›

What does Jesus mean by God’s name?

Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
in Kerygmania
I’m looking at John 17, where Jesus is praying to the Father, and several times he mentions “your name”—for example, “I have kept them in your name” or “your name, which you have given me,” or “I have manifested your name to the people who you gave me.” What exactly does he mean by “your name” in those formations? I mean, is it just a colorful way of saying “You” or “your will” or??? I’m not coming up with a really coherent idea, as you can tell. But it’s clearly very important…

Also, how does it differ from “your word,” which also shows up several times?

Help.

Comments

  • W HyattW Hyatt Shipmate
    I take it as referring to God's nature or quality, similar to using "name" to refer to someone's reputation or the way someone is known to everyone else.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    For me, using a phrase like that almost always links to what Jews would call HaShem—The Name, meaning the name revealed at the Burning Bush—and all the implications that go along with it. It also links to the Ten Commandments, specifically “You shall not bear the name of the Lord your God in vain.”1 Knowing God’s name is knowing God in a way beyond those who don’t know God’s name. God’s name is intimately connected to God’s nature and God’s identity.

    I also think of passages like Isaiah 43 (“Do not fear, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name; you are mine.”)

    In the case of John 17, I think perhaps what Jesus says has to be considered in the broader context of John—the prologue, the number of times Jesus uses “I Am” about himself, etc. I think it’s a way Jesus is yet again identifying himself with YHWH, describing how he has revealed God’s nature and identity, and describing how “those you have given me” have been claimed by God as belonging to God and bearing God’s name, just as a child might bear their father’s name (whether a modern surname or something like Yeshua bar Yosef).
    1     I know the usual translation is “take the name of the Lord your God in vain,” which is often understood to mean “use” or “speak the name of the Lord your God in vain.” But my understanding is that the Hebrew carries a connotation of “take” in the sense of “carry” or “bear,” as in “take this with you.”


  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    My take on it is that where Jesus refers to ‘making known’ the Father’s name it’s a respectful periphrasis for ‘you’. Where he refers to ‘keeping’ them in God’s name I’m less sure. It might mean ‘on God’s behalf’, but I’m more inclined to see it as preserving them in their faith i.e. so they are still known as God’s people.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    I’m wondering what on earth it means to manifest his name.
  • questioningquestioning Shipmate
    I end up going all High Christology TM on this.

    Everything in me wants to claim that "to manifest God's name" is to incarnate God, to reveal God. Not just to reveal some character or quality of God, but to show God forth in a "real" way. I'm grappling for words, and I'm quite sure that someone will come along and beat me up, but that's OK.

    In some cultures, if you know someone's true name, you have power over the person. Clearly, a name is not just a convenient handle, it is, in some way, the essence of the person. I wonder whether manifesting God's name means manifesting the reality of God.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    That actually makes a lot of sense!
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    I take it that we’re looking at John 17.6 (ESV).

    Manifested there translates the Greek Ἐφανέρωσά which simply means to reveal or to make known. At one level you could just see ‘your name’ as a reverent periphrastic for ‘you’ - ‘I have made you known’ or ‘I have revealed you’.

    In Jesus Christ God reveals himself to humankind in a way that we can truly comprehend. And I think that coheres with what @questioning has posted above.

    That also makes me think of the exchange between Moses and God in Exodus 3.13-14 where again giving the name appears to be something which reveals the ‘person’ named.
  • Merry VoleMerry Vole Shipmate
    edited June 2024
    I wonder if 'name' is a sort of plural singular. Eg we might give a child several names which might include the name of a significant relative and an aspirational name that carries connotations of eg bravery or integrity. Taken together with the surname/family name you can end with a name you are usually known by, then a few 'middle names' and all together they are still 'your name' in a singular sense.
    Same with God?
  • Alan Cresswell Alan Cresswell Admin, 8th Day Host
    There's also a tradition, which is evident in much of the Bible as well as wider cultures of the ANE, of giving names that embody something about the person named. Which might be even more important where an adult is renamed - eg Jacob being renamed (by God) Israel, the one who struggled with God and overcame. The name Israel carries with it something about a man who out of fear of his brother has sought to appease him with a flood of gifts, and stays behind (possibly to await a message that it would be OK to cross over and meet Esau) ... and, yet is strong enough to wrestle with God (or an angel) through the night and endure. The name Israel invokes the story of that deeply flawed and redeemed individual, the history that brought him to the bank of the Jabbok, as well as that evening wrestling.

    With the names of human beings being used to convey so much information about who someone is, or what their parents aspire for them, how much more does the name of God convey about who God is? The name of God carries His whole character. He is loving, faithful, forgiving ... being kept in that name is an assurance of our salvation. Making that name known ("manifest") isn't just telling people how to refer to a deity, it's demonstrating who God is by showing all of His character in how we (collectively) behave to others so that in us people see who God is.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    In verse 11, we get "Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one." I looked that and the other "keep" passages up and found forms of tereo, to keep, cherish, obey, observe, take care of. The "keep, cherish, take care of" bits are striking me with more force than usual, since I can't see translating this "obey" the way they do when the noun is "your words" or some such. It's also in verse 15.
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    Lamb Chopped wrote: »
    In verse 11, we get "Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one." I looked that and the other "keep" passages up and found forms of tereo, to keep, cherish, obey, observe, take care of. The "keep, cherish, take care of" bits are striking me with more force than usual, since I can't see translating this "obey" the way they do when the noun is "your words" or some such. It's also in verse 15.

    Yes, the use of “name” in English here does not convey the import does it. The context suggests that believers are maintained in a secure state and protected from negative interference. There is an issue of ownership. The Lord states that these are exclusively his own. The name here possibly suggests a signature of authority whereby a covenant is sealed or a contract authenticated legally.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    I'm wondering a bit about whether there is a connection between ""Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me" and the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:20, "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." In both cases it's a singular name--and baptism is after all the thing that unites us as one ("one Lord, one baptism for the remission of sins...").
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    Lamb Chopped wrote: »
    I'm wondering a bit about whether there is a connection between ""Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me" and the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:20, "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." In both cases it's a singular name--and baptism is after all the thing that unites us as one ("one Lord, one baptism for the remission of sins...").

    Yep. It is a kind of confirming factor.. if you see Baptism as a sealing or signature of the believers security. A kind of conflation of action with label where use of the ‘name’ confirms the assurance the believer has. Looking back at various covenantal transactions there was always a signature factor such as circumcision or the rainbow.

  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    I think we see baptism a little differently, as conveying the thing itself (forgiveness, life, salvation) rather than a sign of it. Still, however we see it, it means we are in God's hands.
  • Alan Cresswell Alan Cresswell Admin, 8th Day Host
    I read @MPaul using "signature" in a different sense than "a sign". What I thought was more like adding your name to a document. If I was to write a cheque to pay someone it's just words on paper until I add my signature to it. I know that the concept of a signature as a part of formalising legal contracts is a modern concept, in other times and cultures adding a seal was more common (I still have my hanko, the stamp used to indicate my agreement to things like rental agreements in Japan, as a souvenir - so it's not just Medieval Europe sealing in wax). But, all cultures appear to have some way to put your name to legal contracts to indicate that you agree to do your part. The various covenants that @MPaul referenced seem to have that element of God "putting his name"/"signing" to the agreement as confirmation that he will abide by the "legal contract" that they express.

    Baptism would be just getting wet, no more effective than a bath, if it wasn't for God's name being invoked. When we're baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit the water is symbolic, but it's also a real event in which God effectively adds His signature to say "I forgive and accept you, you are mine, no matter what happens I will be faithful and won't let you go".
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    "Signed, sealed and delivered" - the delivery being an important part of giving effect to the transaction.
  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    I've been thinking about these comments for a couple of days. There's really good stuff in there, but I'm having some trouble accessing it because I just don't think of baptism as a transaction. We think of it as a birth, really. Something organic, something that creates an actual (not merely legal) change in the person.

    Maybe that's why I'm having trouble with the name thing, I don't know. "Transaction" just sits oddly with me.
  • Gamma GamalielGamma Gamaliel Shipmate
    Yes, I can see that. My own view is that whilst there is certainly transactional and legal imagery in the NT there's also a more 'relational' and organic element.

    I don't think what @MPaul and @Alan Cresswell and others have posted elides or negates that, even though I may not put things in quite the same way that they have.

    I like what @Nick Tamen wrote upthread about the 'I ams' and the invocation of God's 'name' implying the deepest possible identification between God and the believer.
Sign In or Register to comment.