Name

Name

()

Naming, says De Quincy, [Note: H. Japp, Life of Thomas De Quincy, 1890, p. 363.] is not a pre-historic, but a pre-mythical, not only a pre-mythical, but even a pre-fabulous and a pre-traditional thesis. Indeed man must, at a very early period of his history, have been forced to give names to the things and beings around him, and even to those which existed only in his imagination. We may suppose, either that sensations and actions first received appellations, and then the objects which caused these were named after them; or, what is far more likely, that first of all objects and actions essential to life gradually acquired names. Such designations would not be given unthinkingly, but rather, as onomatopoetic terms indicate, on account of some peculiarity in that to which the name was given.

The derivations given as those of certain names in the OT, even if incorrect, indicate that names, like nicknames, were given for some reason. [Note: Lang, The Origin of Totem Names and Beliefs, in FL xiii. [1902] 382 ff.]

1. Names of persons. [Note: Names of countries, places, nations, natural objects, and animals, civic names, and those of persons mentioned in the OT and in the Gospels, do not fall within the scope of this article.] -Ethnologists picture the earliest men as living together in little herds, co-operative groups, as Bagehot calls them. [Note: Bagehot, Physics and Politics, new ed., n.d., p. 213.] Such a group would acquire a name from some object or animal with which it was closely associated. This would, most probably, be bestowed on it by a neighbouring group and then be used by the group to indicate itself to others. The animal or other thing by which it was thus designated became its totem. Worshippers of a totem marked themselves with it, and by the mark men of the same stock recognised one another; [Note: R. Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, 1903, p. 251.] hence the totem mark, which was connected with the habit of tatuing, became the tribal mark. The name of an individual seems originally to have been his stock-name. is primarily a stock-name rather than that of an individual. [Note: p. 248.] Hence arose such totemistic names as those of animals, etc. [Note: ERE i. 497.] In course of time these and all other names tended to lose their primitive significance and became mere hereditary designations. Such are (Aquila), [Note: Act 18:2.] the Graecized form of the Latin aquila, eagle; (Agabus), [Note: Ezr 2:46, Act 11:28; ExpT ix. [1897-98] 567.] very probably a Gr. form of , locust; (Damaris), [Note: Act 17:34; HDB i. 545.] probably a corruption of , heifer, Damalis, indeed, being the reading of one Latinmanuscript . The Heb. has in Aram. the form (Tabitha). In the Septuagint this is translated , [Note: Act 9:36; G. A. Deissmann, Bible Studies, 1901, p. 189.] gazelle; while (Rhoda) [Note: Act 12:13.] is simply the word for a rose.

As the totemistic tribes amalgamated, the wider life demanded more exact, more personal, designations. Hence some peculiarity, bodily, intellectual, or moral, which was, or which it was hoped would be, exhibited by the individual, was assigned to him as a name. Thus from , defend, and we have (Alexander), [Note: Act 4:6, etc.] a defender of men; from the Latin amplius, great or noble, we have the Gr. name (Amplias), [Note: Rom 16:8.] or in a longer form (Ampliatus). Something striking in the appearance is indicated by the name (Epaphroditus), [Note: Php 2:25.] the Gr. word for handsome; from , manly, comes (Andrew), [Note: Act 1:18.] as is just the Greek form of Rufus, [Note: Rom 16:13.] red. Some peculiar circumstance attending a childs birth may suggest a name, as (Agrippa), [Note: Act 25:13.] one born feet first. What names could be more appropriate for a trusted slave than (Onesimus), [Note: Phm 1:10.] the Greek adjective for helpful, or (Onesiphorus), [Note: 2Ti 1:6; 2Ti 4:19.] the profit-bringer? A Hebrew king bore the name , comforter, which in the Septuagint is (Manaen). [Note: Act 13:1; Deissmann, op. cit. p. 310.]

In the development of religion man, having come to believe in spirits and raised some of these, partly by giving them names, into divinities, began to incorporate in a personal name that of a deity; and thus we have theomorphous names. Such a practice was almost inevitable when men began to give names to the lower divinities as angels, whose names (Michael), [Note: Rev 12:7; T. K. Cheyne speaks of Michael as a degraded (but an honourably degraded) deity, a reflexion, not only of Mithra, but of Marduk, as the repository of the Name of God-one might say that he is the Name of God (Exp, 7th ser., i. [1906] 299; ExpT xvi. [1904-05] 147, 193, 287).] and (Gabriel), [Note: Luk 1:19.] like Raphael and Uriel, are both compounds of . As it was believed that a divinity was of necessity closely connected with a person if the name of the former was introduced into that of the latter, the custom was extended to human beings.

The names of exalted personages, like kings, were often compounded of divine names. Most of the names of the Egyptian kings have incorporated in them the names of Ra, Amon, etc. [Note: A. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 1894, p. 56.] The great majority of Mesopotamian names contain the name of a god, the greater number containing two, some three, such elements, as Sin-kalama-idi, meaning Sin knows everything. [Note: F. Hommel, Ancient Hebrew Tradition, 1897, pp. 60-72; L. R. Farnell, Greece and Babylon, 1911, p. 195.] Among the South Arabians, as among the Minaeans and Sabaeans, a great many of the personal names are compounds of ilu, the generic name for God. [Note: Hommel, p. 80.] A Minaean inscription of the Ptolemaic period gives us the name (Zaid-El); in 1Ma 11:17 we have the name as that of an Arabian chief, while Nabataean inscriptions of the age of Jesus have many such names. [Note: Critical Review, vii. [1897] 413.] In pre-Islamitic inscriptions of Arabia, we have such names as Ili-kariba, My God hath blessed ; which served as spells for the protection of the child who bore them. [Note: Farnell, op. cit. p. 195.] A great number of personal names in the OT are compounded of Jahweh, El, or Baal. This custom, a survival from animism, was not intended to serve as a protection to the Divine name, which might not be uttered; the entwining of the name of the deity in the human name meant the enlisting of the power of the god on behalf of the man. [Note: Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religions, 2 vols., 1908, i. 266; R. R. Marett. The Threshold of Religion2, 1914, p. 62.] In such theomorphous names, the predicate is sometimes a verb and sometimes a noun; the subject may be at the beginning as , or at the end as . [Note: EBi iii. 3279.] This custom is closely akin to the Hebrew one of calling the name over. solemnly invoking the name of a person, Divine or human, over a person or place, and thus linking them in the closest possible connexion. [Note: iii. 3266.]

The records of the Apostolic Church furnish us with several such names, as (Ananias), [Note: Act 5:1; Act 9:10.] the Gr. form of the Heb. (Jahweh hath been gracious); (Matthias), [Note: Acts 1.] an abbreviation of , the Gr. form of (gift of Jahweh); (Gamaliel), [Note: Act 5:34.] the Heb. form of which, , means reward of God. (Barnabas), [Note: Act 4:36; Act 11:30.] formerly taken as the Greek form of , is in reality a form of a recently discovered Semitic name, , and is (son of Nebo). Demetrius is another instance of the same thing. [Note: Act 19:24, 3Jn 1:12.] It was not uncommon to brand or tatu the name of the deity on the person by whose name he was called. It is possible that St. Paul was alluding to some such mark on himself when he speaks of bearing branded on my body the marks of Jesus, [Note: Gal 6:17.] and the custom is clearly alluded to in the Apocalypse in the marking of the adherents of the Beast with his name or the number of his name, [Note: Rev 13:17; Rev 14:11.] and the marking of his opponents with the seal of the living God. [Note: Rev 7:2; Rev 9:4; Rev 14:1.] In Greece we have clear traces, in such names as Apollodorus, Zeno, and Diogenes, of the incorporation of a divine name in a human one.

As the members of communities increased and nations grew larger, necessity demanded that individuals bearing the same name should be differentiated one from another. This was done as a rule by making an addition to the original name. This addition might be the name of the father, the name of some place with which the individual was specially connected, or another name in some cases in a different language. All these cases are dealt with in the article Surname.

Names, like other words, were, in course of general use, subject to slight alterations, the most important of which may be classed under-

(a) Abbreviations and diminutives.-A number of these occur in the apostolic writings; thus Apollonius is shortened into Apollos (Act 18:24); Ampliatus into Amplias (Rom 16:8); Demetrius into Demas (Act 19:24, 3Jn 1:12, 2Ti 4:10, etc.); Epaphroditus into Epaphras (Php 2:25, etc., Col 4:12, etc.); Hermogenes (like Hermagoras and Hermodorus) into Hermas (Rom 16:14, 2Ti 1:15, and the author of the Pastor); Lucanus into Lucas (Phm 1:24, etc.); Lucius into Lucullus (Act 13:1, Rom 16:21); Silvanus into Silas (Act 15:22, etc., 2Co 1:19, etc.); Olympiodorus into Olympas (Rom 16:15); Prisca into Priscilla (Act 18:2, Rom 16:3, etc.); Parmenides into Parmenas (Act 6:5); Tertius into Tertullus (Act 24:2, Rom 16:22); Theodorus into Theudas (Act 5:36); and, if Nymphas be the correct reading of Col 4:15, it is probably a contraction of Nymphodorus.

(b) Nicknames.-Just as names were originally given on account of some peculiarity in or about a person, so in later times any such peculiarity was apt through ridicule or contempt to result in a nickname.

An inscription, indicating the holders of seats in the theatre of Miletus, reads Place of the Jews who are called . The designation is evidently a nickname given to the Jews on account of their religion. In the times of the Dispersion, many Gentiles were attracted by the monotheism and imageless worship of the Jews, and yet refused to be circumcised or observe all the commands of the Law. Such individuals, loosely attached to the Jews, were nicknamed or . Similarly the followers of Jesus were nicknamed Christianoi, Christs people, a base-Latin improvisation by the people of Antioch, who were notorious in antiquity for impudent wit. [Note: Ant. XIV. vii. 2; Act 10:2; Act 10:22; Act 13:16; Act 13:26; Act 13:43; Act 13:50; Act 16:14; Act 17:4; Act 17:17; Act 18:7; E. Schrer, HJP II. ii. [1885] 308, 314; Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 1911, p. 446; HDB i. 384; Act 11:26; T. R. Glover, The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire, 1909, p. 151.]

2. Names of sects and parties.-Somewhat akin to nicknames are such names as Herodion, [Note: Rom 16:11.] evidently that of a freedman of one of the Herods. These again lead on to names of sects or parties which are derived from (a) persons, e.g. Epicureans, [Note: Act 17:18.] from Epicurus the founder of the school; Nicolaitans, most probably from a certain Nicolas, [Note: Rev 2:6; Rev 2:15, Act 6:5.] the originator of the heresy; Sadducees, from Zadok. [Note: Act 4:1, etc.; Exp, 8th ser., vi. [1913] 158.]

(b) Others again are derived from places, e.g. Nazarenes [Note: Act 24:5, Mat 2:23.] -a term applied to the followers of Jesus from a name given to Him from the town in which He had been brought up; Stoies, [Note: Act 17:18.] from the , the painted porch in which Zeno the founder taught.

(c) Other such appellations are derived from some peculiarity; thus Hellenists [Note: Act 6:1 (Act 9:20, Act 11:20?).] is a name given to certain Jews who spoke Greek; Libertines [Note: Act 6:9.] to the descendants of Jews who had been slaves; Pharisees [Note: Act 15:5, etc.; Schrer, HJP II. ii. 19.] from the Hebrew (Aram. , stat. emphat. ), meaning the separated, those who had separated themselves from all uncleanness and illegality, and from all unclean persons.

3. Names and titles.-It does not fall within the scope of this article to consider how an ordinary word such as , [Note: 2Co 11:31, Rom 1:25; Rom 9:5.] blessed, almost becomes, if not a name, a title; nor how such a word as apostle acquired a restricted meaning, and became a title; or again how such a title as high priest [Note: Heb 3:1, etc.] was bestowed on a single individual, as our Lord; nor yet how the name of an individual, as Adam, [Note: 1Co 15:45.] was applied to Him to bring out some particular function; but we can see the word passing from a title Jesus the Christ into a personal name Jesus Christ. [Note: DCG ii. 171, 219; Exp, 8th ser., viii. [1914] 205.] A religion in its attempts to gain men from another faith finds the task easier if it can appropriate and employ names which custom has made familiar to them. [Note: L. R. Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, 1905, p. 32.] The religion of Jesus, when it entered the Roman world, could not apply to Him the names of the pagan deities-these indeed it degraded into demons-but familiar appellations could be used to convey kindred but higher truths. is an Oriental term expressing absolute dominion and absolute submission. The Septuagint used it to translate the exalted name Jahweh. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 353.] In Oriental cults it expressed such an abject relation between a worshipper and his deity. The Lord Serapis occurs in papyri of the 2nd cent. a.d. [Note: Ib. pp. 168, 176.] The title came to be given to the Roman Emperors. On an ostracon dated a.d. 63 Nero is called Lord, and Festus referring to him speaks of writing . [Note: Ib. p. 353; Act 25:26.] An inscription at Philae dated 62 b.c. calls Ptolemy XIII. the lord king god. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 356.] We can appreciate at once the necessity and the advantage of the Christians applying this word to Jesus, making Him at once the equal of Jahweh, and making His position intelligible to the whole pagan world. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 354.] Hence they proclaimed Jesus to be both Lord and Christ, Lord of all, Lord both of the dead and of the living, the Lord from heaven, our only liege and Lord. [Note: Act 2:36; Act 10:36, Rom 14:9, 1Th 4:16, 2Th 1:7, Jud 1:4 (1Co 15:47?); Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 359.] Hence, as the Egyptians of the 2nd cent. a.d. spoke of the table of the lord Serapis, St. Paul spoke of the table of the Lord, [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 355.] just as Sebaste day, meaning Emperors day, is paralleled by the Lords day. [Note: p. 361; Rev 1:10.] It is this consciousness of the spiritual proprietorship of Jesus that makes plain the meaning of St. Paul when he says: No one can say Jesus is Lord except in the Holy Spirit, and Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, and you will be saved. [Note: 1Co 12:3, Rom 10:9; Exp, 7th ser., vii. [1909] 292, 297; ERE ii. 378.] was a popular title for princes in the Hellenistic East, and was bestowed on the Emperor. The still higher title was the lofty designation of great monarchs and was given to the gods. At the beginning of the Christian epoch it was borne by the monarchs of Armenia, the Bosporan kingdom, and Palmyra. It was applied to Jahweh. This exalted name the Christians ascribed to Jesus. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 367; Exp, 7th ser., vii. 296; 2Ma 13:4, 3Ma 5:35, 1Ti 6:15, Rev 17:14; Rev 19:16.] The designation (saviour) was from an early period attached to Zeus, and in feminine form to Kore, in her case connoting salvation after death. The Alexandrian Greeks used it to sanctify the divine man, Gods representative on earth, the living image of God, as the monarch was called. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 33.] When Demetrius Poliorcetes restored the Athenian democracy in 307 b.c., the Athenians decreed divine honours to him under the title Saviour God, and altars and priests were appointed to him. [Note: J. G. Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, 1911, i. 390.] Philip of Macedon was called , Ptolemy VIII. (113 b.c.) called himself . [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, pp. 373, 374.] Inscriptions show that on Julius Caesar and many other Emperors there had been bestowed the title Saviour of the world. The word was used in the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew . This title became a designation of Jesus; He is exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour, [Note: Act 5:31, Php 3:20; Exp, 7th ser., vii. 293, 298.] and the still more universal title Saviour of the World, very common in inscriptions for Hadrian, is also ascribed to Him. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 369; 1Jn 4:14; DCG ii. 573.] The title was a technical term familiar in the Empire in the 1st cent. a.d. We have it on an inscription of Olympia, not later than 27 b.c., and in a Fayyum inscription dated a.d. 7. This too the followers of Jesus applied to Him. [Note: Exp, 7th ser., vii. 293, 301; Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 166, Light from the Anc. East, p. 350; Act 8:37, etc.] It is an all-important fact that the chief names given to Jesus were precisely those accorded to the Emperors dead and living, his titles the highest which adorned the Imperial ruler. [Note: Exp, 7th ser., vii. 294, 301.] Other names like really come under the designation of titles, and so too , the Areopagite, applied to Dionysius. [Note: Act 25:21; Act 25:25; Act 17:34.]

4. Names of divinities.-In the evolution of religion one of the earliest and lowest stages is that in which the spirits, not having attained sufficient individuality to be possessed of personal names, are addressed, as among the Phcenicians, by such common terms as Lord, or Chentamentet, as among the Egyptians. [Note: F. B. Jevons, Comparative Religion, 1913, p. 129.] This stage is exhibited in the religion of the primitive Aryans, and even in the later cults of the Hindus, Persians, Thracians, Teutons, Greeks, Romans, and Amerinds. [Note: ERE i. 462, ii. 285; Jevons, Comparative Religion, pp. 125, 129, The Idea of God in Early Religions, 1910, p. 85; J. H. Moulton, Early Religious Poetry of Persia, 1911, pp. 32, 55.] Some deities remain in this state, some become departmental deities, others functional deities (Sondergtter), while others, who manifest themselves in a plant, animal, planet, or tree, are named after it. [Note: Jevons, Comparative Religion, pp. 91, 92, 117; ERE i. 382, ii. 35; see also the classification of Rose quoted in PEFSt xlvi. [1914] 206.] In course of time this designation, the meaning having been forgotten, becomes a proper name representing an individual deity. Gods with names become, in this way, a distinct class of divinities. [Note: Jevons, Comparative Religion, p. 129.] To a divinity with a distinct name the path of advancement is open. The name would be either masculine or feminine, and that itself would gradually determine status, functions, and ritual. [Note: pp. 126-128.] Epithets applied to such a deity, as Adon or Melech, became cult titles (though sometimes they developed into distinct deities). Further, such a divinity might come to exercise functions besides those to which he owed his origin and name, and these outside the locality in which he had been primarily worshipped, thus attaining higher status and greater dignity. [Note: ] Again, his name and functions might make him so real to his worshippers that they represented him by a human or semi-human figure, [Note: ERE ii. 38, 39.] expressing the physical characteristics, and even the moral qualities, of the deity. [Note: Ib. ii. 50; Jevons, The Idea of God in Early Religions, p. 26 f.] Such a deity had the chance of becoming a tribal god. On the other hand, a tribal hero or medicine man, having the initial advantage of a name, might be deified and become in time the tribal god in accordance with the Euhemeristic theory. [Note: W. G. Aston, Shinto, 1907, p. 8.] When a tribe with such a deity developed into or was merged in a nation the qualities and functions of the tribal deity might be taken over by another deity (syncretism), or the deity might become one of the members of a pantheon, or even, like Zeus, the supreme national god. [Note: Ib. p. 10; 2Ki 17:26-29.] In all this we see a trend towards monotheism and the final conception of the unity of the Godhead. [Note: Jevons, The Idea of God in Early Religions, p. 23.] Through some such stages as these Jahweh had advanced till the Hebrews in their conception of Him had become monotheists. [Note: Jevons, Comparative Religion, pp. 125-129.] In the age of Jesus that name in Greek, or simply , had come to denote the supreme and only God. [Note: S. R. Driver, Recent Theories on the Origin and Nature of the Tetragrammaton, Studia Biblica, 1885, p. 1 ff.; T. G. Pinches, PSBA xiv. [1892] 13, The Religious Ideas of the Babylonians, Transactions of the Victorian Institute, xxviii. [1896] 11; Thomas Tyler, The Origin of the Tetragrammaton, JQR xiii. [1901] 581 ff.] It was one of the great achievements of Jesus to fill these names with richer, finer meaning by revealing new and higher attributes of the Godhead. The transference of the name to Jesus marks the awakening of the Church to a true appreciation of His Divinity (Act 1:1; Act 1:11; Act 1:14; Act 1:16 in contrast with v. 21). While the Jews and Christians were thus monotheists, they still continued to believe in a variety of subordinate spirits, some of whom were but nameless, departmental, or functional deities, while others had attained to distinct names, as Satan, Michael (Jud 1:9, Rev 12:7), Gabriel (Luk 1:19; Luk 1:26), Raphael (To 12:15), Uriel (2Es 5:20). In the Gentile world the development had not reached but only tended towards monotheism, Zeus (Act 14:12-13) being recognized only as the king of a countless crowd of deities. Among them there stood out local deities who had got distinct names, as Artemis of Ephesus (Act 19:28), Mars (Act 17:19), and Hermes, the messenger and speaker for the gods (Act 14:12), or the Dioscuri, the twin gods Castor and Pollux (Act 28:11).

5. Name and personality.-At a very early period men came to feel that there was a material and mysterious but essential connexion between the person or thing and its name. To them names were not, as with us, mere meaningless designations, symbols without significance which could be changed without affecting the thing or person; nomina were numina, not even essential attributes, but possessed of a certain independent existence, yet part and parcel of the personality, and therefore supremely important as affecting and affected by a persons good or evil fortune. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 32; E. Clodd, Tom Tit Tot, 1898, p. 53.] The name was a kind of alter ego, a vital portion of the man himself, and to be taken care of accordingly. [Note: J. D. Astley, in Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religion, i. 266; Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 184; HDB v. 640; A. C. Haddon, Magic and Fetishism, 1906, p. 22. The close connexion between a name and the thing is echced in the words of Milton where Adam says of the naming of the animals:

I named them as they passed, and understood

Their nature (Paradise Lost, viii. 353).]

Such a belief is found among the Amerind tribes, the Australians, the proto-Aryans, and almost all other races. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, 1911, pp. 318-320.] The ancient Britons held that the soul and the name were the same. [Note: Squire, The Mythology of the British Islands, new ed., 1910, p. 236.] Among the Annamese when a child continues ill, the parents sell it to someone who gives it a new name and it is then, being a completely different person, re-sold to its parents. [Note: ERE i. 543.] A young Caffre thief can be reformed by shouting his name into a kettle of boiling medicated water, clapping on the lid, and allowing the name (i.e. him) to steep there for several days. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 331.] The Mesopotamians so identified the name and the person that the name was the personality. [Note: A. H. Sayce, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion3 (HL, 1887), 1891, p. 302; cf. ExpT xxiii. [1911-12] 9.] In their religion, as in the Mandaean, Persian, and other cults, the name of the deity is itself a part of the divine essence.

The Aryan-speaking peoples believed at one time not only that the name was a part of the man, but that it was that part of him which is termed the soul, the breath of life. [Note: J. Rhys, quoted by Haddon, p. 23.] Among the Egyptians the name was an imperishable component of the Ego, on a footing of equality with soul, form, heart, etc., for they held that an inward and indissoluble connexion subsists between an object and its name. [Note: HDB v. 181a.] Hence it was necessary that the name should be kept fresh, for so close was the connexion that the continued existence of the name was essential to the immortality of the person. [Note: Ib.; Exp, 7th ser., x. [1910] 122.] A man prayed for his name to be mentioned, or libations poured out in his name, and monuments were raised with the name on them so that it might live. The Pharaoh sacrificed captives to perpetuate his name, and all vassals took the oath by the royal name. In the Papyri, especially in indictments, there occurs the phrase , a memorial to the kings majesty, the name of the king being the essence of what he is as ruler. Inscriptions mention the fact of purchasing , the nominal purchaser purchasing for the god. [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 146, 147.] Sometimes the name became almost a separate personality. In the Tabulae Iguvinae, the god Grabovius is implored to be propitious to the Arx Fisia and to the name of the Arx Fisia, as if the name of the city was a living and independent entity. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 186.]

This practical identification of the person and the name gave rise to a number of practices. The name was honoured equally with the person.

The Egyptian kings made offerings to the names of their predecessors; honour was paid to the name of Pharaoh, while the secret names of the gods of Egypt were specially honoured. [Note: ERE i. 440b; G. Ebers, Joshua, Eng. tr., 2 vols., 1890, i. 79; Sayce, p. 302.] Passages in the OT, too numerous to quote, indicate the great place this conception had in the minds of the Hebrews. There is a glory due to Jahwehs name; men are to sing forth the glory of His name, to exalt His name, to sing praises to His name, to bless His name, to fear His glorious and fearful name, and even to love His name. [Note: Psa 29:2; Psa 34:3; Psa 66:2; Psa 69:36; Psa 96:2; Psa 100:4; Psa 135:3, Deu 28:58. For the honour given to the name of God, of Moses, and of a king see Exp, 8th ser., viii. 307.]

Our Lord carried forward to deeper meaning the ancient usage when He prayed, Father, glorify thy name, and when He taught His disciples to pray May thy name be revered. Through a process of thought to be explained immediately the name of Jesus came to be similarly honoured. Through certain occurrences at Ephesus the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified, the Thessalonians were entreated to live so that the name of the Lord Jesus might be glorified in them; while the saints are described as those who reverence, fear, and glorify the name. [Note: Joh 12:27-28, Mat 6:9, Luk 11:2, Act 19:17, 2Th 1:12, Rev 11:18; Rev 15:4.] Here it is necessary strongly to emphasize the fact that similarity of expression does not necessarily imply identity of meaning. In the realm of ideas a word or expression may have its content essentially changed. But the change is ever gradual, hence the exact meaning at any one moment is reached only when the evolution which preceded and which followed becomes clear. This is especially true of the Apostolic Age when through the welter of religions many expressions were in a constant state of flux. The practical identity of the name and the personality implied further that the continuance of the personality depended on the continuance of the name.

In Egypt one could do nothing better for any one than by inscriptions and representations to cause his name to live, and nothing worse than to allow it to perish. [Note: Erman, p. 162.] The god Amon assures Ramses III. that as long as heaven endures thy name shall endure, and shall grow eternally. [Note: p. 283.] The Egyptians of all classes erased the names and figures of their enemies from tombs and memorials. [Note: p. 162; Exp, 7th ser., x. 122.] Amenhotep IV. went even further, and through the whole country erased the name of the god Amen whose worship he had forsaken. [Note: W. M. F. Petrie, A History of Egypt, ii. [1896] 212.] In Mesopotamia the preservation of names was of unique importance. Terrible curses are denounced [by the kings] against those who should destroy or injure the writing of their names. [Note: Sayce, p. 304.] This belief in connexion with the worship of ancestors deeply influenced the mind of the Jew. Jahweh is represented as saying of His enemies, Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven. The Levirate marriage was enforced that the firstborn son of a woman by her deceased husbands brother should succeed in the name of his brother who is dead, that his name be not blotted out of Israel. The writer of Ecclesiastes describes the sad case of a man who begets an hundred children, and lives many years, so that the days of his years are many, but his soul is not filled with good, and moreover he has no burial, i.e. has no tomb with his name on it, because an untimely birth is better than he, for it comes in vanity, and departeth in darkness, and the name thereof is covered with darkness. The fiercest hatred is that of those who say when will he die, and his name perish, while the glory of the Messianic King is that his name shall endure for ever, his name shall have issue as long as the sun. [Note: Deu 9:14; Deu 25:6; Deu 29:20, Ecc 6:3-4, Psa 41:5; Psa 72:17.]

In the Apostolic Age we find this conception linked with another widely spread idea that in heaven there is a register of life, the insertion in which of a persons name ensures to him the certainty of a blessed immortality, and identification in the other world, as with us the insertion of a persons name in a voters roll entitles the person to exercise his vote, or his enrolment in a society opens to him the privilege of that society. Our Lord calls upon His disciples to rejoice because their names are enrolled in heaven. St. Paul describes his fellow-workers as those whose names are in the book of life. In the same way the omission, or non-insertion, or erasure of the name indicates the exclusion from all such privileges. The friends of the Beast are those whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life; while of the victors of Sardis it is said: The conqueror shall be clad in white raiment; I will never erase his name from the book of life. [Note: Luk 10:20, Php 4:3, Rev 3:5; Rev 13:8; Rev 17:8.]

6. Name and mana.-In the earlier culture man is conscious of two kinds of causation. The first is mechanical, effected by the body itself, or by it through tools or weapons. The second may be named spiritual. Man at this stage of his development is keenly conscious of the unusual, the abnormal, the awful, the uncanny. Objects which in any way exhibit such a peculiarity are to him endowed with a mysterious power, technically called mana. [Note: H. Codringtons definition is quoted with approval by Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, i. 227; R. R. Marett, The Conception of Mana, in Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religions, i. 48, and practically all the leading anthropologists. is possibly the nearest Greek equivalent. In the magical literature of the age of Paul is not exactly power, but rather the supernatural power which depends on a supernatural knowledge (H. A. A. Kennedy, Exp, 8th ser., iv. [1912] 308).] A savage suddenly comes on a stone shaped like a yam. Ah, he exclaims, you have mana. He buries it beside the yams he has planted, and feels certain of a bountiful crop. Knowing that a lion is strong, i.e. has mana, he eats its heart, and its mana passes into him: for there is in primitive man a strong tendency to imagine that the cause of every phenomenon is a personal one. [Note: For the same reason hero warriors were eaten: Clodd, p. 69; ERE i. 521, 530, 574; Gilbert Murray, Four Stages of Greek Religion, 1912, p. 37; W. R. Halliday, Greek Divination, 1913, p. 17.] In the lower culture, as we have seen, the personality was thought of as something not concentrated, say, in the will, but rather as diffused, hence the mana of any living being-whatever its potency might be-was thought of as residing not merely in him, but also in different parts of him, and in things separable from, yet closely connected with, his person, as clothes, shadow, hair, nail-pairings, and spittle. The shadow of St. Peter, the towels or aprons used by St. Paul, the spittle of our Lord were each charged with the mana of the person himself. [Note: S. Hartland, Report of the British Association, 1906, 1907, p. 677; Act 5:15; Act 19:12, Joh 9:6, Mar 7:33; Mar 8:23; ERE i. 542; Clodd, p. 57. After death the mana might continue to reside in these and in the bones. The doctrine of relics is based on this idea. Newman says, each particle of each relic has in it at least a dormant, perhaps an energetic, virtue of supernatural operation (Present Position of Catholics, 1851, p. 298).] But the personality and therefore the mana was specially concentrated in and discharged from the name. In the lower culture any person divine or human has more or less mana, and in consequence is anxious to possess, and so be able to use, that of others. Hence arises the absorbing desire to know names, for to know a name is to have power over the person, even to the extent of compelling him, by the proper use of his name, to use his mana. He who has the name can dispose of the power of its bearer; [Note: HDB v. 181; T. K. Cheyne, Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, 1907, p. 401 n.] for barbaric man believes that his name is a vital part of himself, and to know the name is to put its owner, whether he be deity, ghost, or mortal, in the power of another. [Note: Clodd, p. 53 f.] This knowledge could be employed in a variety of ways. The presence and power of a spirit could be ensured by naming it. Speak of the devil and he will appear.

The pontiffs of Rome possessed among their books the Indigitamenta, a list of the names of the spirits who guarded every action with which a man was concerned. By invoking any name they could call its power into action against any person and consequently have him at their mercy. [Note: F. Granger, The Worship of the Romans, 1895, pp. 157, 277; Clodd, p. 177; W. Smith, DGRA2, 1875, p. 941.] Odin won his supremacy over nature by acquiring the knowledge of the runes or magical names of all things in earth and heaven. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, i. 241; Clodd, p. 176 f.] Any gate in the Egyptian under world had to open to the person who correctly named it. [Note: HDB v. 181a.] In later Judaism he who knew how to pronounce this sacred name [Jahweh] was believed to have a magical power over the forces of nature, and was designated among the Rabbis = the master of the name. [Note: v. 280.]

The extraordinary power of the mana of a deity explains the intense desire to know his name. Only then could his mana be serviceable, for in all the lower cultures to invocate is not to supplicate, but to call to ones aid the powerful mana of the deity invocated. [Note: v. 181.]

The Hindu priests could command the gods to do their will by invoking their hidden names. [Note: A. MacCulloch, Religion, its Origin and Forms, 1904, p. 70.] In Chaldaea it was believed that the demons who caused disease and death could be expelled only by magical spell through the might of the great gods, who could be compelled to act by using their secret names, which the priests alone knew. [Note: p. 100.] In the time of ammurabi the personal names of the deities are invoked, apparently as containing, in like manner, a measure of the personality of their divine patrons. [Note: ExpT xxv. [1913-14] 128.] Heitmller shows that in the Persian, Mandaean, and other religions the mere utterance of the name of a deity acted as a kind of charm. [Note: W. Heitmller, Im Namen Jesu, 1903, pp. 190, 192.] In the under world to know the name of a demon was to be superior to his power. To pronounce the name of a deity [the secret names were most efficacious] compelled him to attend to the wishes of the priest or exorcist. [Note: HDB v. 181; Sayce, p. 302.] Even in modern times the person who knows the most great name of God can by uttering it kill the living, raise the dead, transport himself wherever he pleases, and perform other miracles. [Note: E. W. Lane, Modern Egyptians, 1895, ch. 12.] The Arabs and the Chinese believe that he who knows the name of one of the jinn can make the jinn obey him. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 390.]

A person who knows the name of another can utilize this knowledge in three ways. He does not require such knowledge to aid or bless another, for he can do so directly; but-

(1) When A knows Bs name, A can injure B.

This is true of the Australians, for example. [Note: Ib. p. 320.] The people of Torres Straits when they wish to injure anyone make a rude effigy of the person, and deal with it as they would have the hated person dealt with; but the very first action is to call it by the name of the person who is to be injured. [Note: Haddon, p. 19; also Exp, 7th ser., x. [1910] 122.] The Greeks and Romans wrote on a tablet the name of one whom they wished to hurt, and then defixed it with nails, believing that what was done to the name would be experienced by the person bearing the name. This was called or defixio. One inscription reads (I nail his name, that is, himself). [Note: On the defixionum tabellae see F. B. Jevons, in Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religions, ii. 131 ff., Graeco-Italian Magic in R. R. Marett, Anthropology and the Classics, 1908, p. 106; Ovid, Amores, III. vii. 29; Tacitus, Ann. ii. 69. For similar conceptions among the Chaldaeans, Egyptians, and Scots, see Clodd, pp. 65, 66, 86.]

(2) When A knows Bs name, A can compel B to act in a good way towards C.

It was part of the duty of Aaron and his sons to bless in the name of Jahweh. Naaman thought that his cure would be effected by Elisha calling on the name of Jahweh. Jacob invokes the name of the God of his ancestors, his own name, and the name of his progenitors, to bless his grandchildren. A prescribed formula puts Jahwehs name upon the children of Israel so that he blesses them. David blesses the people in the name of Jahweh, and a not unusual good wish came to be, We bless you in the name of Jahweh. [Note: 1Ch 23:13; 1 Chronicles 23 :2Ki 5:11, Gen 48:16, Num 6:27; Numbers 6 :2Sa 6:20, Psa 129:8.]

(3) When A knows Bs name A can compel B to injure C.

Hence among the Jews thoughtlessly to invocate the name of Jahweh in a curse was blasphemy. [Note: Lev 24:11.] When Goliath cursed David by his gods he was solemnly invoking these deities to destroy his antagonist; and when David retorted, I come to thee in the name of Jahweh Sabaoth, he meant that he had invoked the aid of his God against the giant. Elisha in cursing the lads of Bethel did so in the name of Jahweh.

When St. Paul called down on Elymas the doom of blindness, the words indicate that he did it by means of a solemn invocation of the Divine name. [Note: 1Sa 17:45, Act 13:10-11.]

This invocating of the name of a deity marks a stage in the developing of one element in religion. There is (a) the wish to injure, taking a stronger form in (b) a purely magical act as nailing, [Note: Tacitus, loc. cit.] to which is added (c) an invocation of the name of a deity; then gradually (d) the act becomes symbolical, and the invoking of the name more important, till (e) the act is omitted and there remains the simple cursing in the name of the deity. [Note: Ovid, loc. cit.] Or again there is (a) the wish to bless, taking expression in (b) a formal act as the laying on of hands, to which is added (c) a calling on the name of the god; then gradually (d) this act becomes merely symbolical and the petitioning of the deity all-important, till at the end the act is omitted and (e) what remains is the pure invoking of the deity by name in a blessing or a prayer.

It has been pointed out, e.g., by b.c. Eerdmans that the primitive Israelites assumed the existence of a mysterious power, that dwelt in all things that lived, and in all things that appeared to contain unseen sources of action. The name of this power was Elohim or El. This Hebrew conception, which corresponds to mana, can be traced in such expressions as the El of my hand. [Note: Exp, 8th ser., vi. [1913] 385, 386; Gen 31:29; J. Skinner, ICC, Genesis, 1910, p. 398; Deu 28:32, etc.; HDB v. 640.] As Jahweh advanced to the supreme place among the gods, all such power became attributed to Him, and His name, as embodying this and His other attributes, attained unique importance. His worship is described as calling on the name of Jahweh. [Note: Gen 12:8; Gen 4:26; Gen 26:25.] To proclaim his name is to reveal the essence of His character; the Levites are those who minister in his name, and bless in his name, while the ark was holy because there had been called over it the name of Jahweh. [Note: Exo 33:19; Exo 34:5, Deu 18:5; Deu 21:5; Deuteronomy 21 :2Sa 6:2.] His , messenger or angel, [Note: Exo 23:20; Exo 23:23.] who was to guide the Israelites to Palestine, was to be treated with profound reverence, for my name is in him, i.e., he is the representative of my being. [Note: HDB v. 640b, 1Sa 17:45.] It follows, as E. Kautzsch remarks, that to know it [the name of Jahweh] is of vital importance, for this is the condition of being able to use it in invocation; and invocation has, according to primitive notions, a real efficacy, giving to the invoking party a kind of power over the name invoked, so that he can compel its aid. This we have seen in the case of David. [Note: 1Sa 20:42.] Hence the most solemn oath was taken in the name of Jahweh, for the mana of Jahweh fell on the breaker of such an oath.

An allusion to the ancient practice is found in the words of St. Paul: Every one who invokes the name of the Lord shall be saved. But how are they to invoke one in whom they do not believe, and how can they believe in one of whom they have not heard?-as well as in the custom of the primitive Christians of invoking the name of Jesus. [Note: Rom 10:13-14, Act 2:21; Act 9:14; Act 9:21; Act 22:16.]

The close connexion between the person and the name of a deity comes out in primitive ideas of creation. To pronounce a name is to call up and conjure the being who bears it. The name possesses personality. To name a thing is to create it: that is why creation is often represented as accomplished by the word. [Note: HDB v. 181; Tiele, quoted by J. M. Robertson, Pagan Christs, 1911, p. 220.]

The Egyptians believed that the god created himself by uttering his own name, and that when he named a thing it immediately sprang into existence. [Note: HDB v. 181; Budge, quoted by Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 188; G. Maspero, The Dawn of Civilization, 1897, p. 187.] In the Babylonian cosmogony there is not so much a period of chaos as a period when things were not named and therefore did not exist.

When in the height heaven was not named,

And the earth beneath did not bear a name,

When none of the gods had come forth,

They bore no name. [Note: Maspero, p. 537; G. Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876, p. 62; T. G. Pinches, The OT in the Light of the Historical Records of Assyria and Babylonia2, 1903, p. 16; J. Skinner, ICC, Genesis, 1910, p. 43.]

A reference of a similar kind lingers in such Hebrew myths as Elohim said let there be light, and light was, or that which tells that in order to meet the loneliness of the first man Jahweh made the brute creation and brought them to him to see what he would name them. [Note: Gen 1:3; Gen 2:18-25. Cf. Ahuna-Vairya (ERE i. 238).]

In the writings of the Apostolic Age this conception has passed into that of creation by word. The world was fashioned by the word of God; the earth by the word of God was formed of water and by water; for God calls into being what does not exist. [Note: Heb 11:3; 2Pe 3:5, Rom 4:17; C. Clemen, Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jewish Sources, 1912, p. 82.]

7. Name and tabu.-As primitive man regarded his name as a vital portion of himself he took extraordinary care of it; he kept it secret. This was necessary, for if it was known and properly used in a correct formula by an enemy, the wish of his enemy immediately took effect. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 318; HDB v. 181.]

The Amerinds believed in a personal soul which was neither the bodily life nor yet mental power, but a kind of third soul, or spiritual body. This had a very intimate connexion with the name. It was believed by many of the tribes to come into existence with the name; hence the personal name was sacred and rarely uttered, for it was part of the individuality, and through it the soul could be injured. [Note: Haddon, p. 23; Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 319; Anthropological Essays, ed. W. H. R. Rivers, R. R. Marett, N. W. Thomas, 1907, p. 91.] Savages have strong objections to uttering their own names. This is true of the Australians, the Tasmanians, the Amerinds, and the primitive Scots and Irish. In Abyssinia the real, i.e. the baptismal, name is kept secret, and is only used in church services, such as prayers for the dead. The people of Torres Straits, like those of the west of Ireland, refuse to tell their names; for their doing so would put them in the power of the person to whom they were told, who could thus work his will upon them. [Note: Exp, 8th ser., v. [1913] 311; Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 327; Clodd, pp. 81, 82, 83, 84, 92, 94; Haddon, p. 22.] A persons name must not be uttered by one related to him by blood and especially by marriage. This prevails among the South African tribes, those of Borneo, and North America. Among the Ainus a woman must not pronounce her husbands name; to do so would be to bring harm on him. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 335; Clodd, p. 115; ERE i. 251.] An Abipone will not commit the sin of uttering his own name, for that would he literally to give himself away, though he does not object to mention that of other people. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 328.] Cases are known where a man had completely forgotten his own name, and was thus saved from the possible mistake of inadvertently letting it become known. [Note: HDB v. 181.] Among the Battaks a man, on becoming the father of a boy, N.N., is henceforth known only as father of N.N. [Note: Quoted by Robertson, p. 49 n.] An Amazulu woman must not name her husband, but calls him the father of N., meaning the child. [Note: Clodd, p. 117.] So the Hindu wife speaks of her husband as he, the English wife of hers as my man or my master, while the Scotch woman uses oor ain. The expressions the mother of Sisera, Peters wifes mother, the mother of Zebedees children, are familiar instances of the same practice. [Note: Judges 5, Matthew 8, 20.]

In the Apostolic Age we meet with the same thing. Nothing so preserved a man from evil as keeping his name strictly sacred. The Christian of Pergamum who, fighting his moral battle in the place where Satan sits enthroned, has not renounced his faith but adhered to Gods name, is assured of his ultimate triumph, for to him is given a new name, unknown to any except him who receives it. He who is known to men as the Logos of God, or the King of kings and Lord of lords, is assured of victory as He rides forth on His white horse, for he bears a written name which none knows but himself. [Note: Rev 2:17; Rev 19:12-13; Rev 19:16.]

The fact that the Flamen Dialis was forbidden not only to touch but even to name certain animals and things carries the tabu on names forward into other regions. [Note: Granger, p. 142f.]

The names of the dead were kept secret, for if a dead man heard his name, he would at once return. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, pp. 349, 353.]

Among the Greeks, therefore, it was customary to pass graves, especially those of heroes, in silence. [Note: Anthropological Essays, p. 92.] Among the Abipones all mention of the dead was avoided, and the relatives of the dead changed their names. [Note: ERE i. 29.] This custom prevailed among the Amerinds, Australians, Albanians, Tasmanians, Shetlanders, [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, pp. 349, 354; Clodd, pp. 166, 168, 171.] etc. Our Lord in calling Lazarus from the dead expressly named him. [Note: Joh 11:43.] The Amerinds and others, by solemnly conferring the name of a dead person on a living one, thereby caused the latter to become an incarnation of the dead. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 365.] Certain ceremonies of naming and a certain type of name may have sprung from this custom.

Secrecy in regard to the name was also observed in the case of exalted personages. Instances of this in the case of kings have been collected from many parts of the world. [Note: pp. 374-382; Clodd, p. 157.]

The British sovereign is rarely spoken of by his name, His Majesty or the King being generally employed. In the British House of Commons a member is not addressed by his name, but as the member for N., and the first step in punishing a member is to name him, thus bringing the offender out of his impersonal sacredness.

The tabu on the name was still more important in the case of those connected with divinities and in that of the divinities themselves, as the nearer to the divine, or the more divine a person was, the greater the potency dwelling in his name.

A priest of Eleusis on taking office assumed a holy and hidden name which was written on a tablet and cast into the sea, and when he died that name became the one by which he was known. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 382; Clodd, p. 162 ff.] The real name of Confucius is so sacred that it is a punishable offence to utter it. [Note: Clodd, p. 190.] The Oyampis never name a waterfall till they have passed it, lest the sacred snake in it might on hearing the name attack them. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, ii. 156.] The Egyptians relate that the name of the god Ra was uttered by his parents and then concealed in him by them in such a way that it was impossible for any spell to bewitch him. But Isis managed to worm it out of him and thus became his superior in power. [Note: Maspero, p. 162; Erman, p. 265 ff.; Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 387; HDB v. 181; Clodd, p. 180 ff.] We do not know how the real name of Ra or Amon was pronounced. In a Leiden papyrus a magician says, I am he to whom thou didst grant the of thy mighty name, which I shall keep secret, sharing it with no one. [Note: Exp, 8th ser., iv. [1912] 309.] Examples from various parts of the world have been collected showing that the true names of the gods were kept secret. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 387.] Heroes, giants, and fairies all kept their names secret. [Note: Clodd, pp. 27, 49, 50.] The Algonquins venerated a woman who came down from the skies, and whose name was too sacred to be spoken. [Note: ERE i. 322b.] Allah is but an epithet in place of the Most Great Name; for the secret of the latter is committed to prophets and apostles alone. [Note: Haddon, p. 24; ERE i. 326; Clodd, p. 189.] In the vocabulary of the original Aryan language, the real names of the gods cannot be proved. [Note: ERE ii. 35.] This holds true in all the religions of the Mediterranean race, for the divine name was felt to be part of the divine essence and itself of supernatural potency. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 32.] The Romans called their chief goddess the Dea. Dia, but this was a mere adjectival description employed because of the fear of mentioning the real name. [Note: ERE ii. 11.] The Roman pontiffs concealed the true names of their gods, and especially of the guardian deity of Rome, lest they should be wrongly used by unauthorized persons or an enemy. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 185; Clodd, p. 174; Frazer, GB3, pt. ii., Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 391.] It was improper to mention the personal name of the at Athens on account of his sacred character. [Note: Anthropological Essays, p. 91.] Many divinities were invoked as (thou god of many names), all possible titles of power being summed up in one word. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, pp. 185, 187, and the reference there to Agni.] aeschylus speaks of Zeus, whoever the god is, and Euripides refers to the enlightened man who knows the silent names of the gods. [Note: Quoted by Farnell, ib.] Pausanias, speaking of Pallantion, says There is a temple of still standing on the top of the ridge: they are called , and oaths on matters of the greatest import are taken before them. The people do not know their names, or knowing them are unwilling to pronounce them. [Note: Anthropological Essays, p. 83.] On a tablet of lead found at Hadrumetum occurs the phrase (I adjure thee by the sacred name which is not uttered). On a papyrus a demon is adjured . [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 273 ff., 288, and the reference there to Josephus.] When Herodotus says that the Pelasgian deities were nameless, he means that the names were kept secret, for a god is not nameless because he is not named or addressed only by a simple appellation. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 185; Anthropological Essays, p. 91.] The writer of a Babylonian penitential psalm invokes a deity whom he knew not because probably he is thus deprecating the wrath of some offended deity with whose name he was unacquainted. [Note: Sayce, pp. 304, 351, 353.]

Among the inhabitants of Palestine the name of Jahweh was invoked at the different shrines. [Note: Exo 20:24.] But gradually the rites of the cult were concentrated at the Jerusalem Temple. There Jahweh caused His name to dwell. [Note: Deu 12:5; Deu 26:2; HDB iii. 479, v. 641.] It thus became the only place in which that name could be pronounced, another being used in ordinary places and at ordinary times. [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 287.] Tradition says it was uttered even in the Temple only once in the year when the high priest entered the Holy of Holies. [Note: HDB iv. 604, v. 280.] But the name did not, as in some other cults, develop into a separate deity. Among the Palestinian Jews the name speedily became an . [Note: Lev 24:16; HDB v. 280a.] It was not to be blasphemed, [Note: Lev 24:16.] nor profaned as by using it in swearing falsely, [Note: Lev 18:21; Lev 19:12; Lev 21:6; Lev 22:2; Lev 22:32.] nor taken in vain, [Note: Exo 20:7; HDB v. 640b, n.; Gesenius, Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, 1859, p. 807.] for Jahweh would only be further and more fiercely enraged by any attempt to conjure with His name. [Note: Amo 6:10; HDB v. 640b, n.] Rabbinic mysticism was deeply concerned with the history of the hidden divine name. In the Ethiopic Enoch one of the evil angels asks Michael to show him the hidden name. The mystical name of God is Ani we-hu, I and he, a combination signifying the most intimate relation conceivable between God and His people. [Note: Exp, 8th ser., iii. [1912] 435.] The opposite of this respectful reverence for the name of a deity is blasphemy, which may be the claim in either word or deed to do what can be done only by a god, or done in his name-a crime the Jews preferred against our Lord, [Note: Mat 9:3; Mat 26:65, Luk 5:21, Joh 10:33; Joh 10:36.] or the actual heaping of abuse on the name. When the fourth angel of the plagues poured out his bowl upon the sun, and men were scorched by its fierce heat, they blasphemed the name of the God who had control over the plagues. The Beast revealed his true character in that he uttered blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name. [Note: Rev 13:6.] The conduct of the Jews who prided themselves in God, relying on the Law, and teaching it, while violating it in daily life, caused the Gentiles to blaspheme the name of God; similarly Christian slaves who failed in their duty to their masters caused the name of God to be blasphemed. [Note: Rev 16:9; Rev 16:11; Rev 16:21; Rev 13:1; Rev 13:6; Rev 17:3, Rom 2:24, 1Ti 6:1.] It is noticeable that immediately after our Lords death His followers considered His name as sacred as that of Jahweh. St. Paul looking back on his pre-conversion attitude to Jesus calls himself a blasphemer, a designation the meaning of which becomes clear when we learn that the cruelty of his persecution of the Christians consisted in his compelling them to blaspheme, to pour abuse on the name of Jesus. St. James points out that the powerful plutocrats not only abused the Christians to whom he wrote but openly blasphemed the noble name they bore. [Note: 1Ti 1:13, Act 26:11, Jam 2:7.]

8. Exorcism in the name.-A divinity exercised power over another divinity if he possessed stronger mana than the other. When men believed that all disasters and diseases of the body and mind were caused by demons they also believed that these fell workers were controllable by powers still more mighty. The devils also believe [in one God], and shudder when they think of Him. [Note: Jam 2:19; Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 288.]

Disease-demons among the Malays could be cast out by invoking the spirit of some powerful beast, as an elephant or tiger. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 62, quoting Skeat.]

The mana of a superior divinity lay in his name, especially his secret name. [Note: Erman, p. 354; Sayce, p. 302.]

Among the Australians the name of Daramulun (a high god) was so potent, that Tundun was used in place of it. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 167.] There is peculiar virtue in the three-fold repetition of the name of Ukko in the Kalevala. [Note: Quoted by Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 184.]

A person, by getting to know the name and using it properly, practically identified himself with, and for the time being exercised control over, the particular divinity. [Note: Erman, p. 353.]

By pronouncing the Most Great Name a person could be transported from place to place, could kill the living, raise the dead, and work other miracles. [Note: Haddon, p. 24.] On a tablet from Hadrumetum a magician threatens, in order to win over a demon to obey him, that he will pronounce the unutterable name of God, the very sound of which fills the demons with shuddering dread. [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 273.] Lilith, Adams first wife (says Jewish tradition), refused to obey him, pronounced the ineffable Name, and then flew away. Neither Jahweh nor the three great angels could therefore force her to return. But she was persuaded to swear by the Living God that she would not injure infants who had on them something with the names of the angels written on it; hence the infants had slips hearing their names on them. This custom is still observed among some of the Jews of London. To obtain complete power over a demon it is also necessary to learn his name; hence the question of Jesus. [Note: Mar 5:9, Luk 8:30; Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 257; Clemen, p. 236.] In the magical papyri mystic names are used for expelling demons and compelling incantations. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 255; Exp, 8th ser., iii. 435.] Among the Jews the most powerful of all names was that of Jahweh. From a right use of it amulets could be obtained, anathemas launched, the sick healed, and demons put to flight; [Note: A. Hausrath, History of NT Times, 2 vols., 1878-80, i. 125.] indeed the overwhelming effect of the Divine name upon the demons was a very familiar idea in post-biblical Judaism. [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 255.] Josephus speaks of . [Note: Jos. BJ v. x. 3.] In the Book of Enoch an evil angel asks Michael to show him the hidden name. [Note: Exp, 8th ser., iii. 439.] The Jews became noted throughout the Roman Empire as magicians, mathematici, etc. [Note: Act 19:13 and Roman authorities.] Jewish ideas as to the name became connected with similar conceptions in pagan cults. Strong arguments have been advanced for the Egyptian origin of this belief. [Note: Exp, 8th ser. iii. 439.] We need not therefore be astonished to find that casting out ordinary disease-demons by the princely demon Beelzebul was not an uncommon practice among the Jews in the time of our Lord. [Note: Mat 12:27, Luk 11:19.] Herod [Note: Mar 6:14, or, according to BD and the Old Lat. Version, the people.] was not astonished at the miracles of Jesus because he imagined that He was John the Baptist risen from the dead and therefore possessed of very powerful mana. [Note: Mat 14:1-2.] Jesus Himself was keenly conscious that there was within Him which could pass out from Him, as well as be exercised by Him. [Note: Luk 8:46, Mar 3:10; Mar 5:30, Luk 6:19.]

In accordance with the opinion of His time, Jesus looked on some diseases as caused by the intrusion of demons, though in the great majority of His works of healing there is no reference to them. Some who were so afflicted He cured by casting out the demons. [Note: Mar 1:27; Mar 1:39; Heitmller, p. 241; Clemen, p. 234.] It is noticeable, however, that He did this not by invoking any name, not even the Tetragrammaton; He did it with a word. [Note: Mat 8:16; F. C. Conybeare, The Demonology of the NT, in JQR viii. [1895-96] 586.] These deeds aroused immense curiosity among the populace, and it was felt that, in some way, the mana displayed in them must be accounted for. [Note: Mar 5:20; Mar 5:42, Mat 8:27; Mat 9:8; Mat 21:20, Joh 5:20; Joh 7:21; Joh 8:56, Luk 4:36.] The theory of the scribes and Pharisees was that Jesus was able to act thus through His exercise of the mana of Beelzebul. [Note: Mat 12:24; Mat 12:26, Mar 3:22, Luk 11:15; Luk 11:18 (Mat 9:34 is probably a later insertion).] Another theory was that Jesus, like John the Baptist, was possessed by a demon. [Note: Mat 11:18, Joh 7:20; Joh 8:48; Joh 8:52; Joh 10:20.] Jesus Himself, in explaining how He effected the cures, uses three expressions. He did them by the Spirit of God, or by the finger of God, or in the name of His Father. [Note: Mat 12:28, Luk 11:20 (cf. Joh 3:2, Act 2:22; Act 10:38), Joh 10:25.] All these expressions indicate that Jesus was conscious that He had power to master and control the demons, and that He had this given Him by God; that, far from being dependent on any demon, He had entered their house to spoil it. [Note: Mat 12:29.]

In accordance with the ideas of the time, this extraordinarily powerful mana exhibited by our Lord was supposed to be lodged in His name, and immediately magicians began actually to effect cures by the invoking of His name. [Note: Luk 9:38; Luk 9:49.] Jesus refused to interfere with those who did so, though they were not His professed followers, [Note: Mar 9:39, Luk 9:50.] and even intimated that some did such miracles whom he knew not. [Note: Mat 7:22 (cf. Luk 13:26; Heitmller, p. 241).] The Twelve after being chosen were ordained to be with Jesus, in order that they might go forth (a) to preach, (b) to have power to heal diseases, and (c) . [Note: Mar 3:14-15, Mat 10:1.] When Jesus did send them forth He gave them power to cast out all unclean spirits. [Note: Mat 10:8, Mar 6:7, Luk 9:1.] The Twelve were able to cast out the demons, though they sometimes failed in their efforts because they had so little faith. [Note: Mar 6:13, Luk 9:6, Mat 17:16; Mat 17:19-20.] Jesus also sent out the Seventy to heal, giving them power of trampling down all the power of the enemy, and when they returned they reported that the spirits were subject to them in His name. [Note: Luk 10:17; Luk 10:19.] Finally, Jesus bequeathed to those who should believe power to cast out demons in His name. [Note: Mar 16:17.]

After the death of Jesus the apostles continued to cure those annoyed (or roused, ) with unclean spirits and to do other wonderful works in His name. [Note: Act 5:16.]

As the Church spread through the Roman Empire it came more and more into contact with Oriental and Greek magic, and under this stimulus formulae of exorcism in His name rapidly became popular. The origin of the Jewish belief in the efficacy of the name has been sought in Babylon [Note: Heitmller, p. 185.] and Egypt, [Note: Ib. p. 218; Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 189.] but it possibly goes back to older Semitic ideas. Among the pagans the disciples effected cures through the Name, and a similar power was exercised by other Christians over spirits which came out shouting with a loud cry. [Note: Act 8:7; Act 16:18; Act 19:11-13.] Heitmller argues: Not only the name, the outspoken, invoked name of Jesus, but also the name itself, as formula, was, according to the representation of these passages, the instrument of the miracles of the apostles. The idea underlying the passages is belief in the magical potency of the name of Jesus. [Note: P. 236.] Clemen is forced to admit that a magical effect is attributed to the Name in Act 4:10, and practically in Act 3:6; Act 3:16; Act 4:7; Act 4:10; Act 16:18, and escapes from admitting the same thing in regard to Mat 7:22, Mar 16:17, Luk 10:17; Luk 13:26 only by declaring them unhistorical. [Note: Clemen, pp. 234-236.] He produces not an iota of evidence for the unhistoricity of these passages, and the history of the use of the Name gives their true meaning. [Note: F. C. Conybeare, Myth Magic and Morals, 1910, ch. xiii.] The in the churches of the Diaspora are instructed by St. James in cases of illness to pray over the patient, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. [Note: Jam 5:14.] Certain Jewish exorcists in Ephesus took upon themselves to effect cures, using the formula, I adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. [Note: Act 19:13.] The standpoint of the post-Apostolic Church is put thus: Before we believed in God the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak for it was full of idolatry, and was a habitation of demons. Having received the forgiveness of sins and placed our trust in the name of the Lord, we became new creatures. [Note: The Epistle of Barnabas, xvi. 7, 8.] Hermas implies a similar use of the Name when he says, You can be saved from the great beast by no other than by His great and glorious name. A man cannot otherwise enter into the kingdom of God than by the name of His beloved son, for whosoever does not receive His name shall not enter into the kingdom of God. [Note: Hermas, Vis. IV. ii. 4; Sim. IX. xii. 5, 4.] Justin is still more explicit. Jesus was conceived for the sake of believing men, and for the destruction of the demons. The evidence for this is that numberless demoniacs throughout the whole world, and in your city many of our Christian men exorcize them in the name of Jesus Christ rendering helpless and driving out of men the possessing devils. [Note: Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. 6.] The power of Jesus name, even the demons do fear, and at this day, when they are exorcized in His name, they are overcome. His Father has given Him so great power by virtue of which the demons are subdued by His name. [Note: 30.] God made it manifest that through Jesus the demons would be destroyed and would dread His name. [Note: 131.] And now we, who believe on our Lord Jesus, when we exorcize all demons and evil spirits, have them subjected to us. [Note: 76.] Every demon, when exorcized in the name of this very Son of God, is overcome and subdued. [Note: 85.] Origen again writes thus: The names Sabaoth, Adonai, and other names when pronounced with that attendant turn of circumstances which is appropriate to their nature, are possessed of great power; and other names again, current in the Egyptian tongue, are efficacious against certain demons. [Note: c. Cels. i. 25.] It is not by incantations that Christians seem to prevail [over evil spirits] but by the name of Jesus, accompanied by the announcement of the narrative which relates to Him, for the repetition of these has frequently been the means of driving demons out of men, especially when these who repeated them did so in a sound and genuinely believing spirit. [Note: Ib. i. 6.] Christians employ no spells or incantations, but the simple name of Jesus, and certain other words in which they repose faith. [Note: Ib.] The name of Jesus has expelled myriads of evil spirits from the souls and bodies of men. [Note: Ib. i. 25, v. 45.] Tertullian observes that though names be empty and feigned, yet when they are drawn down into superstition, demons and every unclean spirit seize them for themselves. [Note: de Idol. 15.] The name of Jesus, with other biblical names, was used as an amulet in the 3rd or 4th century. [Note: Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 415.] The Maronites still cure the insane by exorcizing the evil spirit, adjuring him in the name of God, and beating the patient on the head. [Note: PEFSt, 1892, p. 144.] In Christian rituals, from about the year 300 on, an altar, shrine, and any other sort of building, and also the natures of oil, water, salt, candles, even of hassocks, have been consecrated by repeating over them the formula in the name of Jesus Christ, or in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. [Note: Conybeare, Myth Magic and Morals, p. 243.] In Abyssinia, Biblical sacred names, together with a large number of fanciful appellations, were magically pronounced for the purpose of warding off the power of demons and all kinds of diseases. [Note: ExpT xxi. [1909-10] 403.] In the Directorium Anglicanum a form is given for the exorcism of water, salt, and flowers for decoration, in the Triune Name. [Note: Directorium Anglicanum3, ed. F. G. Lee, 1866, p. 327.] The practice, if we may so term it, has not yet ceased. Baroness de Bertouch tells us that Ignatius is said on one occasion, over a girl who had died of typhoid fever, to have pronounced the words, In the name of Jesus Christ, I say unto thee, Arise, and the dead girl came back to life; on another, using the same formula, to have raised to life a man who had been crushed by a crate of stone to a mass of pulp. [Note: Baroness de Bertouch, Life of Father Ignatius, 1904, pp. 87, 117, 373, 493.] And the ancient expression, if not the old magic meaning, still lingers in popular religious phrases, and in such hymns as All hail the power of Jesus name.

9. Baptism in the Name.-At a very early period man discovered that water removed physical impurities. Evil was primarily thought of as physical, hence water cleansed from it. When evil came to be regarded as something spiritual, washing with water developed into a ceremonial rite. [Note: ERE ii. 367.] As such it removed tabus, purified from evil and acted as a kind of magic armour which turns aside the attacks of a visible or invisible foe. [Note: ii. 368.] Such ceremonial or religious washing was a common practice among the nations of antiquity and remains so among the peoples of the lower culture to-day. It was a well-known rite among the Jews. [Note: ii. 408; Mar 7:2-6, Luk 11:38.] Among the Essenes a candidate for admission to the Order, after one years trial, entered on a second years probation and was then allowed to share their bath of purification. [Note: BJ II. viii. 7.] Proselytes were admitted to the fold of Judaism by baptism, which was at once a purification from heathenism and an initiation or consecration of the convert. At this baptism there was a solemn invocation of the Lord as Protector. [Note: ERE ii. 376.]

When John began his ministry he also practised baptism, explaining that it symbolized such a repentance and confession as resulted in a remission of sins. [Note: Mat 3:6, Mar 1:4, Luk 3:3, Act 13:24.] To the Pharisees this baptism appeared illegitimate and impotent, because John was destitute of mana, as was evidenced by the fact that he did not perform any sign, and that he admitted he was not the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet. [Note: Joh 10:41, Mat 21:25, Joh 1:25.] Johns explanation was that he was merely baptizing with water, but that his successors baptism would be baptism with the Holy Spirit and fire. [Note: Joh 1:26; Joh 1:31-33, Mar 1:8, Mat 3:11, Luk 3:15-16, Act 1:5; Act 11:16; Act 19:3-5.]

In strict conformity with this Jesus did not use water-baptism. So far as we know, He baptized none of His disciples, though His disciples (some of whom had been baptized by John) continued Johns practice. This was during the early Judaea n ministry. [Note: Joh 4:2; Joh 4:35-40; cf. Luk 7:29, Joh 3:22; Joh 4:2.] After that baptism is never mentioned. There is no indication that it was practised, and of those who are said to have believed on, or followed, Jesus, there is no hint that any were baptized, though it can scarcely be doubted that the followers of Jesus, like the Jews and the Essenes, continued the ceremonial washings.

When therefore at Pentecost flames resting on the heads of those present and the descent of the Spirit fulfilled the prediction of John and of Jesus, and seemed to herald the catastrophe predicted by Joel when he only would be saved who invoked the name of the Lord, St. Peter instinctively summoned his hearers to repentance, signified and symbolized by a baptism in which the name of Jesus Christ was solemnly invoked. We may well conclude that subsequent Jewish converts were baptized into the name of Jesus. [Note: Act 2:21; Act 2:38; Act 2:41.] When Philip preached to the Samaritans good tidings concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ the converts were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [Note: Act 8:12-16.] When St. Paul was converted he was baptized invoking the name of Jesus. [Note: Act 9:16; Act 22:16.] When the Holy Spirit descended on the Gentiles at Caesarea, Peter ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. [Note: Act 10:47-48.] When the disciples of John at Ephesus believed, they had themselves baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [Note: Act 19:3-5.] That baptism into the name of Jesus was the regular practice is clear from such expressions as baptized into Christ Jesus, was it in Pauls name that you were baptized?, no one can say you were baptized in my name, baptized into Moses, baptized into Christ; [Note: Rom 6:3, 1Co 1:13-14; 1Co 10:2, Gal 3:27.] while other passages in the Epistles tend to confirm this. [Note: 1Co 6:11; 1Co 12:13, Eph 4:5, Col 2:12; 1Pe 3:21. In none of these cases would the ceremonial formula have been out of place (Exp, 6th ser., iii. [1901] 411).] In the case of the eunuch, Lydia, the jailor, Crispus and the other Corinthians, their baptism is recorded, but it is not said that the name of Jesus was invoked; but a study of the case of the eunuch makes such invocation almost certain, and in the other cases there is no reason to doubt that the usual practice was followed. [Note: Act 8:25-40; Act 16:14-15.] Of Apollos and others it is not said that they were baptized. [Note: Acts 18.] The references to a name in connexion with baptism in the Apostolic Fathers tend to confirm this view. Hermas portrays the Church as a tower built upon the waters founded on the word of the almighty and glorious name. Referring to the state of a man before his baptism, it is said, before a man bears the name of the son of God he is dead. [Note: iii. 3; Sim. ix. 16 (cf. ix. 13); the Athos MS reads name of God.] The Didache speaks of those baptized into the name of the Lord. [Note: Ch. ix.] The practice of baptizing into the name of Jesus continued into the 3rd cent., when Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian and the Apostolic Canons, declared such baptism to be invalid. [Note: Cyprian, Ep. lxxiii. 17-18; F. C. Conybeare, EBr11 ii. 365.]

In Mat 28:19 there is recorded a command of Jesus to baptize in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The earliest mention we have of this is in the Didache, where a similar direction is given. [Note: Ch. vii.; but see J. H. Bernard, Exp, 6th ser., v. [1902] 51.] Justin Martyr says that baptism was administered in the Triune Name. [Note: Apol. i. 61.] Irenaeus, who mentions baptism in the Triune Name, bases this not on the command in Matthew but on the traditional faith handed down to him by the elders, the disciples of the apostles. [Note: Exp, 7th ser., iv. [1907] 42; A. Harnack, History of Dogma, ii. [1896] 22.] That baptism in the Triune Name was universally current about a.d. 150 is scarcely in accordance with the evidence. The discrepancy between the command of Jesus and the practice of the Apostolic Church has been accounted for in various ways, some of which are worthy of consideration. (1) Its historicity as part of Matthews Gospel and its authority as a command of the Lord have been maintained, [Note: Resch, ExpT vi. 247; J. T. Marshall, ib. p. 395; Critical Review, v. [1895] 42; F. H. Chase, JThSt vi. [1904-05] 481 ff., viii. [1906-07] 161 ff.; W. C. Allen, ICC, Matthew 3, 1912, p. 305 ff.; J. V. Bartlet, ERE ii. 376; A. Plummer, HDB i. 242; J. H. Bernard, Exp, 6th ser., v. [1902] 51.] the argument adduced being that the words did not constitute a formula to be used, and that baptism into the name of Jesus was virtually the same as baptism into the Triune Name-an explanation that does not account for the fact that the words of Jesus were not in one single case obeyed. (2) The historicity of the words as those of Jesus, questioned by Neander, [Note: Life of Jesus Christ, 1880, pp. 131, 484 n.] who declares it undeniable that the account does not bear so distinct a historical stamp as other narratives of Christs reappearance is denied by Strauss, Weinel, Clemen, Harnack, Robinson, Sabatier. [Note: D. F. Strauss, Life of Jesus2, 1892, p. 745 f., says: The formula in Matthew sounds so exactly as if it had been borrowed from the ecclesiastical ritual, that there is no slight probability in the supposition that it was transferred from thence into the mouth of Jesus. H. Weinel, in Jesus or Christ (HJ Suppl.), 1909, p. 30, says: It is most assuredly post-Pauline. Clemen, p. 214, says: It cannot be historical, at all events in its present form. Jesus cannot, I think, have instituted a form of baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Harnack, History of Dogma, i. [1894] 79, says: Mat 28:19 is not a saying of the Lord. Robinson, EBi, i. 474, practically accepts the view that Matthew does not here report the ipsissima verba of Jesus, but transfers to him the familiar language of the Church of the evangelists own time and locality; cf. A. Sabatier, The Religion of Authority and the Religion of the Spirit, 1904, p. 51 ff.] (3) The historicity of the words as part of the First Gospel, questioned by Sanday, [Note: Sanday in HDB ii. 213b.] who says they belong to a comparatively late and suspected part of the Gospel, is assailed by Conybeare, [Note: HJ i. [1902-03] 102. See also M. Arnold, Literature and Dogma5, 1876, p. 292.] who holds that the command to baptize in the Triune Name was interpolated for dogmatic reasons in some copies of the Gospel, and that its place in the text was not fully assured till after the Council of Nicaea, instancing the fact that Eusebius of Caesarea (a.d. 313-339), when quoting or referring to it, continually omits or stops short of the words which refer to baptism. This practically is the opinion of such scholars as Moffatt and Kirsopp Lake. [Note: Moffatt, The Historical NT, 1901, p. 647, The Theology of the Gospels, 1912, p. 32; K. Lake, ERE ii. 380b, says the cumulative evidence of the textual, literary, and historical criticism is thus distinctly against the view that Mat 28:19 represents the ipsissima verba of Christ; see also M. Arnold, Literature and Dogma5, p. 292, and ExpT xv. [1903-04] 294.] Of singular interest are the opinions of Bruce. At first maintaining that this and other post-Resurrection sayings bear internal evidence of being last words from their fitness to the situation, [Note: B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve2, 1877, p. 519.] he comes to favour an idea of Keim that Mat 28:19, an authentic logion spoken by Jesus before His death, was transferred by Matthew to what he deemed a specially suitable place-the final leave-taking, the Trinitarian formula simply summing up in brief compass the teaching of Jesus; [Note: The Kingdom of God4, 1891, p. 257 f.] then he accepts the idea that the apostles knew the formula but did not consider themselves under bondage to a form of words, but felt free to use an equivalent form, [Note: p. 260.] and comes at last to think that the words are not so much a report of what the risen Jesus said as a summary of what the Apostolic Church understood to be the will of the exalted Lord. [Note: Apologetics, 1892, p. 463.] But even if the passage be a genuine logion of Jesus, the knowledge of which may have been confined to only a few, preserved only in one Gospel which is dated c. [Note: . circa, about.] a.d. 80, [Note: In Mat 28:15 down to the present day implies a considerable lapse of time.] it cannot be used as evidence against what, so far as one knows, was an actual and universal custom. The slight variety in the words which record the baptism in the name of Jesus-clearly of no significance [Note: Though B. F. Westcott (Exp, 3rd ser., v. [1887] 257) says: Certainly I would gladly have given the ten years of my life spent on the Revision to bring only these two phrases of the New Testament [into the name in Mat 28:19 and in Christ in Rom 6:23] to the heart of Englishmen.] -shows that there was indeed no stereotyped formula which must not be departed from, but raises no doubt as to the fact that baptism was in the name not of three persons, but of one.

The meaning of such baptism is clear. When we remember the use of the name in the exorcism of demons, when we remember that the world into which the religion of Jesus came was a world without natural science, steeped in belief in every kind of magic and enchantment, and full of public and private religious societies, every one of which had its mysteries and miracles and its blood-bond with its peculiar deity, that it was from such a world and such societies that most of the converts came and brought with them the thoughts and instincts of countless generations, who had never conceived of a religion without rites and mysteries, [Note: Glover, p. 158 f.; ERE ii. 381.] when we remember the magical use of the Name in the Jewish and Gentile worlds, the words of Robinson state the true position: The Name of God among the Jews was an instrument of awful power. That such divine power could be brought into play by the use of the Name of the Lord Jesus was clearly the belief of the early Christians. Those who were authorized to use the Name were regarded as having at their disposal the supernatural power of the Being whom they so named. [Note: A. Robinson, JThSt vii. [1905-06] 196, 197.] The exact effect of baptism into the name is not easily determined. If the words in Mat 28:19 are not a genuine logion of Jesus, the meaning which He might have attached to them need not be discussed, and hence we are concerned with the view not of Jesus but of His followers. No trace remains of the baptism of the initiated into the name of any of the mystery-deities, [Note: A. A. Kennedy, Exp, 8th ser., iv. 539.] and so they afford us no help. It has been suggested that the baptism into the Name merely indicates to whom the baptized person will thenceforward adhere, and therefore that the theory of a magical virtue in baptism cannot be proved: [Note: Clemen, pp. 238, 370.] such baptism constitutes the belonging to God or to the Son of God. [Note: Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 147.] Such a view does not do justice to the facts; much nearer the truth is the conception that such baptism reveals the name as a religious potency into which as into a spiritual atmosphere the adult catechumen or the initiated infant is brought. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 189 f.] This was clearly St. Pauls view. He indicates that baptism in the name of Jesus constituted a mystical union between the baptized and Jesus through which the baptized received (a) a share in His death and specially in His resurrection, [Note: Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27, Col 2:12.] (b) the gift of the Spirit, [Note: 1Co 12:12-13.] and (c) a cleansing from sin which involved their consecration and justification; [Note: 1Co 6:11.] and baptism can produce these effects because it works in the name, and so links up baptism with the view, prevalent at the time in almost every circle, that the pronunciation of the name of any one could, if properly used, enable the user to enjoy the benefit of the attributes attached to the original owner of the name. This it accomplishes by the power of the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the sacramental effect of the water, according to the well-known idea that results could be reached in the unseen spiritual world by the performance of analogous acts in the visible material world. [Note: ERE ii. 382; Heitmller, pp. 320, 329.] It is this efficacy of the water given it by the Name that enables us to understand the meaning of the words of Barnabas: We descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up bearing fruit in our hearts, having the fear (of God) and trust in Jesus in our spirits. [Note: Ch. xi.] For a similar reason Justin Martyr connects the life with the name. [Note: Apol. i. 61.]

10. Prayer in the Name.-As we have seen, primitive man gradually came to realize that in him, in other beings and things, lay the extraordinary, the supernormal-what Hartland calls theoplasm, god-stuff; and that this, whether in himself or others, was a power able to be exercised by him and them-mana. When, for example, such a man met an enemy, and willed to kill him, it was his mana that enabled him to do so. His will, moving on a supernormal plane, [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 51.] projected itself against the foe; his mana went forth as an act of will. Such a will to power was almost inevitably accompanied by, and expressed itself in, two things: (1) an act, as the flinging of a spear; and (2) a hurling forth of words, such words being the very type of a spiritual projectile. [Note: p. 54.] When the enemy is not present, and there arises the wish to kill, then, when there speeds forth the mana that destroys, the more emotional side of the mans nature asserts itself and expresses itself in the throwing of the spear and the hurling of the words in the direction in which the enemy is supposed to be. A man does this when what is to be influenced is not, to us, a person.

A British Columbian Indian, wishing to stop the rain, holds a stick in the fire, describes a circle with it, then holds the stick towards the east and addresses the rain in these words: Now then, you must stop raining. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, i. 253; J. E. Carpenter, Comparative Religion, 1913, p. 148, The Prayer of the Todas.]

Reflexion causes two changes. Man realizes that many of such acts are more or less symbolical, and this, especially under priestly influence, leads to detailed and dramatic symbolism, such as sacrifice and ritual. Again-and this is important in the present connexion-he comes to realize that for some of the harder tasks he must use not only the mana which is his own, but mana superior to his own. He therefore turns to beings superior to himself, to the divinities. There is thus gradually developed a body of doctrine as to the divinities, more or less esoteric, both intricate and complicated, which influenced and still continues to influence religion. This influence is seen in its simplest form when a human being exercises power over a divinity.

The king of the Matabele, in order to get rain, offers sacrifices and says, O great spirits of my father and grandfather, make us to be the best-fed and the strongest people in the world! [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, i. 352; see also Carpenter, pp. 35, 151.]

When it becomes clearly understood that such divinities do possess power, they are naturally invoked during the performance of the symbolic acts, and then we have the spell.

The ancient Peruvians on the eve of war starved some sheep, killed them, saying as they did so: As the hearts of these beasts are weakened, so let our enemies be weakened. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 55.] Here from the beasts, the symbols, to the enemy, the reality, the mana is transferred. But the words so let indicate the consciousness that it is the deities who are putting the thing through. [Note: p. 30.] Westermarck quotes with approval Renans dictum that with the Romans prayer is a magic formula, producing its effect by its own inherent quality, and adds: They wanted to compel the gods rather than to be compelled by them; [Note: W. Warde Fowler, The Religious Experience of the Roman People, 1911, pp. 185, 186.] but Warde Fowler asserts that the prayers of the gild of brethren at Iguvium to Jupiter Grabovius retain some of the outward characteristics of spell, but internally, i.e. in the spirit in which they were intended, they have the real characteristics of prayer. [Note: Ib. p. 189.]

When a god attains such a degree of personality as to have a name, this enables the human suppliant to influence him personally, by using his name.

This is seen in its simplest form when a human being exercises power over a divine being by the proper use of his name. The Torres Straits islanders summon a local bogey or a spirit by mentioning his name. [Note: Haddon, p. 24.] A Malay prays at the grave of a murdered man: Hearken, So-and-So, and assist me. I desire to ask for a little magic. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 62.] When the Angoni desire rain, they go to the rain-temple and in connexion with certain ceremonies pray: Master Chauta, give your children the rains. [Note: Frazer, GB3, pt. i., The Magic Art, i. 250.]

The mana of a deity who has attained to a name becomes specially lodged in his name, and can be commandeered by the proper use of it.

In Gen 4:26 it is said of Enoch, He was the first to call by (means of) the name Jahweh. This expression denotes the essential act in worship, the invocation (or rather evocation) of the Deity by the solemn utterance of His name. It rests on the wide-spread primitive idea that a real bond exists between the person and his name, such that the pronunciation of the latter exerts a mystic influence on the former. [Note: Skinner, ICC, Genesis, p. 127.] In Elijahs time the question was whether Jahweh or Baal was the proper name for the Divine Being, and the test proposed by Elijah is which name-Baal or Yahwe-will evoke a manifestation of divine energy. [Note: ]

From the conception of the mana of the deities specially lodged in their names there was developed the doctrine that the proper use of the name set in motion and brought into real operation all the powers of the deity.

The Kei women when their men are fighting pray: O lord sun and moon let the bullets rebound from our husbands. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 67.]

Thus the name which had been added to the spell to cause it to work gradually supersedes all other methods of entreaty in the prayer, and becomes that by which the effective appeal is made to the deity. The liturgies of all the more advanced peoples show that prayer gains potency from the solemn utterance of the true divine name. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 184.]

Throughout the OT we have many instances of men calling on the name of Jahweh. Jesus dropping that name taught His disciples to pray to the Father.

The account of St. Pauls prayers [Note: See, e.g., Eph 1:17; Eph 2:18; Eph 3:14; Eph 5:20, Col 1:3; Col 1:12; Col 3:17; also Jam 3:9; 1Pe 1:17, 1Jn 2:1.] indicates that this was his custom, and neither in these cases, nor in the account which he himself gives of his prayers, [Note: 1Co 1:4, 1Th 1:2.] nor yet in those actually recorded, [Note: Php 1:3.] is this custom departed from. But in the Fourth Gospel, Jesus, reminding His disciples that previously they had asked nothing in His name, [Note: Joh 16:24.] instructs them so to ask and they shall receive, [Note: Joh 16:23-24.] indicating that the Father will grant whatever they ask in His name, [Note: Joh 15:18.] and promising that the day was coming when He would let them know plainly about the Father, and on that day they would ask in His name, [Note: Joh 16:26.] for He Himself was going to the Father and would do whatsoever they asked in His name. [Note: Joh 14:13-14.] It cannot be inferred from these passages that Jesus taught His disciples to pray not to Him, but to the Father in His name. [Note: H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of our Lord8, 1878, note F; also G. A. Chadwick, Exp, 3rd ser., vi. [1887] 191.] Whether these words were actually spoken by our Lord before His death, or represent the views of the Christians of the 2nd cent. matters little for our immediate purpose. They indicate clearly that the addition of the name is not a mere devotional form, but a new ground on which the worshipper stands, a new plea for the success of his petitions. [Note: HDB iv. 44.] Further, they indicate that when His disciples have entered into complete union with Him they will lose the sense that He is intermediary between them and the Father. They will be so identified with Him that all prayer of theirs will be the prayer of Christ Himself, offered immediately to God. [Note: E. F. Scott, The Fourth Gospel, 1906, p. 316.] We have in the case of Stephen prayer addressed to Jesus, [Note: Act 7:59.] and there are indications that the invoking of His name was common. [Note: Act 22:16; Act 2:21; Act 9:14, 1Co 1:2.] This invoking of the Name would seem to have been associated not so much with petitions, as we might have expected, as with thanksgiving. [Note: Act 4:10, Eph 5:20, Col 3:17, Rom 1:8.] When we think of the use of the Name in preaching, in exorcism, in the persecutions of the primitive Christians, we can understand how fervour led them to add to their prayers, and to pray in what they had come to think of as the name above every name, the one which was with the Father the all-prevailing name. [Note: Php 2:9-10.] In this way we see that the name-formulae, which close most of the prayers of the Christian Church, were originally words of power to speed the prayer home. [Note: Farnell, The Evolution of Religion, p. 190.] In the apocryphal acts of St John we find a long list of mystical names and titles attached to Christ giving to the prayer much of the tone of an enchantment. [Note: ] Hence we see that the conception of mana yields the chief clue to the original use of names of power in connection with the spell, from in the devils name to Im Namen Jesu. [Note: Marett, The Threshold of Religion2, p. 62.]

Literature.-This has been indicated in the article

P. A. Gordon Clark.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

Name

(Heb. shem, ; Gr. ). On the names of persons in Oriental countries, and especially in ancient Israel, the following particulars may be noticed. (See Hauptmann, De Hebrceor. [Gera, 1757] ; Schwarz, De nomin. V.T. propriis [Gott. 1743].)

(1.) A name among the Hebrews was given to the male child at the time of its circumcision, but it is probable that previous to the introduction of that rite the name was given immediately after its birth. All Oriental proper names have a special significance, which is more or less obvious, and generally may be ascertained. This meaning is often alluded to or explained in the Old Testament (Gen 27:36; 1Sa 25:25; Rth 1:20). But some have attempted to show that the explanations given in the Pentateuch of the names of the patriarchs, etc., are not historically correct, on the ground that they are mutually inconsistent, or that they violate the analogies of the language; and refer them to a desire on the part of the writer to interweave the name significantly with the narrative (see Ewald, Isr. Gesch. 1:429). Those of modern nations, e.g. the English and Germahs, have also their meaning, but it is more difficult to discover, as these languages do not preserve the roots in so pure a form as Oriental tongues. In early times they were conferred (by the mother, as Gen 4:1; Gen 4:25; Gen 19:37 sq.; Gen 29:32 sq.; Gen 30:18; Gen 30:20 sq.; Gen 35:18; 1Sa 1:20; 1Sa 4:21; comp. Isa 7:14; Odys. 18:6; Eurip. Phaniss. 57; yet also by the father, Gen 16:15; Gen 17:19; Gen 21:3; Exo 2:22; Hos 1:4 sq.; see Tournefort, Voyage, 2:434) sometimes in reference to remarkable circumstances preceding or attending the child’s birth, to peculiarities of its bodily constitution, to a wish connected with its future, or as an expression of endearment; sometimes borrowed from religion, and in this case applied both as a pious remembrancer and an omen of good. Sometimes the name had a prophetic meaning (Isa 7:14; Isa 8:3; Hos 1:4; Hos 1:6; Hos 1:9; Mat 1:21; Luk 1:13; Luk 1:60; Luk 1:63). In these classes belong many compounded in Hebrew with (comp. Hengstenberg, Pent. 1:267 sq.), just as the Assyrian, Aramaean, and Phoenician names with Nebo (Nebu), Bel, Baal; the German Gottlieb, Gotthold, Ehregott, Christlieb, etc.; and the Tyrian names, , , in Josephus, Apion, 1:18 (on which see Hamaker, Miscell. Phoenic. page 213; Fromann, De cultu deorum ex illustra. [Altdorf, 1745]). For examples of the first class, see Gen 25:25 sq.; Gen 29:32 sq.; Gen 30:6 sq.; Gen 35:18; Gen 41:51; 1Sa 2:20; 1Sa 4:21; comp. Rosenmiller, Morgenl. 1:139, 173; Seetzen, in Zach’s Correspondenz, 19:214; Gesen. Com. in Jes. 1:303; Bohlen, Genes. page 292. Such names take various forms among the Shemitic nations, following in each language the name it applies to God; e.g. Hannibal () and John (); Abibal () and Abijah (); Ezrubaal () and Azriel (). See Ludolf. Histor. AEth. 4:3. 4. The terms of endearment are appropriated especially to girls, and are often taken from the names of valued animals and plants (, Rachel, a sheep; , Tamar, palm-tree; , Zibia, roe; , Zipporah, sparrow; , Keziah, cassia). Comp. Hartmann, Pentat. 276 sq. On the transfer of names from animals to children, see Bochart, Hieroz. 1:2, 43; Simonis Onomast. pages 16, 390 sq. At a later period, when a sufficient number of words had become proper names by usage, a suitable choice was made among them, or the child took the father’s name (Tob 1:9; Luk 1:59; Josephus, Ant. 14:1, 3; War, 5:13, 2; Euseb. H.E. 1:13, 5), or yet oftener the grandfather’s (1Sa 22:9; 1Sa 23:6; 1Sa 30:7; 2Sa 8:17. See Eisner, Observ. 1:176 sq.; Simonis Ononast. V.T. page 17; comp. Eustath. Ad Iliad. 581, 4). This was the case alo with the Phoenicians (see Gesen. Monum. Phan. page 100), and is still with the Egyptians (Descript. de l’Eqypte, 23:59 sq.), Frieslanders, and Danes. Sometimes that of a highly-esteemed kinsman was taken (comp. Luk 1:61; Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad loc.; Rosenmiiller, Morgenl. 5:158). In the Roman period we meet with many persons who were named by prefixing Bar, , son, after the Aramaean custom, to the names of their fathers; as in the N.T. Bartholomew, Bartimeus, Barjesus, Barabbas. Many of these were originally only surnames, as in Mat 16:17, but by custom the personal name was entirely dropped (as in Arab. e.g. Ibn- Sina). But some Orientals, at the birth of a son, put off their own names, and thenceforth bear that of the child, with the prefix Abu,,father, e.g. Abu-Nausel; comp. Arvieux, Nachr. 2:292. According to Gesenius (Isaiah 1:278), a person in earlier times was sometimes accosted or described as the son of this or that man, in order to disparage him, either because the father was obscure, or because the personal merit of the son would thus be questioned. But, besides, there are many Hebrew proper names which cannot be classed among appellatives; the roots of which, however, have been preserved. These have received proper attention in modern Lexicons. (See Gesenius, Geschichte Hebr. Sprache. On the formation of Hebrew proper names, see Ewald, Ausfuhrl. Lehrb. de Hebr. Spr. page 491 sq.). It must further be observed that

(a) among the later Jews many old names were commonly shortened or otherwise modified in form; e.g. Lazarus for Eleazar. This shortening of names in the N.T. has been examined by Winer (Gram. N.T. page 113 sq.: comp. besides J.C. Mylius, Diss. de varietat. V.T. page 12; Simonis Onomast. V.T. page 12). Aramaean names, also, had crept in among those of true Hebrew origin as, Martha, Tabitha, Cephas.

(b) After the age of the Seleucide, Greek names came into circulation; as Lysinachus, 2Ma 4:29; Antipater, 1Ma 12:16; Bereniae, Herod (among these must be reckoned Andrew, see Joseph. Ant. 12:2, 2; although Olshausen [Bibl. Comment. 1:321] would refer it to the Hebrew , to dedicate); especially those Hebrew names which had been translated in the Greek versions; as Dositheus, , 2Ma 12:19; or Theodotos, , 2Ma 14:19; 3Ma 1:4; comp. the Hebrew ; Nicodemus or Nicolaus, , , comp.

; Menelaus, , comp. , Josephus, Ant. 12:5, 1. Instead of these, a Greek name of somewhat similar form and meaning was sometimes used; as (comp. ), , etc. , Jesus, is also a Hebrew name, approaching a Greek form. SEE JESUS. (On , , Hyrcanus, see Simonis Onomast. N.T. page 152.) The custom thus introduced was confirmed by increasing intercourse with the Greeks, and even some Latin names crept into Judaea. The names Philip, Ptolemy, Alexander, etc., were not rare (comp. especially Joseph. Ant. 14:10, 22). Jews took Latin names on various occasions; some, for instance, on emancipation from Ronman slavery. Among Egyptian Jews, Greek names were in use still earlier (comp. Philo, 2:528).

(c) Here we find in part the reason why, ini later times, some of the Jews bore two names at once; e.g. Johannes Marcus, Jesus Justus (Col 4:11). Other occasions were these: Bar was prefixed to the name of the father for a surname, as Joseph Barsabas; or it was acquired on some special occasion, as Simon Cephas or Peter, Joses Barnabas, (1Ma 2:5), Simon Canaanites (comp. also Josephus, War, 5:11, 5), or given to distinguish persons of the same name in one family or neighborhood; a distinction usually made in the Talmud by adding the name of the father, or of a trade or profession; elsewhere by that of one’s residence or birthplace, as Mary Magdalene, Judas Iscariot. A complete catalogue of all the proper names used by Jews is given by Hiller, Onomast. Sacrum (Tubing. 1706); J. Simon, Onomast. V.T. (Hal. 1741), in connection with his Onomast. N.T. et libr. V.T. apocrapha (ibid. 1762); comp. B. Michaelis, Observatt. philol. de nomin. prop. Hebr. (Hal. 1729), and his Diss. nomina qucedam propr. V. et N.T. ex virilib. in mulietria, etc., versa suo restituens sexui (Hal. 1754); Potts, Sylloge, 7:26 sq. There is a useful catalogue of Phoenician and Carthaginian proper names in Gesenius, Monumenta Phen. page 395 sq.

(2.) The name was naturally given for the most part by the parents, but sometimes a number of their kinsmen and friends would agree in bestowing one; as in Rth 4:17; Luk 1:59. Not seldom in the course of life this was changed for a new name which was full of significance among those who gave it; or was at first added to the original name, and gradually took its place. The latter happened with Cephas (Peter) and Barnabas. But princes often changed their names on their accession to the throne, as the popes do now (2Ki 23:34; 2Ki 24:17); comp. Joseph. Ant. 16:9, 4; Justin, 10:3; Ctes. Pers. 56; Ludolf, Histor. AEthiop.; Paulsen, Regier. d. Morgenl. page 78. This was done even in the case of private persons on entering upon public duties of importance. See Num 13:16; comp. Joh 1:42; Act 4:36. This is still customary with monks on taking the vows of cloister life. To this head must be referred also the incident in 2Sa 12:25, where the prophet Nathan, on assuming the charge of Solomon’s education, gave him the name Jedediah. So in reference to important epochs in life (Gen 32:28; comp. Gen 17:5; Gen 17:15; Jdg 6:32). The appellation Boanerges, which Jesus gave to James and John (Mat 3:17), seems not to have been a permanent name, but simply the expression of an opinion as to their talents and disposition. In Gen 41:45; Dan 1:7; Dan 5:12, the change of name takes place, not so much in reference to the change of circumstances or occupation as because Joseph and Daniel were in lands where their fbrmer Hebrew names were not understood or not readily pronounced. On the change of Saul’s name to Paul, SEE PAUL. Comp. Harmar, Observ. 3:368; J.H. Stuss, De mutatione nomtin. sacra et profana (Goth. 1735), 3:4; Hackett, Illust. Script. page 83; Thomson, Land and Book, 1:179; Noldeke, Hebr. u. Arab. Eigennamen, in the Zeitschr. f. deutsch. morgenl. Gesellschaft, 1861, page 806. SEE PROPER NAMES.

Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

Name

In the Bible expressing the nature or relation for the most part. According as man has departed more and more from the primitive truth, the connection between names and things has become more arbitrary. In Genesis on the contrary the names are nearly all significant. Adam’s naming the animals implies at once his power of speech, distinguishing him above them, and his knowledge of their characteristics as enabling him to suit the name to the nature. God, in calling His people into new and close relationship with Himself, gives them a new name. Abram becomes Abraham; Sarai, Sarah; Jacob, Israel. (See ABRAM; JACOB; ISRAEL.) So the name was given the child at the time of circumcision, because then he enters into a new covenant relationship to God (Luk 1:59; Luk 2:21). So spiritually in the highest sense God’s giving a new name implies His giving a new nature; Rev 2:17; Rev 3:12, Christ will give some new revelation (“new name”) of Himself hereafter to His saints, which they alone are capable of receiving, when He and they with Him shall take the kingdom.

Christians receive their new name at baptism, indicating their new relation. They are “baptized into (eis onoma) the name of (the revealed nature, 2Pe 1:4, into living union with) the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” in their manifested relations and offices toward us (Mat 28:19). In Isa 65:15, “ye shall leave your name for a curse unto My chosen, for the Lord shall call His servants by another name”: instead of a “curse,” as the name of Jew had been, the elect Jews shall have a new name, God’s delight, “Hephzibah,” and married to Him, “Beulah,” instead of “forsaken” and “widow” (Isa 62:2-4). The “name” of Jehovah is His revealed character toward us. Exo 34:5-7; “Jehovah proclaimed the name of Jehovah … Jehovah Elohim, merciful and gracious,” etc. So Messiah, Jesus, Immanuel, the Word, indicate His manifested relations to us in redemption (Rev 19:13); also Isa 9:6, “His name shall be called Wonderful,” etc. (1Ti 6:1; Joh 17:6; Joh 17:26; Psa 22:22). Also His gracious and glorious attributes revealed in creation and providence (Psa 8:1; Psa 20:1; Psa 20:7). Authority (Act 4:7). Profession of Christianity (Rev 2:13). Manifested glory (Phi 2:9). (See GOD; JEHOVAH.)

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

NAME

To the Israelites of Bible times, the name of a person had much more significance than it does in most countries today. This applies to the giving of names and the usage of names.

Names given for a purpose

Many factors influenced Israelite parents in their choice of names for their children. In some cases the name was connected with happenings at the childs birth (Gen 10:25; Gen 25:24-26). In other cases parents gave names that expressed their joys or sorrows at the time of the birth (Gen 29:32-35; Gen 35:16-18), or expressed their hopes for their own or the childs future (Gen 30:24). God at times directed parents to give names that were a prophecy of coming events (Isa 8:3-4; Isa 8:18; Hos 1:4; Hos 1:6; Hos 1:9).

People in positions of power could give new names to those within their authority as indications of blessing or appointment to places of honour (Gen 17:5; Gen 17:15; cf. Php 2:9). In some cases a new name may have been given to indicate a new character (Gen 32:28).

Where there was such a connection between name and character, the request to know a persons name was a request to know the character indicated by the name (Gen 32:29; Exo 3:13; Jdg 13:17). Sometimes people remembered a new revelation of Gods character by calling him by a special name that summarized the revelation in a few words (Gen 22:14; Exo 3:14; Exo 17:15; Jdg 6:24). To know a persons name (in this sense) was to know the person (Exo 33:12; Psa 9:10; Psa 79:6).

The name meant the person

Since the name represented the person, Israelites considered it important to have descendants to carry on the family name (Num 27:4; Deu 25:5-6; see INHERITANCE). It was a matter of great shame for the family name to be blotted out (Jos 7:9; 2Sa 14:7; Pro 10:7). To honour a persons name meant to honour the person; to dishonour a persons name meant to dishonour the person (Exo 20:7; Lev 18:21; 1Ki 1:47; Isa 29:23; Mat 6:9; Rom 2:24; 1Ti 6:1).

When an Israelite was called by the name of another person, it meant to be associated so closely as to belong to that person (Deu 28:9-10; Isa 4:1; Jer 14:9; Jer 15:16; Jer 25:29; Mat 28:19; 1Co 1:13-15). In the same way, to speak or act in the name of another person meant to speak or act as if one were that person (Deu 18:20; 1Sa 25:5; Mat 18:20; Joh 16:23-24; Act 3:6; Act 3:16; Act 9:27-29; Col 3:17).

According to this common biblical usage, to make known a persons name meant to make known the persons character and activity (Psa 22:22; Psa 99:3; Joh 17:6; Act 9:15). Anyone who did something for the sake of a persons name acted as the persons representative and therefore was concerned with upholding the persons good character (Psa 109:21; Act 9:16). To call upon a persons name had the same significance as actually calling upon the person (1Ki 18:24; Psa 99:6; Act 2:21). Therefore, those who called upon the name of the Lord could be assured that the Lord himself would save them (Psa 54:1; Act 4:12; Rom 10:13).

Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary

Name

NAME ().1. In the Gospels the word is frequently used in the ordinary sense of a distinctive appellation or title, and especially to denote personal proper names (e.g. Mat 10:2, Mar 5:22, Luk 1:5; Luk 1:27, Joh 1:6). See following article.

2. Rarely it is found in the sense of reputation, fame, glorythe result of a persons name being on every tongue. So it is said of Jesus, His name was spread abroad (Mar 6:14; cf. a name which is above every name, Php 2:9).

3. But especially is used, like Heb. , not as a mere external designation, or distinguishing label attached to an individual, but with the suggestion of its significance as characteristic of personality. Hence the importance attached, just as in the OT, to the choosing of a name (Mat 1:21, Luk 1:13; Luk 1:31; Luk 1:63). hence also (cf. Gen 17:5; Gen 17:15; Gen 32:28) the alteration of a name, or the addition of another name, when some vital fact of experience has made the character different from what it was before (e.g. Mat 16:17-18, Act 13:9). It is when we remember that name stands for character that we see the force of such an expression as to receive a prophet in the name of a prophet (Mat 10:41). This does not mean to receive him in the name or for the sake of someone else, but to receive him in his character as a prophetfor his works sake, and on the ground of what he himself is.

4. This use of as significant of character is of very frequent occurrence with reference to Godcorresponding here again to the employment of in the OT. When Mary sings in the Magnificat, Holy is his name (Luk 1:49), it is the revealed character of God that is meant. When Jesus teaches His disciples in the Lords Prayer to say, Hallowed be thy name (Mat 6:9 = Luk 11:2), it is that Divine quality of Fatherhood which He has just set in the very forefront of the prayer that He desires them to hallow. When He did works in His Fathers name (Joh 10:25), He did them by appealing to His Fathers self-revelation, and hence by His Fathers authority. When He exclaims, Father, glorify thy name (Joh 12:28), He is asking the Father to complete in the eyes not only of the Jewish people, but of the great Gentile world represented by those Greek seekers who now stood before Him, the manifestation of His holiness and love given in the Person and ministry of His Son. And when He says in the Intercessory Prayer, I have manifested thy name (17:6, cf. v. 26), He is speaking once more of that Fatherhood of God of which His own earthly life had been the revelation and the pledge.

5. Corresponding to the foregoing use of as expressive of the revealed character of God, is the constant employment of the word, not only in the Gospels, but throughout the whole of the NT, to denote the character, dignity, authority, and even the very Personality of Jesus Christ. This is the use made of it by the First Evangelist (Mat 12:21) when he applies to Jesus the words of Deutero-Isaiah according to the LXX Septuagint reading, And in his name shall the Gentiles hope (Isa 42:4). The meaning of the author of Acts is similar when he writes, The name of the Lord Jesus was magnified (Isa 19:17). When our Lord speaks of those who receive a little child in my name (Mat 18:5 ||), or gives a gracious promise to the two or three who in His name are gathered together (Mat 18:20), or assures us that whatsoever we shall ask in His name the Father will bestow (Joh 16:23 f.), He is certainly not speaking of the use of His name as a species of magical formulanothing could be further from the mind of Christ (cf. Mat 7:22)but of a service and worship and prayer undertaken for His sake or inspired by faith in His Person. And when in the Johannine writings the very same blessings are assured to those who believe on his name (Joh 1:12; Joh 2:23; Joh 3:18, 1Jn 3:23; 1Jn 5:13) and to those who believe on Himself (Joh 3:16; Joh 6:40, 1Jn 5:10; cf. esp., as occurring in close juxtaposition, Joh 3:15 with Joh 3:18, and 1Jn 5:10 with 1Jn 5:13), it seems plain that by the name of Jesus is meant the Personality of Jesus as that has been summed up in the namethe name, above all, of only-begotten Son of God (Joh 3:18, cf. 1Jn 5:13).

6. There are certain phrases in which the name of Christ occurs that call for more particular consideration.

(1) Persecution for the name.When our Lord said to His disciples that they should be hated and persecuted for his name s sake (Mat 10:22; Mat 24:9, Mar 13:13, Luk 6:22; Luk 21:12; Luk 21:17); when for his names sake shame and suffering actually fell upon the Apostles and the early Church (Act 5:41; Act 9:16; Act 15:26). and when St. Paul expresses his readiness not to be bound only, but also to die for the name of the Lord Jesus (Act 21:13)what are we to understand by these expressions? No doubt in several of these cases name is practically synonymous with Person; and so to suffer for Christs name is equivalent to suffering for His sakean alternative phrase which is also employed (Joh 13:37-38, 2Co 12:10, Php 1:29). But sometimes it seems more natural to think of the primary meaning of name as an external designation. The expression used in Act 5:41 (Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 for the Name) and 3Jn 1:7 (Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 for the sake of the Name) suggests that the Name, like the Way (Act 9:2; Act 19:9), was a technical term, and that to suffer for the Name meant to suffer as a Christian (1Pe 4:16), i.e. as one who bore the name of being a disciple of Christ. It is true that the name Christian (wh. see) does not appear to have been originally used by Christs followers themselves. But at all events it was employed by outsiders (Act 11:26; Act 26:28), and came to be employed especially by enemies (1Pe 4:16). And if the name was not current within the Church, there was a party in Corinth that claimed to be distinctively of Christ (, 1Co 1:12), while St. Paul not only protests, with reference to this claim, Is Christ divided? (1Co 1:13), but says a little further on in the Ep., with regard to the whole Christian body, Ye are of Christ ( , 1Co 3:23). When, again, St. Peter writes, If ye are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are ye (1Pe 4:14), it is evident that the reproach is brought not so much against the name of Christ itself as against those who bear it (cf. 1Pe 4:16). And this view is confirmed when we find St. James speaking of the honourable name which was called upon you (Jam 2:7 (Revised Version margin) ), the reference being apparently to Christs name as a designation that came to be applied to His peopleprobably from the fact that His name had been invoked over them at the time of their baptism.

(2) Working of miracles in the name.In the Gospels references to the working of miracles (esp. the casting out of evil spirits) with the use of the name are found in Mat 7:22, Mar 9:38 f. = Luk 9:49 f., Luk 10:17, and in the Appendix to Mk.s Gospel, where, before His Ascension, Jesus is represented as assuring His disciples that those who believe shall have the power of casting out demons in His name (Mar 16:17). In Act 3:6 ff. (cf. Act 3:16; Act 4:10; Act 4:30) St. Peter cures the lame beggar at the gate of the Temple by commanding him in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth to walk. In Act 16:18 St. Paul, with the invocation of the same name, casts the spirit of divination out of the slave-girl at Philippi. In Act 19:13 ff. certain vagabond Jews, exorcists, take upon themselves to call over those possessed by evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, and the sons of Sceva in particular do this to their own confusion; but the implication of the narrative evidently is that the special miracles which had just been wrought by St. Paul himself were accomplished with a like invocation (cf. Act 19:11-12 with Act 19:13). In Jam 5:14 the elders of the Church are told to pray over the sick man, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

The view has been taken that this use of the name of Christ for the working of miracles was nothing more than the employment of a theurgic formula, which finds its analogue in the invocations and incantations of ancient magic (so esp. Conybeare, JQR [Note: QR Jewish Quarterly Review.] viii, ix). We may be sure that in so far as such a use of His name was commanded or approved by our Lord Himself, this view is quite impossible (cf. Mat 7:22). And as for the Apostolic Church, while it is clear that the name of Jesus was invoked by both Peter and Paul before the performance of a miracle, Peters prayer, after the miracle at the Temple gate, that God would accompany the use of the name by stretching forth His hand to heal (Act 4:29-30), points to the conclusion that the name of Jesus was invoked by the Apostles in these cases simply because every appeal to God was made through the Person of the Mediator. The influence of Greek and Oriental superstition soon brought into the Church a magical and theurgic element, which gathered specially round the use of Christs name in formulas of exorcism. But within the Apostolic sphere, at all events, it was not a formula, however sacred, that was believed to cast out demons or work cures. St. James, after enjoining the use of the Lords name at a sick-bed, adds that the prayer of faith shall heal the sick (Jam 5:15). And in the case of the impotent man, St. Peter, when the people came crowding into Solomons Porch, greatly wondering (Act 3:11), said, By faith in his name hath his name made this man strong yea, the faith which is through him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all (Act 3:16).

(3) Baptizing in (or into) the name.Christian baptism, as we meet with it in the Apostolic Church, is performed in (or into) the name of Christ (Act 2:38; Act 8:16; Act 10:48; Act 19:5, Rom 6:3, Gal 3:27). On the other hand, in our Lords parting instructions to the Eleven, as given at the end of Mt., He directs them to baptize into (or in; but is the preposition used) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mat 28:19)a formula that is found nowhere else in the NT. This is not the place to discuss the genuineness of the logion (in support of it see Resch, TU [Note: U Texte und Untersuehungen.] x. 2, summarized by Marshall in ExpT [Note: xpT Expository Times.] vi. [1895] p. 395 ff.; Bruce, Kingdom of God, p. 258 ff.; against it, Holtzmann, NT Theol. i. 378 ff.; Harnack, Hist. of Dog. i. 79; Moffatt, Hist. NT, p. 647 ff. See, further, art. Baptism, 5). But if we accept the triple formula as coming from the lips of Jesus, the fact that we have no direct evidence of its use in the Apostolic Church certainly creates a difficulty. The suggestion that the shorter form is simply a designation of the fact that baptism was administered on confession of Jesus as Christ and Lord, and that the Trinitarian formula would invariably be employed in the actual administration of the sacrament, does not meet the case, for we know that in the 3rd cent, a baptism in the name of Christ was still common, and that in the time of Cyprian the controversy about re-baptism gathered round this very point.

The solution of the problem may lie in the fact that at first the efficacy of baptism was not attached to any set form of words. The Trinitarian formula itself occurs in different versions. Justin gives it after a paraphrastic fashion (Apol. i. 61); Tertullian associates the name of the Church with the names of the Three Persons of the Trinity (de Bapt. vi.), and a like usage is found in the Syrian Church (see Scholten, Taufformel, p. 39). Corresponding to this lack of fixity in the longer form is the absence of anything like uniformity in the shorter one. The name used is Jesus Christ, or the Lord Jesus, or perhaps even simply Christ (1Co 1:13 suggests the last); while the relation to the name is variously expressed by , ( [or ] , Act 2:38; , Act 8:16; Act 19:5; , Act 10:48; , Rom 6:3; , Gal 3:27). It is hardly legitimate to simplify this diversity by assuming, with Dean Armitage Robinson, that and are really synonymous in every case, and that in the name, not into the name, is always the proper English rendering (EBi [Note: Bi Encyclopaedia Biblica.] i. 473). No doubt it is true, as he says, that the interchangeability of the two prepositions in late Greek may be plentifully illustrated from the NT (cf. J. H. Moulton, Gram, of NT Gr. i. 62, 66, 234 f.). But this is far from deciding the question whether in the case of baptism they are used indifferently, and passages like Rom 6:3, 1Co 12:13, Gal 3:27 strongly suggest that they are not.

All this diversity of usage seems to show that slight importance was attached at first to the question of a formula, provided that it was clearly understood what Christian baptism meant, and what it implied. Relation to Christ was the essential matter. And as Christian baptism in the NT is invariably conditional upon confession of Christ, so it was administered with an appeal to Christs authority ( ); it depended for its reality upon a faith that rested on His name ( ); and it was the outward symbol of an actual union with His Person ( ).

Literature.The Lexx. of Grimm-Thayer and Cremer, s.v. ; Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible , art. Name; PRE [Note: RE Real-Encyklopdie fur protest. Theologic und Kirche.] 3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] , art. Name; Bhmer, Das biblische Im Namen (1898); Conybeare, Christian Demonology in JQR [Note: QR Jewish Quarterly Review.] viii, ix; Scholten, Das Taufformel; Deissmann, Bibelstudien, 181 ff.; ExpT [Note: xpT Expository Times.] vi. [1895] 247, 395, xi. [1899] 3, xv. [1904] 294; Expositor, Oct. 1902, p. 251 ff.; F. H. Chase and J. A. Robinson in JThSt [Note: ThSt Journal of Theological Studies.] , July 1905 (vi. 481), Jan. 1906 (vii. 186), Jan. 1907 (viii. 161).

J. C. Lambert.

Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels

Name

By the name is meant in Scripture, the person of any one. Thus we read in Rev 3:4 “Thou hast a few names in Sardis”-the meaning is, thou hast a few persons there. So it is said, “they that know thy name will put their trust in thee.” (Psa 9:10) -The sense is, that the right knowledge of the Lord can only induce a right dependance upon him: and in this sense, what a blessedness is there in the name of JEHOVAH! Hence Moses, towards the close of his ministry, admonisheth Israel to this proper apprehension concerning JEHOVAH. “That thou mayest fear (said Moses) this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD.” (Deu 28:58) And what an infinite fulness is contained in this glorious and fearful name! Observe, not only The Lord, that is JEHOVAH in his threefold character of person, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but Thy God, that is, God in covenant; so that in this view of the name of JEHOVAH, is included both his essence, nature, attributes, perfections, counsel, will, and purpose. All his gracious revelations in the person of his dear Son, his grace, love, wisdom, mercy, and the whole constellation of glories manifested in Christ and by Christ; and so running through the whole kingdoms of nature, and providence, and grace, and glory; so much, and infinitely more, is included in this one view of the glorious and fearful name of The Lord Thy God.

And this may serve to explain, in some measure, the awfulness of taking this glorious and fearful name in vain-a sin but little considered, but yet most tremendously heinous. The Jews were so tenacious of it, that they never made use of it in their ordinary discourse, even when intending to speak with reverence; but always substituted some other expression, to intimate their meaning without using the very name. See Jehovah under this particular.

And we find the Lord himself helping his people, as it were, in this sacred regard which they desired to have to his honour, by commanding them to avoid all temptations to it, in prohibiting their use of the names of the dunghill gods around them; knowing that the familiar use of the one, might insensibly lead to the use of the other. “And in all things that I have said unto you, (saith the Lord) be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.” (Exo 23:13) And hence we find, in after-ages of the church, the Lord again interposing with his grace on this occasion, and saying: “And it shall be at that day, saith the Lord, that thou shalt call me Ishi, and shalt call me no more Baali; for I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth.” (Hos 2:16-17) The Israelites were not only in danger from using the same name of Baali, which signifies Lord, as their idolatrous neighbours did, when speaking of their gods, but they had been upon numberless occasions infected also with their idolatry. Hence the Lord graciously promised, in this sweet and condescending Scripture, to remove the temptation to this sin, by taking the names of Baal and Baalim out of their mouths. As if the Lord had said, by being called Ishi, my man, the Lord would came home nearer to their affections.

I must not dismiss this view of the glorious and fearful name of JEHOVAH, of which we are so repeatedly told, in the word of God, the Lord is jealous, without first begging the reader to remark with me the very tender intimations the Lord gives of this name, in the person, work, and righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ. Hence the church sings, “Because of the savour of thy good ointments, thy name is as ointment poured forth.” (Son 1:3) And when a poor sinner, sensible of the loathsomeness of his own person, hath found Jesus, and what is contained for all the purposes of salvation in the person and glory of Christ, then is the name of Jesus more fragrant than all the costly perfume of the sanctuary. The soul then enters into tile enjoyment of all those names of Jesus which the prophet hath described him by, in one full constellation: “His name (saith he) shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace!” (Isa 9:6)

Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures

Name

nam (, shem; , onoma; Latin nomen (2 Esd 4:1); verbs , onomazo; Latin nomino (2 Esd 5:26)): A name is that by which a person, place or thing is marked and known. In Scripture, names were generally descriptive of the person, of his position, of some circumstance affecting him, hope entertained concerning him, etc., so that the name often came to stand for the person. In Act 1:15; Rev 3:4, onoma stands for persons; compare Num 26:53, Num 26:55.

I. Old Testament Word and Use

1. General

The word for name in the Old Testament is shem (also the name of one of the sons of Noah). The etymology is uncertain, although it may be from shamah (obs.), To set a mark; shum is the Aramaic form. For the name as descriptive of the person see NAMES. Besides designating persons, the name also stands for fame, renown, reputation, character gained or expressed, etc. (Gen 6:4; 2Sa 7:9, 2Sa 7:23, etc.); it might be an evil name Deu 22:14, Deu 22:19; the name is also equivalent to a people or nation (which might be blotted out, i.e. destroyed (Deu 7:24, etc.)); to speak or write in the name signified authority (Exo 5:23; 1Ki 21:8, etc.); to call one’s name over a place or people indicated possession or ownership (2Sa 12:28; Amo 9:12, etc.); to act in the name was to represent Deu 25:6; to be called or known by name indicated special individual notice Exo 31:2; Isa 43:1; Isa 45:3-4. Gen 2:19-20 even displays a conception of identity between the name and the thing.

To name is sometimes ‘amar, to say 1Sa 16:3; dabhar, to speak Gen 23:16; nakabh, to mark out Num 1:17; kara’, to call Gen 48:16; Isa 61:6.

2. The Divine Name

Of special interest is the usage with respect to the name of God. (For the various Divine names and their significance see GOD, NAMES OF.) He revealed Himself to Israel through Moses by a new name (which was at the same time that of the God of their fathers) – JEHOVAH (which see) (Yahweh) – the nature of which should be shown by His manifestations on their behalf Exo 3:13-16; Exo 15:2-3. The name of God was therefore not a mere word, but the whole of the Divine manifestation, the character of God as revealed in His relations to His people and in His dealings with them (Exo 9:16; Jos 7:9; Jos 9:9, etc.). The name of Yahweh was proclaimed to Moses on Mt. Sinai, Yah, Yahweh, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth, etc. Exo 34:6; the name Yahweh (so revealed) was Exo 3:15 His memorial Name (so, often, in the American Standard Revised Version; see MEMORIAL).

His sole Deity was such an important element in His name that Deu 6:4 was termed the Shema (from shema, hear, the first word in Deu 6:4), the first article of Israelitish faith, taught to all the children, written on the phylacteries, and still recited as the first act in public and private worship twice a day by every adult male Jew. Where Yahweh is said to record His name, or to put His name in a place (or person), some special Divine manifestation is implied, making the place or person sacred to Him Exo 20:24; 1Ki 8:16. His name was in the angel of His Presence Exo 23:21; what He does is for his great name’s sake, in fidelity to and vindication of His revealed character and covenant relationship 2Ch 6:32; Psa 25:11; the great things He should do would be for a name Isa 55:13; He would give His people a new name, an everlasting name Isa 56:5; to be called by the name of Yahweh is to be his people 2Ch 7:14; Isa 43:7; it implies protection, etc. Isa 63:19; Jer 14:8-9; to call upon the name of Yahweh was to worship him as God (Gen 21:33; Gen 26:25, etc.); To confess His name, to acknowledge him 1Ki 8:33, 1Ki 8:35; to love, trust, act in, etc., The name, was to love, trust, etc., Yahweh Himself Psa 5:11; Psa 7:17.

Very frequently, especially in the Psalms and prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah, the name of God stands for God himself; to forget his name was to depart from him Jer 23:27; to minister, prophesy, or speak in His name signified Divine appointment, inspiration, authority (Jer 11:21; Jer 14:14-15, etc.); we have swearing by or in the name of Yahweh Deu 6:13; to take His name in vain was to swear falsely Exo 20:7; Lev 19:12; we have blessing in His name Deu 10:8; cursing 2Ki 2:24. In Lev 24:11, we have the case of one who blasphemed the Name, and cursed, the penalty for which was death by stoning (Lev 24:13-16). In later Jewish usage (compare Wisd 14:21) the sacred name Yahweh was not pronounced in reading the Scriptures, ‘Adhonay (my Lord) being substituted for it (the vowels belonging to ‘Adhonay were written with the consonants of the Divine name), hence, the frequent term the Lord in the King James Version, for which the American Standard Revised Version substitutes Yahweh.

II. New Testament Word and Use

1. Character and Work of the Person

In the New Testament onoma has frequently also the significance of denoting the character, or work of the person, e.g. Mat 1:21, Thou shalt call his name Jesus; for it is he that shall save, etc. (Luk 1:31; Luk 2:21; Luk 1:63, His name is John; compare the new names given to Simon, James and John; Saul’s new name of Paul). The name of God has the same relation to the character of God as in the Old Testament (Mat 6:9; Father, glorify thy name, Joh 12:28); it is manifested by Christ (Joh 17:26; compare Joh 17:3); the name of Jesus, as manifesting God, takes the place of the name of Yahweh in the Old Testament (compare Jam 2:7 with Jer 14:9, and see below); to Him is given the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow … and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father, Phi 2:9-10 (compare Isa 45:23); It is not the name Jesus, but the name of Jesus (Lightfoot), i.e. the name (Lord,) received by Jesus; we have with reference to Jesus simply the Name (Act 5:41, worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name; Jam 5:14 (probable text, Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek), in the Name; 3Jo 1:7, for the sake of the Name); the name of Christ is equivalent to Christ himself Mat 10:22; Mat 19:29; it is the same thing as his manifestation Joh 20:31; therefore to believe on his name is to believe in Him as manifested in His life and work Joh 1:12; Joh 2:23; in the name of God means sent by God, as representing Him, with Divine authority Mat 21:9; Mat 23:39; in like manner, we have prophesying or preaching in the name of Jesus Act 4:18; Act 5:28.

The name of Jesus represented His authority and power, e.g. working miracles in His name (Mat 7:22; Mar 9:39; Act 4:7, ‘by what name (or power) have ye done this? ‘), and it is contrasted with casting out evil spirits by some other name or power Act 16:18; Act 19:17. The gospel, of salvation was to be preached in his name, by His authority and as making it effectual Luk 24:47; sinners were justified through his name Act 10:43; 1Co 6:11; sins were forgiven for his name’s sake 1Jo 2:12; men called upon the name of Jesus, as they had done on that of Yahweh (Act 9:14, Act 9:21 (compare Act 7:59); Rom 10:13-14).

To name the name of Christ was to belong to Him 2Ti 2:19; the calling of His name on the Gentiles signified their acceptance as God’s people (Act 15:17 (quoted from Amo 9:12); compare Rom 1:5); to hold fast his name is to be true to Him as made known Rev 2:13; Rev 3:8; to be gathered together in his name, to do all’ ‘ things in his name, is as acknowledging him Mat 18:20; Col 3:17; to baptize in or into the name of Jesus Christ (Act 2:38; Act 22:16, calling on his name, contrasted with baptizing into one’s own name in 1Co 13:1-13, eis) is to call over them his name (in the rite), as claiming them for Christ and as their acknowledgment of Him or of faith in Him – becoming His disciples; similarly, to baptize into (eis) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, represents dedication to God as He has been revealed in Christ.

In the name of means as representing (or as being), e.g. in the name of a prophet, of a righteous man, or of a disciple Mat 10:41-42; to receive a little child in Christ’s name, i.e. as belonging to Him, is to receive Himself (Mat 18:5; Mar 9:37; Mar 9:41 to disciples, the Revised Version (British and American) because ye are Christ’s, margin Greek: in name that ye are (Christ’s); Luk 9:48; compare Mat 18:20; Mar 13:6, Many shall come in my name; Luk 21:8).

2. In Relation to Prayer

The significance of the name of Jesus in relation to prayer deserves special notice. To pray in the name of Jesus, to ask anything in His name, according to His promises, Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do (Joh 14:13; compare Joh 14:14; Joh 15:16; Joh 16:23); Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask … that your joy may be made full Joh 16:24, is not merely to add to our prayers (as is so often unthinkingly done): we ask all in the name of Jesus, or through Jesus Christ our Lord, etc., but to pray or ask as His representatives on earth, in His mission and stead, in His spirit and with His aim; it implies union with Christ and abiding in Him, He in us and we in Him. The meaning of the phrase is, as being one with me even as I am revealed to you. Its two correlatives are in me (Joh 6:56; Joh 14:20; Joh 15:4 ff; Joh 16:33; compare 1Jo 5:20), and the Pauline in Christ (Westcott, The Gospel according to St. John).

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Name

Value of a good name

Pro 22:1; Ecc 7:1

A new name given to persons who have spiritual adoption:

– General references

Isa 62:2

– To Abraham

Gen 17:5

– To Sarah

Gen 17:15

– To Jacob

Gen 32:28

– To Paul

Act 13:9

Intercessional influence of the name of Jesus

Jesus, The Christ, In His Name

Symbolic

Hos 1:3-4; Hos 1:6; Hos 1:9; Hos 2:1

Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible

Name

Name. Gen 2:19. This sometimes has a peculiar signification, as in Pro 18:10, where the term denotes God himself. See, also, Psa 20:1; Psa 20:5; Psa 20:7. In the New Testament it usually means the character, faith, or doctrine of Christ. Act 5:41; Act 8:12; Act 9:15; Act 26:9. The names of God are expressive of some element of his characterare the symbol of some revealed attribute of his nature. We name him only because we know him, and we know him only because he has made himself known. Names among the Jews usually had a meaning and a relation of some peculiar circumstances in the character, birth, or destiny of the person. Exo 2:10; Exo 18:3-4; Mat 1:21. The same person often had two names. Names were changed, and are still, in Eastern countries, for slight reasons. A change of office or station often occasioned a change of name. “And upon his thigh a name written.” Rev 19:16. This alludes to an ancient custom among Eastern nations of adorning the images of their gods and the persons of princes and heroes with inscriptions expressive of their character, titles, etc. They were made on the garment, or on one of the thighs, and several ancient statues have been discovered, with inscriptions of one or two lines, written sometimes horizontally and sometimes perpendicularly, both on the inside and outside of the thigh, and sometimes upon both thighs. Men surname themselves by the name of Israel, when, having been before Gentiles and sinners, they join themselves to Jesus and his church. Isa 44:5.

Fuente: People’s Dictionary of the Bible

Name

A word or symbol which denotes (designates) a particular thing is called a proper name of that particular thing.

In English and other natural languages there occur also common names (common nouns), such a common name being thought of as if it could serve as a name of anything belonging to a specified class or having specified characteristics. Under usual translations into symbolic notation, common names are replaced by proper names of classes or of class concepts; and this would seem to provide the best logical analysis. In actual English usage, however, a common noun is often more nearly like a variable (q. v.) having a specified range. — A.C.

Fuente: The Dictionary of Philosophy

NAME

The name of a person or thing, according to the Hebrew style, frequently imports the quality or state thereof. Thus in Rth 1:20, “And she said unto them, Call me not Naomi,” i. e. pleasant, “but call me Mara,” i.e. bitter; “for the Lord bath dealt very bitterly with me.” And thus, when it is said in Isaiah 9., “He shall be called Immanuel,” the meaning is, that the Son there spoken of shall be God with us, dwelling amongst us. And so in Luk 1:32, “He shall be called the Son of the Highest,” is, he shall be the Son of the Highest.

Thus in Thucydides,f1 “to be called the allies of the Lacedmonians,” is the same as to be allies, and have effectually the honour and advantage of that title. Agreeably to this, a new name signifies a new quality or state, a change of the former condition, as in Isa 62:2. Hence the custom of changing names upon any remarkable change of condition. So, on account of the new covenant made with God, Abraham and Sarah received those new names from God himself. So Jacob was named Israel: so Joseph had a new name given him by Pharaoh; and Daniel another by the king of Babylon. So our Saviour changed Simon’s name for Peter; and the Primitive Christians took a new name at their baptism.

To be called by the name of any one, signifies to belong to, to be the property of, or to be in subjection to that person whose name is called upon the other, as in Gen 48:16.

Thus to be called by the name of God, is to be accounted his servant, to be appropriated to him, and separated from the heathen world; as in Deu 28:10; 2Ch 7:14; Act 15:17.

So because a woman by marriage becomes subject to, and is the property of her husband; therefore in Isa 4:1, she is said to have the name of her husband called upon her. And thus when God had submitted all creatures on earth to Adam in token of their subjection, and to give him possession of the gift, “God brought them to him to be named.”

So David, to express that God is the Lord as well as maker of the stars, says, Psa 147:4 : “He telleth the number of the stars: he calleth them all by their names.”

Thus masters gave names to their slaves;f2 and these, that it might be publicly known to whom they belonged, were branded in their foreheads with the names or marks of their masters.f3 And for the same reason soldiers were branded in the hand with the name or character of their general.f4 And after the same manner, upon the said account, it was likewise customary to stigmatize the worshippers and votaries of some of the gods.f5 Whence Lucian, speaking of the votaries of the Syrian goddess, affirms they were all branded with certain marks, some in the palms of their hands, and others in their necks; whence it became customary for the Assyrians so to stigmatise themselves.

To call by name, implies a superiority to examine and blame the actions of the persons called. The phrase is thus used in Ignatius’s Epistles; and in Virgil’s neid, L. xii. ver. 759.

See also, to this purpose, Servius’s Observation on neid, L. i. ver. 80; and n. L. xii. ver. 652.

Names of men are sometimes taken for the men themselves. Thus in Act 1:15 : “the number of the names,” i.e. the number of the men. And thus in Virgil, Sylvius, ” Albanum nomen,” is Sylvius, a man of Albania.f6

The origin of this expression is to be deduced from the public registers of the names of citizens, (which were very carefully kept by the Greeks and Romans);f7 and from the exact account of genealogies among the Jews; and from the diptychs or matricula used in the primitive Church, in which were registered the names of all the faithful. Hence the expression, “to blot out a man’s name,” signifies to reject, or cast him out from enjoying any longer the privileges of a citizen, or Christian, by blotting his name out of the public register, or matricula.

Man of name is a man of renown. So David is called in 2Sa 7:9, being made famous for many victories, which made him to be celebrated upon different accounts. See 1Sa 18:7-8; 2Sa 12:28 And the Roman generals used to take names from their victories; as Africanus, Asiaticus, Macedonicus, and the like; and sometimes from things done at home to the good of the public; as Tully was saluted, Pater Patri, Father of his Country; and so Augustus afterwards.

The word H8034, name, denotes simply an object of worship or invocation. Hence , the name, signifies the object of worship to Israel, Lev 24:11. And so in Exo 20:25, where God says, “I record my name,” the meaning is, I choose a place where I require to be worshipped, wherein I will shew my glory and power, and hear the prayers of them that invoke me.

Thus the declaration of God in Exo 3:15, when he first appeared unto Moses, “This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations,” respects his worship. It is that name by which he is to be remembered; that is, invoked, and served by his people, and distinguished from all false objects. For, the word memorial is a term of the Rituals, Lev 2:2. Therefore, when God forbids Israel, in Exo 23:13, ” even to make mention of the names of other gods,” he forbids to worship, and give veneration, or to commemorate, in public or private worship with the false votaries, those actions of other gods which had occasioned their being deified. For God is, and calls himself, Exo 34:14, in the LXX , a jealous name, a jealous God, or object of worship. It was on this account, and with a due sense of gratefulness to God’s kindness to Israel, that Moses inquired after the name of God, when he appeared to him, and that the Israelites might serve God their deliverer, Exo 3:13. But Manoah speaks out in Jdg 13:17 : “What is thy name, that when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honour?”

The origin of this expression appears to be this. When God appeared by some vision, dream, or miracle to the patriarchs, they noted the place, and commemorated the event by some solemn acts of devotion, and the imposition of a name; as in Gen 12:7-8; Gen 13:4; Gen 13:18; Gen 28:18-19. But when men mistook the object of their worship, and by whatever mistake, worshipped with Divine honours, either living or dead men, which was done to Nimrod, and to all the other heads of families after the Deluge, except Abraham and his descendants by Jacob, at least after their decease; then wherever this object of worship had done some memorable action when alive, or was believed to have done so after his decease upon the prayers or invocation of his worshippers, or where he was buried and supposed to preside and favour his worshippers; there a monument was raised, and his name invoked in proper hymns, with suitable praises and thanks. See an instance in Pap. Statius, L. iv. ver. 664.

Hence it comes, that not only among the Jewish authors,f8 but also the Gentile,f9 to name, is the same as to invoke in divine worship. And thus “to be baptized into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” is to be baptized into the worship of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, as the one God.

F1 Thucyd. L. v. 9.

F2 See Plaut. Bacchid. Act. ii. Sc. iii. ver. 127. Captiv. Act. v. sc. iii. ver. 7.

F3 See the Lord Bishop of Oxford’s Grecian Antiquities, Vol. I. p. 65. Petron. Arb. Satyr. p. 366, 370, 373. Martial. L. ii. Ep. 29. Plaut. Ce1. Act. ii. Sc. ii. ver. 49.

F4 G. Ant. Vol. i. p. 65.

F5 Ibid. Vol. p. 65.

F6 Virg, iEn. L. vi. ver. 763. Aul. Gell. Noct. Att. L. ii. c. 17. See also Horat. L. iii. Od. i. ver. 16.

F7 See the Lord Bishop of Oxford’s Grecian Antiquities, Vol. J. p. 46, 47, 48. Dodwell’s Cypr. Diss. D. V.

F8 See the LXX. in Isa 26:13, and 2Ti 2:19.

F9 Herodot. L. vii. c. 117. Plut. Qumst. Rom. p. 254. Macrob. Saturn. L. i. c. 16. Ammian. Marcell. L. 17.

Fuente: A Symbolical Dictionary

NAME

(1) Good

1Sa 18:30; Pro 22:1; Ecc 7:1; Act 6:3; Act 10:22; Act 16:2; Act 22:12

2Co 8:18; 3Jo 1:12

(2) Of the Lord, Mighty

Neh 9:5; Psa 113:3; Pro 18:10; Isa 50:10; Mal 1:11

(3) Of the Lord to be Reverenced

Lev 22:2; Deu 28:58; Isa 29:23; Isa 57:15; Eze 36:23; Dan 2:20

Mat 6:9

–SEE Reverence (1), REVERENCE

— The New. See NEW MAN

Fuente: Thompson Chain-Reference Bible

Name

is used (I) in general of the “name” by which a person or thing is called, e.g., Mar 3:16-17, “(He) surnamed,” lit., “(He added) the name;” Mar 14:32, lit., “(of which) the name (was);” Luk 1:63; Joh 18:10; sometimes translated “named,” e.g., Luk 1:5, “named (Zacharias),” lit., “by name;” in the same verse, “named (Elizabeth),” lit., “the name of her,” an elliptical phrase, with “was” understood; Act 8:9, RV, “by name,” Act 10:1; the “name” is put for the reality in Rev 3:1; in Phi 2:9, the “Name” represents “the title and dignity” of the Lord, as in Eph 1:21; Heb 1:4;

(II) for all that a “name” implies, of authority, character, rank, majesty, power, excellence, etc., of everything that the “name” covers: (a) of the “Name” of God as expressing His attributes, etc., e.g., Mat 6:9; Luk 1:49; Joh 12:28; Joh 17:6, Joh 17:26; Rom 15:9; 1Ti 6:1; Heb 13:15; Rev 13:6; (b) of the “Name” of Christ, e.g., Mat 10:22; Mat 19:29; Joh 1:12; Joh 2:23; Joh 3:18; Act 26:9; Rom 1:5; Jam 2:7; 1Jo 3:23; 3Jo 1:7; Rev 2:13; Rev 3:8; also the phrases rendered “in the name;” these may be analyzed as follows: (1) representing the authority of Christ, e.g., Mat 18:5 (with epi, “on the ground of My authority”); so Mat 24:5 (falsely) and parallel passages; as substantiated by the Father, Joh 14:26; Joh 16:23 (last clause), RV; (2) in the power of (with en, “in”), e.g., Mar 16:17; Luk 10:17; Act 3:6; Act 4:10; Act 16:18; Jam 5:14; (3) in acknowledgement or confession of, e.g., Act 4:12; Act 8:16; Act 9:27-28; (4) in recognition of the authority of (sometimes combined with the thought of relying or resting on), Mat 18:20; cp. Mat 28:19; Act 8:16; Act 9:2 (eis, “into”); Joh 14:13; Joh 15:16; Eph 5:20; Col 3:17; (5) owing to the fact that one is called by Christ’s “Name” or is identified with Him, e.g. 1Pe 4:14 (with en, “in”); with heneken, “for the sake of,” e.g., Mat 19:29; with dia, “on account of,” Mat 10:22; Mat 24:9; Mar 13:13; Luk 21:17; Joh 15:21; 1Jo 2:12; Rev 2:3 (for 1Pe 4:16, see Note below);

(III) as standing, by metonymy, for “persons,” Act 1:15; Rev 3:4; Rev 11:13 (RV, “persons”).

Note: In Mar 9:41, the use of the phrase en with the dative case of onoma (as in the best mss.) suggests the idea of “by reason of” or “on the ground of” (i.e., “because ye are My disciples”); 1Pe 4:16, RV, “in this Name” (AV, “on this behalf”), may be taken in the same way.

denotes (a) “to name,” “mention,” or “address by name,” Act 19:13, RV, “to name” (AV, “to call”); in the Passive Voice, Rom 15:20; Eph 1:21; Eph 5:3; to make mention of the “Name” of the Lord in praise and worship, 2Ti 2:19; (b) “to name, call, give a name to,” Luk 6:13-14; Passive Voice, 1Co 5:11, RV, “is named” (AV, “is called”); Eph 3:15 (some mss. have the verb in this sense in Mar 3:14; 1Co 5:1). See CALL, Note (1).

“to call by a name, surname” (epi, “on,” and No. 1), is used in Rom 2:17, Passive Voice, RV, “bearest the name of” (AV, “art called”). See CALL, Note (1).

primarily denotes “to address, greet, salute;” hence, “to call by name,” Heb 5:10, RV, “named (of God a High Priest)” (AV, “called”), expressing the formal ascription of the title to Him whose it is; “called” does not adequately express the significance. Some suggest the meaning “addressed,” but this is doubtful. The reference is to Psa 110:4, a prophecy confirmed at the Ascension. In the Sept., Deu 23:6.

“to call,” is translated “named” in Act 7:58, RV (AV, “whose name was”). See CALL, No. 1 (b).

Notes: (1) In Luk 19:2, AV, kaleo, “to call” (with the dative case of onoma, “by name”), is translated “named” (RV, “called by name”); in Luk 2:21, AV, the verb alone is rendered “named” (RV, “called”). (2) In Mat 9:9; Mar 15:7, AV, the verb lego, “to speak, to call by name,” is rendered “named” (RV, “called”). See CALL, No. 9.

Fuente: Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament Words

Name

A name was given to the male child at the time of its circumcision, but it is probable, previous to the introduction of that rite, that the name was given immediately after its birth. Among the orientals the appellations given as names are always significant. In the Old Testament, we find that the child was named in many instances from the circumstances of its birth, or from some peculiarities in the history of the family to which it belonged, Gen 16:11; Gen 19:37; Gen 25:25-26; Exo 2:10; Exo 18:3-4. Frequently the name was a compound one, one part being the name of the Deity, and among idolatrous nations the name of an idol. The following instances may be mentioned among others, and may stand as specimens of the whole, namely, , Samuel, hear God; , Adonijah, God is lord; , Josedech, God is just; , Ethbaal, a Canaanitish name, the latter part of the compound being the name of the idol deity, Baal; , Belshazzar, Bel, a Babylonish deity, is ruler and king. Sometimes the name had a prophetic meaning, Gen 17:15; Isa 7:14; Isa 8:3; Hos 1:4; Hos 1:6; Hos 1:9; Mat 1:21; Luk 1:13; Luk 1:60; Luk 1:63. In the later times names were selected from those of the progenitors of a family; hence in the New Testament hardly any other than ancient names occur, Mat 1:12; Luk 1:61; Luk 3:23, &c. The inhabitants of the east very frequently change their names, and sometimes do it for very slight reasons. This accounts for the fact of so many persons having two names in Scripture, Rth 1:20-21; 1Sa 14:49; 1Sa 31:2; 1Ch 10:2; Jdg 6:32; Jdg 7:1; 2Sa 23:8. Kings and princes very often changed the names of those who held offices under them, particularly when they first attracted their notice, and were taken into their employ, and when subsequently they were elevated to some new station, and crowned with additional honours, Gen 41:45; Gen 17:5; Gen 32:28; Gen 35:10; 2Ki 23:34-35; 2Ki 24:17; Dan 1:6; Joh 1:42; Mar 3:17. Hence a name, a new name, occurs tropically, as a token or proof of distinction and honour in the following among other passages, Php 2:9; Heb 1:4; Rev 2:17. Sometimes the names of the dead were changed; for instance that of Abel, , a word which signifies breath, or something transitory as a breath, given to him after his death, in allusion to the shortness of his life, Gen 2:8. Sometimes proper names are translated into other languages, losing their original form, while they preserve their signification. This appears to have been the case with the proper names, which occur in the first eleven chapters of Genesis, and which were translated into the Hebrew from a language still more ancient. The orientals in some instances, in order to distinguish themselves from others of the same name, added to their own name the name of their father, grandfather, and even great grandfather. The name of God often signifies God himself; sometimes his attributes collectively; sometimes his power and authority. Of the Messiah it is said, And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King of kings, and Lord of lords, Rev 19:16. In illustration of this it may be remarked, that it appears to have been an ancient custom among several nations, to adorn the images of their deities, princes, victors at their public games, and other eminent persons, with inscriptions expressive of their names, character, titles, or some circumstance which might contribute to their honour. There are several such images yet extant, with an inscription written either on the garment, or one of the thighs. Herodotus mentions two figures of Sesostris, king of Egypt, cut upon rocks in Ionia, after his conquest of that country, with the following inscription across the breast, extending from one shoulder to the other; I conquered this country by the force of my arms. Gruter has published a naked statue made of marble, and supposed to represent the genius either of some Roman emperor, or of Antinous, who was deified by Hadrian, with an inscription on the inside of the right thigh, written perpendicularly in Roman letters, and containing the names of three persons. Near the statue, on the same side of it, stands an oval shield with the names of two other persons written round the rim in letters of the same form. In the appendix to Dempster’s Etruria Regalis, is a female image of brass, clothed in a loose tunic down to the feet, with a shorter garment over it, on the right side of which is a perpendicular inscription in Etrurian characters, extending partly on the lower garment. This figure, from the diadem on the head, and other circumstances which accompany it, Philip Bonarota, the editor of that work, supposes to have been designed for some Etrurian deity. Montfaucon has given us a male image of the same metal, dressed in a tunic, and over that another vestment something like a Roman toga, reaching to the middle of the legs, on the bottom of which is an Etrurian inscription written horizontally. There are likewise in both those writers two male figures crowned with laurel, which Montfaucon calls combatants, as the laurel was an emblem of victory. But Bonarota takes one of them for an image of Apollo, which has a chain round the neck, a garment wrapped over the right arm, and a bracelet on the left, with half boots on the legs; the rest of the body being naked has an Etrurian inscription written downward in two lines on the inside of the left thigh. The other figure has the lower part of the body clothed in a loose vestment, with an inscription upon it over the right thigh, perpendicularly written in Roman letters, which Bonarota has thus expressed in a more distinct manner than they appear in Montfaucon: POMPONIO VIRIO I.

To these may be added from Montfaucon, a marble statue of a naked combatant, with a fillet about his head in token of victory. It is drawn in two views, one exhibiting the back and the other the fore part of the body, the latter of which has in Greek letters, for , perpendicularly inscribed on the outside of the left thigh; and the former the name in the like characters and situation on the right thigh; these together make one inscription, signifying Caphisodorus filius Aeschamii. [Caphisodorus the son of Aeschlamius.]

Fuente: Biblical and Theological Dictionary

Name

Mic 1:8 (b) The prophet thus describes the utter desolation of Israel. By this unclothed illustration, Israel was to know of that which was to happen to them. (See v. 11).

Hab 3:9 (a) GOD’s words of judgment were clearly revealed without camouflage or deception.

2Co 5:3 (a) Since we cannot take any garments with us when we die, we must have His robe of righteousness, or else we would be in the presence of GOD without a garment. We cannot come into GOD’s presence unclothed. GOD has provided a robe of righteousness, and a garment of salvation. It may be also that the Lord is referring in this passage to the changed bodies which we shall have in the resurrection. It will be identical with the present bodies which we own, but will be incorruptible, and will be free from all pain, suffering and deterioration. (See also Rev 3:18).

Heb 4:13 (b) The Lord is telling us again the same truth that He gave us in Gen 3:7. He tells us very clearly that nothing can be hidden from GOD. He can see through any covering, any false religion, any false teachings, any excuses that the sinner may use to cover his sins, iniquities, trespasses and transgressions.

Rev 3:17 (a) GOD is telling these people that their real condition is seen and known by Him. Nothing about them or their lives is hidden from His eyes.

Rev 16:15 (a) GOD sees these people as having no covering at all, unless it is the robe of righteousness which He gives to those who trust in Him, and belong to Him.

Rev 17:16 (a) The false church is to be stripped of all her pretense and false claims, and will be seen in all her wickedness. All her evils will be exposed.

2Sa 7:9 (a) This represents a great and good reputation. It means the same in most of the passages in which it is mentioned, as in Isa 55:13, and Jer 13:11.

Pro 22:1 (a) The good reputation of a man is of more value than earthly possessions. (See Ecc 7:1; Isa 56:5; Isa 63:12; Jer 32:20; Zep 3:20).

Joh 1:12 (a) We are not told in this passage which name the Lord is referring to. The Lord JESUS has somewhere around two hundred names in the Bible. Each name indicates an office which He bears, and a service which He renders. The Lord is using a common principle in this passage, for if we are sick we seek for one whose name is physician. If the teeth need attention, we seek for a dentist. If the car needs fixing we seek for a mechanic. The name indicates the work which the person can do, and is really a title. Probably in the passage we are considering the name referred to is “Saviour.” As we pass along the streets of life and realize that We need to be saved from our sins, and from the penalty of them, We find this wonderful Man whose Name is Saviour, and we at once commit our cause and our case to Him. He does the saving, and therefore we prove that we believe in His Name when we take advantage of that name or title and trust our all to Him.

Rom 10:13 (a) Again in this passage we do not find mentioned what name we call upon. It may be that it is the name “Lord.” Certainly we are saved when JESUS CHRIST becomes our Lord. His lordship is put first, ahead of His other many names. Those who appeal to Him in this way find He is ready and willing to save.

Fuente: Wilson’s Dictionary of Bible Types