Is “Jehovah” in the Bible?

Hi Bart,

Sorry for offering another overly log reply, but I think that a few clarifications are in order. Your article gives the impression that Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that “Jehovah” is how the divine name was pronounced, but that’s not actually the case. Notice what is said on page 7 of volume two of “Insight On the Scriptures”, published by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, under the heading “What is the proper pronunciation of God’s name?”:

“Hebrew scholars generally favor ‘Yahweh’ as the most likely pronunciation. They point out that the abbreviated form of the name is Yah (Jah in the Latinized form), as at Psalm 89:8 and in the expression [Halelu-Yah’] (meaning ‘Praise Jah, you people!’). (Ps 104:35; 150:1, 6) Also, the forms Yehoh’, Yoh, Yah, and Ya’hu, found in the Hebrew spelling of the names Jehoshaphat, Joshaphat, Shephatiah, and others, can all be derived from Yahweh. Greek transliterations of the name by early Christian writers point in a somewhat similar direction with spellings such as [Iabe’ and Iaoue’], which as pronounced in Greek, resemble Yahweh. Still, there is no unanimity among scholars on the subject, some favoring yet other pronunciations, such as ‘Yahuwa,’ ‘Yahuah,’or ‘Yehuah.’ Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form ‘Jehovah’ in favor of some other suggested pronunciation.”

As the publishers of that volume also point out, if we are going to insist on “Yahweh” for God’s name, then, to be consistent, we’d have to change the common spelling of a host of other names. So the Watchtower Society doesn’t argue that “Jehovah” is the correct pronunciation.

However, interestingly, an article by George Wesley Buchanan entitled “How God’s Name Was Pronounced” appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review (March/April 1995, Vol. 21, No. 2), and he does a good job, I think, in highlighting data that calls into question the pronunciation “Yahweh”. For example, “Yahweh” lacks the middle vowel that is present in Clement of Alexandria’s spellings (represented in English by Buchanan as Ya-oo-ai, Ya-oo-eh, and Ya-oh), in 4QLXX Lev — again, Ya-oh — which was a transliteration of the first part of the name in Hebrew. Buchanan also suggests that reading Hebrew poetry can help:

“There is still one other clue to the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton–Hebrew poetry. For example, from the poem of Exodus 15, read aloud verses 1, 3, 6, 11, 17 and 18, first pronouncing the Tetragrammaton as ‘Yehweh’ and then read it again, pronouncing the same word as ‘Yahowah.’ Notice the rhyme and poetic beat of the two. In this way the reader can judge which one is the more likely pronunciation used in antiquity.” (ibid, p. 31)

Buchanan concludes:

“When the Tetragrammaton was pronounced in one syllable it was ‘Yah’ or ‘Yo.’ When it was pronounced in three syllables it would have been ‘Yahowah’ or Yahoowah.’ If it was ever abbreviated to two syllables it would have been ‘Yaho,’ but even this spelling may have been pronounced with three syllables, including the final aspirant, because Hebrew had no vowel points in Biblical times.”

As for the question of whether the divine name was written in original NT writings, I think it’s plausible that it was, at least in some of them. All pre-Christian LXX documents that have been found have some form of the divine name, and it seems plausible that the early Christian writers would have been familiar with these. True, Albert Pietersma has argued that KURIOS was used in the original LXX, but Emanuel Tov favors Skehan’s view that ΙΑΩ “reflects the earliest attested stage in the history of the LXX translation.” (see http://www.emanueltov.info/docs/papers/23.Greek.2008.pdf).

In light of what’s stated in the Tosefta about cutting out the divine names from what may have been Christian writings, I think it’s reasonable to postulate that the name very well may have appeared in some of them. After all, why invent rules about cutting out instances of the divine name from Christian documents if the divine name didn’t appear in any? I can’t help but wonder whether the early Christians themselves replaced original occurrences of the divine name (perhaps in the form ΙΑΩ) with KURIOS specifically to preserve their writings against those who would destroy them, such as those who cut the names out and burned them. Many Jews, like Paul himself before his conversion, felt that at least some Christian teachings were so offensive that they sought to kill Christians. Certainly such individuals would have been highly offended to find the sacred name used in such “blasphemous” writings!

~Sean