Shaddai.  But the one name which  came  closer  to the inner reality of the God of  the  Old Testament was the Tetragrammaton,  the YHWH.  It was held in such profound awe that it was rarely pronounced for fear of  profaning it  and  possibly  for fear of the magic of enemies if they  should discover  its pronunciation.   This belief  led  to  a  theological problem.  If God could be coerced by the use of his  name, then he was not omnipotent.   Therefore, a magical explanation was advanced to solve the problem.  The invocation of God's name does not oblige him to do  the  will  of the one who invokes his name, and he cannot  be  coerced  by  the recital  of his  name.   Rather,  the 'name' itself is invested with the  power  to fulfill the desire of the man  who  pronounces  it."  Cavendish, article 'Names'.

"The  Tetragrammaton  was considered to be connected with  awesome mysteries. The 'wonder-workers' of the Middle Ages,  and  later times,   were  believed  to  have  known  how  to pronounce  the Tetragrammaton.   Such  a wonder-worker was called a 'Baal  Shem' meaning master of the name." The Universal  Jewish  Encyclopedia; Vol. 10, article 'Tetragrammaton'.

"In the Cabala,  the creation of the universe was regarded as  the unfolding  of God's name and the ten Sefiroth,  being aspects  of God's identity,  constitute the sacred name of God.   The letters of the Hebrew alphabet, used in various combinations and changes, came  to be regarded as extremely powerful objects of  meditation and magical tools—tools through which the universe was created and which  contained the secret of the structure of all  things.  Thus, the object of Jewish mystical contemplation was the name of God which reflects the hidden meaning and totality of  existence.  It is  the  name of God through which  everything  acquires  its meaning.   Who,  therefore, can succeed in making this great name of God,  which is the least concrete and perceptible thing in the world,  the object  of  his  meditation is on the  way  to  true mystical ecstasy." Cavendish, 'Names'.  


"The  idea common to all magic is that words,  names,  and  sounds have  special  powers and this applies  particularly to  names  of gods,  angels, and demons.  To know the name and how to pronounce it  and use it made it possible to utilize its power.   It is  an ancient widespread belief that a secret name can have power  over everything  in the universe.   This belief is especially held  by the Jews,  and  the  names  of God are frequently  used  in  the practice  of  magic.   This  is  why  the pronunciation  of  the Tetragrammaton  is so important.   The correct  pronunciation  is absolutely essential for the working of magic." The  Supernatural—Magic, Words, and Numbers, Editorial Consultants: Colin Wilson and Uri Geller, p. 68.

"The  Talmud makes no bones about the magic of the names  of  God.  According  to  it,  the divine names of God were used to  perform miracles  by  those  who  knew  their  combinations." The Jewish Encyclopedia,  article, 'Names of God'.

In the 11th century A.D.,  the Jewish scholar,  Hai Gaon, claimed that the use of God's name should be restricted to the Holy Land (The Jewish Encyclopedia, article, 'Shem ha-Meforash').  Physicians even tried to  learn the pronunciation of the name of God, because of its marvelous powers,  and  it is in conjunction with magic that the  YHWH  was introduced into the   magic  papyri (ibid., article, 'Tetragrammaton').

According  to Eliphaz Levi,  the YHWH is the key to divine  power and  all  magical science is comprised in the knowledge  of  this sacred name (Transcendental Magic,  by Eliphaz Levi,  pp. 17,55).

"In  sorcery,  the magic circle is a must and the names of  Hebrew divinities were often inscribed within the magic circle including the Tetragrammaton." Witchcraft, Magic, and Alchemy, by Grillot De Givry, p. 104.  

"When  the 'Name' was worn by the person,  it was  regarded  as  an amulet  for the purpose of protecting against  danger,  sickness, and  evil spirits." Morals and Dogma of the Ancient  and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, p. 204.

"The  supreme  magician,   Henry  Cornelius  Agrippa  (1486-1535), believed that the name 'Jesus' was all powerful and contained all the power of the Tetragrammaton.  Cornelius Agrippa advocated the idea that he had drawn close to the Creator Himself and knew  how to  call  upon the names of God.   As Yates  notes,  this  occult religion  of  Agrippa,  which called  itself  Christian,  claimed access to the highest power because it accepted the name of Jesus as the chief of the wonder-working names" (Yates, pp. 37,46).

"It  was  the interest in the Cabala during the Middle  Ages  that supplied  the  mystical  formulas found in the  occult,  and  the divine  names  were introduced into the ceremonies of  magic  and sorcery.   Astrological talismans were coupled with Bible verses, Hebrew  divine  names,  and various formulas  borrowed  from  the Cabala." De Givry, pp. 206,339-340.

"One  of  the peculiarities of the modern tongues movement is the belief in the value of  words. . . there  was  an  ancient widespread  belief  that  certain  words  and  phrases  contained magical power.    Of  these  words,  the  best  known  was  the Tetragrammaton.   Among  the Gentiles the reverence for words was displayed in oracles and ritualistic incantations." (Glossolalia in the Apostolic Church,  by Ira J.  Martin, pp. 22-23).

One of the major  characteristics of those involved in the movement of Speaking in Tongues (i.e., speaking in unintelligible languages in an attempt to worship God)  is  the concept of the importance and value of  words, which shows that there is a historical link  between the Tongues movement and the Sacred Names movement.

Occult  attachment  to  the  Sacred Names movement  is  seen  by comments that say there is a blessing pronounced upon those  who think on his  name.  Sacred Names advocates say that, although the name often  stands for the person,  the name helps them to  understand the person. Moreover, they say that meditation on the sacred name is one of the ways by  which believers  in the deity can come to know the deity better and  define and understand their own position better.

Just  because a person states something as fact does  not make it so. This simple truth is often forgotten by those who are trying to support a theory or position of religious doctrine.


Jesus  says that  many will come in his   name (i.e., using  his  name)  and  deceive  many (Matt.24:4-5). The Savior came in his Father's name,  not  his  own (Jn.5:43).  There are over  20,000 various church organizations  that   call   themselves 'Christian', and they all differ from each other in their doctrine.

Many  think they are doing the will of God because of  works  and physical  manifestations  of supernatural  power.  However,  the scriptures  say that, if one does not keep the laws  of  God, everything else they do is in vain (Matt.7:21-23; 15:9).  The devil has deceived most professing Christians into thinking  God's law has been done away with and is not to be  kept  by  the followers of Christ.   But,  Jesus says that, if a person is lawless, they will not be in the Kingdom of God.  


According  to the 'The Assembly of Yahowah the  Eternal', one can only gain salvation through the pronunciation of a name:

"Do you know that without the true personal name of the Family of heaven, Yahowah  and Yaho-Hoshu-wah,   you  cannot  receive  the forgiveness for your sins?  That's how serious it is.  If you are still  calling  upon  and using the false substituted  names  and titles—God,  Lord,  Jesus, Christ, Iesous,  Iesus, Christos, Yahweh,  Yahveh,  Yahshua, Yeshua, Yahvehshua, and Jehovah—you do not   have   salvation   and  your  sins   have   not   been forgiven." Bishop Gordon Kieth Pearce.

Each  Sacred  Name group states that there is only  one pronunciation of the Saviors name  by which one can be saved.  If in fact this is the case, we must indeed pronounce this name exactly and with impeccable precision, not missing a single intonation or  decibel of intensity.  If  their statements are correct, we  must  search  out  and  vocalize  these  names precisely or lose out on salvation. Of course, this may be an impossible task, because time, chance, and human error enter the picture as we search for this supposed auditory elixir of eternal life.

According to The Jewish Encyclopedia:

"The correct  pronunciation  of the JHWH was known by members  of  the Babylonian Academy as late as 1000 A.D. It is believed the name is derived from the Hebrew verb 'to be' (havah).  It is for this reason  some Sacred Names advocates insist the pronunciation of the JHWH should be Yahvah. Many Sacred Names people are  troubled  over the various  forms of the Sacred Name,  but the majority have chosen Yahweh and in faith believe this is the name because  scholars predominantly agree in this choice.  So, until a better form is learned from the Hebrew grammar and Hebrew authorities, most will continue teaching the Sacred Name as Yahweh".

"One fact is certain, sacred name advocates are not in  agreement themselves  as to the correct pronunciation of the Name.   Some contend  for  Yahweh,  others  for Yahveh or for  Yahvah  or for Yaheveh.   None  of the selected forms such as Jehovah,  Yehovah, Yahweh,  Yahveh,  Yahwe, Yahvah, Yahaveh, and Yahaweh are really demonstrated to be on a sound basis.  What is significant is that the  YHWH has no true vowel points in modern Hebrew.   Its  vowel points are those of Adonai.

"The much quoted statement from the Encyclopedia Judaica, that the pronunciation of the YHWH was never lost is predicated upon  the idea  that  a  few of the early Greek writers  of  the  Christian Church testify to a pronunciation very nearly like Yahweh.   What Sacred  Names  writers  fail  to mention,  with  respect  to  the statement in the Encyclopedia Judaica,  is that the  preservation of the proper pronunciation of the YHWH is limited to the  first syllable,  Yah, only"  (Volume 12,  page 118). See also Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 1, article 'God, Names of.'

Can anyone prove  beyond a doubt what the correct  spelling and pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is?   All of those who  try  to do so are forced to go to human sources for verification.  But, there is no agreement in this search.  The best  that  can be said is that the various forms used today  for the  Tetragrammaton are educated guesses.  Yahweh may  be  more nearly correct, but is this good enough?  

The various derivations and pronunciations of the Tetragrammaton are  still in doubt.   What is now generally assumed is that the YHWH is the causative  form  of  the verb 'to be' and  should  be pronounced Yahweh or Yahveh. See Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition, article, 'Tetragrammaton'.


In The Law and the  Prophets, there is some information that destroys any linguistic or historical credibility for the Sacred Names doctrine:

"This  explanation  was  first advanced by Jewish writers  in  the Middle  Ages  and has found wide acceptance  now.   The  serious objection  to  this explanation is that the verb 'to be'  has  no causative stem in the Hebrew.   So, in order to express this idea it  is necessary to employ a different verb.   In Exodus 3:14 the assumption is drawn that Yahweh is derived from the verb 'to be'.  But the  verb 'to be' in the Hebrew is 'hayah',  not 'hawah'.  'Hawah'  belongs  to  an earlier era of  the language. In  the historical sense, then, YAHWEH is not a Hebrew name.

"The  curious fact is that the ancient pronunciation of  the  YHWH has  been totally lost.   The Dead Sea scrolls did not solve  the problem, but  merely demonstrated that the ban was in effect  two hundred years before the time of Christ.  The form Yahweh is thus an  incorrect  hybrid  with an early 'w' and a  late 'eh'.   The indication, though, is that often the inspired writers of the Old Testament were not interested in etymology.   Rather, they wanted to draw attention to the similarity of sound, that is, to use the pun and write a word descriptive of the event.  Therefore, it is quite likely that the interpretation of the Name in Exodus  3:14 may not be etymological at all.

"What  should be obvious in all this is that the pronunciation  of the  YHWH  is  an academic matter and the God of Israel  is  more interested  in our personal relationship to Him rather  than  the pronunciation  of  his   name.  In fact,  from the  evidence  now available,  it may be argued that Yahweh is incorrect and Jahoweh might  be the true pronunciation" (pp. 215-224,  edited by John H. Skilton, Milton C. Fisher, and Leslie W. Sloat).


"One thing is certain:  critical speculation about the origin and meaning  of the name YHWH seems endless" (Theological Wordbook  of the  Old Testament,  Vol.  1,  pp.  210-212,  edited by R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke).

If  the Sacred Names doctrine is correct,  pronouncing  the name  as closely as possible is not good enough. Either  one has salvation,  or one does not.

If  the exact pronunciation of God's name were important to him, there would be  no  problem finding out what it is.  In  fact,  the  exact phonetic pitch,  decibel range,  intensity, and cycles per second would  be  clearly and distinctly recorded for us to mimic in order to obtain salvation.


One  Sacred  Names group claims that, in order to worship the Supreme Sovereign, we have to know his name and if the name is not  known, there is no hope of ever worshiping him.  However, there is no scripture  that  says we must know God's name in order  to  worship him.

One Sacred Names group asks:

"Have you  offered  pure worship to him by calling upon his  name, just as did the ancient patriarchs. Are you sure that you're in communication with  the true Almighty Heavenly Father today?"


If the phonetic sound of God the Father's name were extremely important  to him,  it would also be important to  his  Son who is our Savior.   But was this phonetic sound important to our Savior when he taught his Father's way to salvation?

In Mark 15:34-35, just before his death:

"Jesus cried with a loud voice,  saying,  Eloi,  Eloi, lama sabachthani?   which is,  being interpreted, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?   And some of them that stood by, when they heard it,  said,  Behold, he calls Elias."

These verses in Mark show the prophetic fulfillment of Psalm 22:1-2:

"My God,  my God,  why have you forsaken me?   why are you so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?  O my God, I cry in the day time,  but  you hear not;  and in the night season,  and  am  not silent."

Even  the  Lamsa Bible,  which is supposedly translated  from  an original  Hebrew  text,  quotes Mark 15:34:  "Eli,  Eli,  lemana shabakthani."  If one must use only the proper phonetic sound  of the proper name when addressing the Supreme Sovereign of all that exists, our  Savior  used  the wrong name during  the  most critical  moment  of  his  life.    These   words,   'Eli,   Eli, shabakthani,' are not Hebrew, but are of Chaldean derivation.

On numerous  occasions, Jesus spoke directly  to  the Supreme Sovereign God using the term 'Father' as his name.  This same  intimate  title  is  to be used by all those  who  are  the children of God the Father.


The Sacred Names advocates base their entire doctrine on Acts 4:10-12, which they claim is proof that there is only one name by  which  one can  be saved.  If this is true, we should indeed pronounce this name correctly. However,  Acts 4:10-12 does not prove this.

Acts 4:10-12

"Be it known to you all,  and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God  raised from the dead,  by him does this man stand before you whole.  This is the stone which was set at nought of  you builders  which is become the head of the corner. Neither is  there salvation in any other:   for there is none other  name under  heaven  given among men,  whereby we must be saved"  (See also Psa.54:1).

In  verse  10, the English word 'by',  in the phrase 'by the  name of ',  is translated from the Greek word 'oloma', which can mean 'in the power of.'

A further study  of this verse shows that the phrase 'in the name of ' means 'in  the authority of ', and it makes  much  more sense  than ascribing some mystical power to a name  or a phonetic sound.

There  is no question that verse 11 clearly states that there  is no salvation in any other spirit-being than Jesus the Christ,  but how do we reconcile this with what the psalmist David said about asking to be saved by the Creator God?

"Save  me,  O God,  by your name,  and judge me by your strength" (Psa.54:1). How could the psalmist David be saved  by  God's name?   Acts 4:11 says that the name of our Savior is the  only name by which we can be saved. The logical answer is that the  same spirit-being is  being spoken of, but from a different reference point in time.

"He  that  believes and is baptized shall be saved;  but he  that believes not shall be damned" (Mk.16:16 KJV).   

Here, those who  are saved are those  who  believe, repent,  and are baptized.   Where does a sacred name fit into this method of salvation?  Nowhere does the Bible support the use of the Tetragrammaton  as a prerequisite to salvation.   Scriptures that Sacred Names advocates advance to support this idea  are  either forced or given a private interpretation.

Isaiah 9:6  foretold that the Messiah  would be called, 'Pele,' 'Yatts,'  'Gibbor,' 'Ad', and 'Sar.'  Later Isaiah  was  inspired  to say that he  would  be called 'Immanuel' (Isa.8:8-10; 17:14). Just before Christ's conception,  an  angel was sent to say his  name would be  'Jesus'  and 'Emmanuel'.  None of these scriptures support the theory that the Savior  had only one name by which he was to be called. Actually,  they show just the opposite. They show that he has many  names, because  his greatness cannot be communicated by only one name.   


Once we understand that the Sovereign God of ancient Israel is the God who became the Messiah, it is easy  to  reconcile  the following  scriptures, which state that his  is the only name by which there is salvation.

"I,  even  I,  am  the Lord;  and beside me there is no  savior" (Isa.43:11 KJV).  In Isaiah 44:24, the Creator says that he is the Redeemer. And  in  Isaiah 60:16 he says, he  is  the  Savior  and Redeemer.

"Tell  you,  and  bring them near;  yes,  let them  take  counsel together:   who  have declared this from ancient time?   who have told it from that time?   have not I the Lord?   and there is no God else  beside me;  a just god and a savior;  there  is  none beside me" (Isa.45:21 KJV).

"Yet I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt, and you shall know  no  god  but  me: for there is  no  savior  beside  me" (Hos.13:4 KJV).

A  Samaritan woman said to Christ:

"I know that  Messias  comes, which  is called Christ:   when he is come,  he will tell us  all things.  Jesus said to her, I that speak to you am he . . . Now we believe,  not because of your saying:  for we have heard  him ourselves,  and know that this is indeed the Christ,  the Savior of the world" (Jn.4:25-26,42 KJV).  

The Book of Luke contains a statement, which  verifies that the God of ancient Israel is the Savior:

"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he has visited and redeemed his people" (Lk.1:68).

"For  therefore  we both labor and suffer  reproach,  because  we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe" (1.Tim.4:10 KJV).

"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 KJV).

It is true that there is only salvation through the Messiah. However, salvation is not given because of his name; it is given because of what he did for us.  This  is why the patriarchs—Noah,  Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and others—will  have  salvation along with all who  remain  in  Christ.  If salvation was tied to the phonetic sound of the name, these people would not  be  able to attain salvation.  All of them  would  be lost. It is through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and the power and authority of the God family that one can be saved, not through the phonetic sound of a name.

The  reason that there is not salvation in any other name  (authority) is that  the  God who came to earth  fulfilled  the  supreme sacrifice; he gave his life for us. Thereby, he made an eternal atonement for our sins.   Jesus is the only  name (authority) under heaven by which we can be saved.  Because Jesus was the Creator God through which Israel  could  attain salvation,  it makes sense that he is still the only name (authority) through which all people can be saved. For more details about the importance of the sacrifice of the Creator God, see our studies about the true gospel, the various covenants, and the sacred observance and convocations.


Forgiveness  of sin is not an act of man,  it is an act of  God.  A name cannot save us.  It is the Savior who saves us.  It  is the result of  his  action,  not ours.  Salvation does not come to humans by the act of pronouncing a name or making a phonetic sound.  If knowing and  using  the Savior's name could get us salvation, it would come by the works of people, not by the grace of God through the sacrifice of the Savior.  From Sacred Names literature, it  is apparent  that they believe salvation for them is gained by works (i.e., the  pronunciation  of the Tetragrammaton);  it  is  the result  of what they do,  not what God is doing through  the Savior.   This assumption shows a  lack of  faith in the grace of God the Father and the power  of  his  Son's sacrifice, which allows us to gain salvation without works.

The  whole  point  of  Acts  4:10-12 is not  that  a  name  saves anyone.  The  point  is  that salvation can  only  be  obtained through the sacrifice, authority, and office of the Savior.


Today's Sacred Names doctrine seems to have its roots in the  mid 1930's with  two  elders, Andrew Dugger  and  C.O.  Dodd,  who  were  rivals  and contenders for power within the Church of  God in the United States. When it became apparent to Dodd that Dugger was leading in this power struggle, Dodd  found a new and exciting cause to  champion in order to create a  following for himself. This new cause was the 'Hebrew Name Doctrine',  which a few small groups have accepted,  modified,  added to, and tried to validate to this very day.   And the controversy continues among  these  various groups as to  which  is  the real personal name that one should use to gain salvation.   


There  is little or no agreement among the various Sacred Names  groups as to the correct symbolic and phonetic representation of the tetragrammaton. However, they do all seem to agree that recognition and pronunciation of the name are matters of life and death to someone who is seeking salvation. Moreover, they also seem to agree that the name must be recognized in its original form and uttered with impeccable precision or one cannot obtain salvation.


Almost all Sacred Names groups rely on and quote extensively from Bible dictionaries, commentaries,   historians,  encyclopedias, concordances,  and  other Bible helps for their  major sources  of proof.  The problem with this approach is that these sources very seldom  agree on any of the points that are used as proof.  How do  the various  Sacred  Names  groups know who is right when  even  the scholars  who wrote these materials from which they quote  cannot agree among themselves as to the names of the Supreme spirit-beings  in question. It also seems a bit incongruous that the Sacred  Names groups would place  so  much  faith in those who,  according to their belief, are lost and without salvation.

When  one looks into the issue of the names and pronunciation  of the names in the Bible, it becomes obvious that this subject  is  extremely  technical and  controversial  and is not  a subject for a novice to tackle with little study and preparation. As a result of the difficulty of the subject,  the Sacred Names groups'  arguments,  prey  on  the ignorance of those who are not well versed in Bible study and research.

Why would anyone place their eternal  salvation  in the hands of a group of  people who cannot prove their belief?  The  Bible tells us to place our faith in no man, but to work  out  our own salvation in fear and  trembling  (Phil.2:12).  If a person cannot prove a point of salvation to himself, his faith is weak and perhaps not valid.  The scripture says  to:

"Prove  [test]  all things; hold fast to the things  that  are good"  (1.Thes.5:21 KJV).


"And God spoke all these words,  saying,  I am the Lord your God, which have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of  bondage.  You shall have no other gods before me.   You shall not make to you any graven image,  or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:  You shall not bow down yourself to them,  nor serve them:   for I the Lord your God am a  jealous God,  visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy to  thousands  of  them  that  love  me,   and  keep my commandments.   You  shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain;  for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain" (Ex.20:1-7; Deut.5:7-11).

The  first commandment states that one must worship God—not his  name,   his  description, or even his  title.   There is no indication whatsoever that one  should worship  his name.  The name has no substance or relevance other than descriptive terminology.

Idol  worship  is defined throughout the Bible as any  doctrine, person,  place or thing that a person obeys, worships or holds in reverence  above the God Family.  An idol can even be  something that God has created for his people's benefit.  Anything  can become  an  idol to a person if that thing is looked to as  equal to,  or more important than the God that caused or allowed it to  come into existence.

There  are many who profess the Christian faith, but believe and practice  idol  worship. However, few of these people will state that idol worship is  acceptable  to  God.  This study has shown that the Sacred  Names doctrine of recognizing, worshiping, and serving a name is nothing more than pure and unadulterated idolatry. However,  as with all false  doctrine,  the  primary source is  always Satanic.

For  those who  wish  to  make  a  further  detailed scripture-by-scripture study into this  subject, we recommend that  you  get a  copy of  The Sacred Name Is  It  Sacred  Or Mystical?, the Church of God, The Eternal P.O. Box 775 Eugene,  Oregon,  97440.


In reference to controversial or new doctrines,  the apostle Paul had  some  very  good advice  for any  Christian  who  takes their salvation seriously:

"Of  these things put them in remembrance,  charging them  before the  Lord that they strive not about words to no profit,  but  to the subverting of the hearers.   Study [i.e., be diligent] to show yourself  approved to  God,  a workman that needs  not  to  be ashamed,  rightly dividing  the word of  truth.  But  shun  vain babbling; for they will increase to more ungodliness" (2.Tim.2:14-16 KJV).

To  the Thessalonians Paul writes:  

"Prove all things;  hold  fast that which is good" (2.Thes.5:21).


The Sacred  Names doctrine  brings people  to the  brink  of  idolatry  and some cross over  the  line and worship a name instead of  God because of a lack of knowledge:

"My  people  are  destroyed  for  lack  of knowledge:  because  you  have rejected knowledge, I  will also reject  you, that you shall be no priest to me:  seeing  you  have forgotten the law of your God, I will also forget your children" (Hos.4:6 KJV).

One  of  these laws that Hosea speaks about has to do with idolatry. The punishment for worshiping an idol is death,  no matter what the idol is:  a physical thing, a philosophy, or a name.

The  important  issues  to  be dealt with  in  the  Sacred  Names doctrine are not the exact recognition and pronunciation  of  the names of  God the Father and  Jesus Christ.  The real issues here are idolatry  and salvation.   Once  these  two issues are put to rest,  the  whole matter  of  how to recognize and pronounce  the  names  of  the Sovereign Family becomes insignificant by comparison.

Many  have  crossed the boundary between the worship of God the Father and serving Jesus Christ and the worship of their names.  This kind of  worship is idolatry as defined in the Bible  (Ex.20:1-5; Deut.5:6-9).  There is a fine line between reverence  and  respect  for  a name that  symbolizes power and authority,  and the step into idolatry. It appears that some people have crossed this line and,  if it is not repented of, they are in danger of  losing the salvation that they seek to gain by worshiping a name.  

The Bible maintains that mankind must worship and serve God the Father and his Son, because both are worthy.   Nowhere does the Bible show that we must worship and serve a name. Moreover, to do so is to worship and serve an idol.


What  should  be  obvious to the reader  is that, the arguments advanced by Sacred Names advocates to support the notion that Yahweh is the exclusive name that must be used  in order  to gain salvation cannot be substantiated. Moreover, there  is  no valid historical or biblical tradition that verifies the proper pronunciation of  the Tetragrammaton.  



The  Sacred  Names  doctrine  is  just  another  satanic deception that leads to a very subtle form of idolatry and clouds the  truth of the Bible. Moreover, it captures and draws  away those who are not well-grounded in truth and faith:

"As also in all his [Paul's] epistles,  speaking in them of these things;  in which are some things hard to be understood,  which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction" (2.Pet.3:16 KJV).


If  you believe you have discovered the correct pronunciation  of the  personal name of the Sovereign Family in heaven and you want to  use this  name instead of other descriptive words for them  in  your particular language, there is no conflict  with God's word. However, you must not worship or serve the name; worship  and  honor God the Father and his Son who is the Savior of humanity. To  do otherwise  is  idolatry,  which  requires  the administration of the  death  penalty  to those who practice it:

"Be sober,  be vigilant:  because your adversary the devil,  as a roaring lion,  walks about, seeking whom he may devour" (1.Pet.5:8 KJV).