Home | FAQ | Message Boards | Site Map | Subject Index | Other Resources | We Believe...
Perilous Times | Unitarian Christology | Logically Speaking | Sacred Names | Faith-Doctrine

Sacred Names

by Phil Maxwell

You won't go too far at this site without realizing that we use uncommon forms of both God and the Messiah's names: YHWH or Yahweh and Yahshua, respectively.   Unfortunately, because of this, people tend to hastily associate us with beliefs, practices, and/or groups with which we absolutely have neither affinity nor affiliation.  Strangely, we get the same from many of those because we have no superstitious reservations about using terms like 'Jesus', 'Christ', 'Lord', 'the Father', 'God', etc.  Thus, please allow me to qualify OUR intents and purposes in this matter:

1. We respect everyone we know enough to strive to speak and spell their names accurately and see no reason to deny the same to the two most important figures in our life: Our Father and God, Yahweh, and our Lord and Savior, Yahshua.  RESPECT is the main issue, not the spelling and pronunciation.  We grant the same regard we give on this matter, that is, that how we address or refer to someone is only an issue between the two parties and, therefore, no one else's concern.
   
   
2. Although most 'sacred name' groups practice the 'if some is good, more is better' mentality, we see no reason to 'Hebrew-ize' every English rendition of Biblical names.  Rather, we prefer to simply communicate with the fewest possible encumbrances on those who we only currently speak OF and not TO.
    
3. Also, unlike most 'sacred name' groups, we are not amongst those who render grace ineffective by measuring righteousness according to the law of Moses or, as is usually the case, a contrived rendition of the same.

You say KRI-ZOO-SKEE, I say SHA-SHEF-SKEE

Transcription vs. Transliteration

(Excerpt from Debate on the Name Yahshua)

...I'd like to comment on the underlying issue alluded to here: transliteration vs. transcription. Because transliteration is directed at spelling, it is a poor tool for conveying correct pronunciation of proper names from one language to another.

A good example is the well known Duke University basketball coach, Mike Krzyzewski, which is properly pronounced 'sha-shef-skee', not 'kri-zoo-skee' as one would pronounce it using English phonetics. No English speaking person would pronounce his name correctly based on the spelling, nor would they spell it correctly based on the pronunciation.

As long as we have reliable information on both spelling and pronunciation, the proper thing to do would be to spell it 'Kryzewski' and pronounce it 'Shashefski', but what if we didn't have complete and reliable information? We would be forced to judge how we spell and pronounce his name based on the best information we had available.

Similarly, we really don't have reliable or complete information on either the spelling or the pronunciation of the Messiah's name in Hebrew or Aramaic. This forces us to judge both how we spell His name in English and pronounce it with our English trained tongues based on the information available.

Since modern English didn't even exist 2,000 years ago, the fact is that there is no "correct" English spelling until and unless a divine mandate is given to that effect. For example, only Mike Kryzewski or his ancestors have authority to determine the "correct" English spelling of their name. Likewise, the only "correct" spelling of the Messiah's name would be how HE spelled it in whatever language He may have rendered it in His day. Anything else can be no more than conjecture. Transliterating previously rendered transliterations may be a viable approach, but not the only one.

Another approach would be to attempt to discern the correct original pronunciation and transcribe an English spelling from that, which is my personal preference. If my name were the issue, that's how I'd want it done. For instance, if people of a foreign language would pronounce a transliterated 'P-h-i-l' as 'P-woo', but would pronounce 'F-e-l' as 'Phil', I'd choose the latter.

That is why I weigh SOUND over SPELLING when it comes to the Messiah's name, and why I believe transcription a better approach than transliteration. Of course, since we have no recordings of the true pronunciation of the Messiah's name, even the very best efforts are still subject to uncertainty, regardless of what approach one takes. This inherent uncertainty is one of many reasons why the issue is not worthy of the dogmatism often attributed to it.

In the end, we will all be judged on such things based on the judgment we render ourselves. I give what I'd like to receive from others with regard to names -- a reasonable effort to get them right. I don't get upset over innocent mispronunciations or misspellings of my name, but could take exception to someone intentionally or even negligently doing so. Because my Lord lives and I know better, this is why I won't call him 'Jesus' simply to appease others. Neither do I worry about my rendering of His name being less than perfect, though, for He knows I seek to honor Him in this and other tangible ways. (Click HERE for Full Debate)

Other Resources

Links may be included on this page for a variety of reasons, but no endorsement or affiliation should be assumed unless otherwise stated.  If you would like to suggest a site or crosslink, please email admin@scatteredsheep.com for consideration.

• Yehoshua, Yeshua or Yeshu; Which one is the name of Jesus in Hebrew? -- By Dr. James D. Price studies the etymology behind the common Hebrew name given the Lord (who I call) Yahshua without offering much by way of direct evidence on HIS name.  Emphasis given to how the matter bear upon the alleged numeric Bible Code...(yawn)

Home | FAQ | Message Boards | Site Map | Subject Index | Other Resources | We Believe...
Perilous Times | Unitarian Christology | Logically Speaking | Sacred Names | Faith-Doctrine