Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJames Hastings Dictionary of the NT: Jesus
Subjects in this Topic:
JESUS (the name).—It is strange that even this name has not yet been explained with certainty. Ἰçóïῦò (gen., dat., voc. Ἰçóïῦ ; acc. Mat_1:1; Mat_8:34, Mar_1:24, Mat_1:21 [on Ἰçóïῖ as gen. and dat. see Winer-Schmiedel, § 10, note 6]) is the Greek form of the Hebrew éִùׁåּòַ or éְäåֹùׁ֖òַ . Aquila has for the latter (Deu_1:38) ἸçóïõÜ ; in some passages Ἰçóïῦå is found (1Ch_7:27, 2Es_2:6; 2Es_2:40); see Redpath’s .
No satisfactory explanation has yet been offered of the varying forms éִäåֹùְׁòַ and éִùׁåּòַ . The high priest, for instance, who led the Jews back from Babylon with Zerubbabel, is constantly called éִäåֹùְׁòַ in the prophetical books of Haggai and Zechariah ( Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 Joshua,’ not ‘Jehoshua, as in the name of his father ‘Jehozadak’), and with equal constancy éִùׁåּòַ in the historical books of Ezra and Nehemiah (where also the name of his father is written in the abbreviated form ‘Jozadak’). Were, then, both forms used at the same time? Or is this a hint that the difference is due to later recensions, and that the form ‘Jeshua’ is later than the time of the Exile? Again, how did ‘Jehoshua’ become ‘Jeshua’? The question is the more difficult as nowhere is the intermediate form ‘Joshua’ found, as in the other names formed with ‘Jeho-,’ e.g. åֹàְúְæ side by side with éִäåֹàְçָð , etc. The nearest parallel seems to be the name of the king of Moab, who is called ‘Meshaʽ’ ( îִéùִׁò ) in the Massoretic Text of 2Ki_3:4, but ÌùóÜ in the LXX Septuagint ; or the name ‘Moah,’ which is explained as if = mç’ab in Gen_19:37. The reason for the vowel change has been sought in the analogy of names beginning with el. or merely on phocetical principles (differentiation, as rishôn from rösh, etc.) (For quite a different explanation, which will hardly stand examination, see Fr. Pratorius in ZDMG [Note: DMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft.] lix. 342) The difficulty is increased by the fact that the name is spelt éäåùåò (with åּ ) but twice (Deu_3:21, Jdg_2:7); and éäåùò may therefore have been originally ‘Jehoshaʽ’ like àֵìִéùָò alongside of àֵìִéùׁåּòַ .
Hitherto it has generally been presupposed that the name was formed from the root éùׁò ‘to save’ (or rather ‘to be safe’), like äåֹùֵׁòִ , which, according to Num_13:8; Num_13:16 and Deu_32:44, was the earlier name of ‘Joshua’; cf. the name äåùò on a Palestinian jarhandle combined by Macalister with the name éùòé 1Ch_4:20 (PEFSt, 1905, p. 330). But the dropping of the first letter is not easily explained on this theory. And the analogy of the names áֵּúֽùåּòַ , àֲìִéùåּòִ , ùׁåּòִ side by side with áֵּúֽùֶׁåּòַ , àֲìִéùåּòִ , ùׁåּòִ , points to the possibility that éְäåֹùׁ֖òַ is related to éְäåֹùֶáַò , as ùׁåּòִ is to ùֶׁáַò As to the meaning of these names nothing is certain. That to popular sentiment the name recalled the idea of salvation is proved for the OT by Num_13:8; Num_13:16, and for the NT by Mat_1:21 ‘Thou shalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from their sins.’ Perhaps also in 1Th_1:10 Ἰçóïῦí ôὸí ῥíüìåíïí ἠìᾶò , we have an allusion to this etymology. Greek Christians were reminded by the name of the root ἰÜïìáé , ‘to heal’; cf. Sib. Or. i. 351 êáἱ ôüôå äὴ íïóåñïὺò ἰÞóåôáé ; Clem. Al. Paedag. i. 7. 61 ôïéïῦôïí ἠìῖí ὄíïìá óùôçñßïõ ðñïöçôåýåé ðáéäáãùãïῦ … ἴí ʼ ïὐò ὁ ëüãïò ὁ ðåéèÞíéïò ïὐê ἰᾶôáé , ἀðåéëὴ ἰÜóåôáé , ê . ô . ë ., ib. iii. 12. 98 ὁ ἰþìåíïò ἡìῶí êáὶ óῶìá êáὶ øõ÷Þí , ôὸí ἀÀäéïí ἄíèñùðïí , Ἰçóïῦò ; Cyril of Jerusalem, Cateches. x. p. 88 Ἰçóïῦò ôïßíõí ἐóôὶ êáôὰ ôὴí ἘëëÜäá ãëῶóóáí ὁ ἰþìåíïò . ἘðåéäÜí ἰáôñüò ἐóôé øõ÷ῶí êáὶ óùìÜôùí , êáὶ èåñáðåõôὴò ðíåõìÜôùí , ôõöëῶí ìὲí áἰóèçôῶí èåñáðåõôὴò … ÷ùëῶí öáéíïìÝíùí ἰáôñüò ; Epiphanius, Haer. 29, Nazar. § 4 Ἱçóïῦò ãὰñ êáôὰ ôἠí Åâñáἰêὴí äéÜëåêôïí èåñáðåõôὴò êáëåῖôáé , ἤôïé ἰáôñὸò êáὶ óùôÞñ . Epiphanius betrays in these last words also a knowledge of the Hebrew root; and the same is the case with Chrysostom, who expressly states (Hom. 2 in Matth. p. 23), ôὸ ãἀñ Ἰçóïῦò ôïῦôï ὄíïìá ïὐê ἔóôéí Ἐëëçíéêüí , ἀëëὰ ôῇ Ἑâñáßùí öùíῇ ïὔôù ëÝãåôáé ἰçóïῦò · ὅ ἐóôéí åἱò ôÞí ἘëëÜäá ãëῶôôáí ἐñìçíåõüìåíïí , óåôÞñ · óùôὴñ äÝ , ἀðὸ ôïῦ óùóáé ôὸí ëáὸí áὐôïῦ . To the same effect is the statement of Eusebius (Dem. Ev. iv. 17, p. 199), who compares Christ with the high priest of the Return, and writes on their names, § 23, Åἰêüôùò ïὖí ôῆò åἱêüíïò ἕíåêá êáὶ ïὖôïò ôῆò ôïῦ óùôῆñïò ðñïóçãïñßáò ἠîéïῦôï … ἐðåéäὴ óùôÞñéïí èåïῦ åἰò ôἡí ἘëëÜäá öùíὴí ôὸ ôïῦ Ἰçóïῦ ìåôáëçöèὲí ὄíïìá óçìáßíåé · Ἰóïõὰ ìὲí ãὰñ Ἐâñáßïéò óùôçñßá , íéüò äὲ Íáõῆ ðáñÜ ôïῖò áὑôïῖò Ἰùóïõὲ ὀíïìÜæåôáé · Ἰùóïõὲ äÝ ἐóôéí ἸÜù óùôçñßá , ôïῦô ʼ ἔóôé èåïῦ óùôÞñéïí . åἰêüôùò åἴ ðïõ èåïῦ óùôÞñéïí ἐí ôïῖò Ἐëëçíéêïῖò ἁíôéãñÜöïéò ὠíüìóôáé , ïὑä ʼ ἄëëï ôé ἥ ôὸí Ἰçóïῦí êáôὰ ôὴí Ἑâñáßùí öùíὴí ðÝðåéóï äçëïῦóèáé ; cf. also Theodoret, ii. 385, on Is 61:10, ἐí ôῇ Ἑâñáßùí öùíῇ ôὸ ‘ ἱìÜôéïí óùôçñßïõ ’ ἰìÜôéïí ἰåóóùὰ êåῖôáé , ôïῦô ʼ ἔóôé ×ñéóôïῦ . Lagarde (Übersicht, p. 97) concludes from this that ܝܫܘܓ , the Syriac form of the name, had a double š.
Already in the oldest MSS [Note: SS Manuscripts.] of the Gr. Test. the name is written with abbreviations
H. Leclereq, in art. ‘Abréviations’ in Cabrol’s Dict. d’Archéol, Chrétienne, has a special paragraph ‘de l’abréviation ÉÇÕ , ÉÇÓ ’ (col. 177–180). The earliest coins exhibiting the symbol IHS are of Justinian ii. (685–695, and 705–711). In the legend IHSVS XPISTVS NICA found on coins of Constantine ii. (780–791), the second letter is pronounced to be the Greek ç , despite the C in NICA. On the story that the monogram of Christ was found written on the heart of Ignatius ( ðåïöïñïò ), when at his martyrdom it was laid bare by the claws of the lions, see A. Bell, The Saints in Christian Art, i. [1901] p. 205.
On the power of the name Ἰçóïῦò , which cannot be translated, see Origen, c. Cels. i. 25: like the names Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, êáὶ ὁ ἡìÝôåñïò ἰçóïῦò , ïὖ ôὀ ὁíïìá ìõñéïõò ἡäç ἑíáñãῶò ἐþñáôáé äáéìïíáò ἐîåëÜóáí øõ÷áῖí êáὶ óùìáôùí , ἑíåñççóáí åἰò ἕêåíïõò ἀö ἑ · í ἀôçëáèçóáí .
We have as yet no explanation of the statement of Irenaeus: ‘Jesus autem nomen secundum propriam Hebraeorum linguam litterarum est duarum ac dimidiae, sicut periti eorum dicunt, significans dominum eum, qui continet caelum et terram, quia Jesus secundum antiquam Hebraicam linguam cœlum est: terra autem iterum sura ussea dicitur’ (= sma uers? ‘heaven and earth’). In another passage Irenaeus writes: ‘Nihilominus autem et unigenitus et maxime autem super omnia nomen, quod dicitur Deus, quod et ipsum hebraice Baruch dicitur, et duas et dimidium habet literas.’
The Jews now write éùå , which is explained by Handler (Lexicon der Abbreviaturen, 1897) îáãðå éîú ùîå , by Lagarde (Mittcilungen, ii. 290) é× ù×åéúàáø . ‘may his name (and memory) be wiped out (and perish)’; Jastrow’s Dictionary explains it as an abbreviation of éùåò ’; Renchlin and other Christian Hebraists wrote the name éäùåä , as a combination of the tetragrammaton éäåä , with ù . wherein they found deep mysteries.
The first letter of the Greek Ἰçóïῦò seems to be treated as a consonant in the hexameter
On the spelling of the name in the Latin MSS [Note: SS Manuscripts.] of the Bible, Iesus, Ihesus, Hiesus, see Wordsworth-White on Mat_1:1 and p. 776; H. J. Lawlor, Chapters on the Book of Mulling, p. 76; the letter of Amalarius to Bp. Jonas of Orleans and to Abp. Jeremias of Sens ‘de nomine dni Iesu,’ whether mo or ihs is the correct spelling, whether the middle letter is the Greek ç or the Latin h, whether the last letter is Greek or Latin. In the Russian Church there was at one time a violent dispute about this orthographical question. In mediaeval poetry, for instance in Ekkehart iv. of St. Gall, Isus is made to rhyme with visus, etc.:
‘Virgo prior visum cunctis agnoverat Isum …
Sed nec ab his volumus nudetur laudibus Isus.’
Damasus formed the lines:
‘In rebus tantis Trina conjunctio mundI
Erigit humanum sensum laudare venustE,
Sola salus nobis et mundi summa potestaS
Venit peccati nodum dissolvere fructU
Summa salus cunctis nituit per secula terriS.’
The Mohammedan form ʽIsâ was certainly adapted to get an assonance with Mûsa (like Ibrahim with Ismail, Kabil with Habil), and not to identify the name with Esau. This was the more easy because the Nestorians pronounced the name Ishoʽ, not Jeshuʽ’ like the Jacobites. On the proposal to introduce the Mohammedan form ʽIsâ instead of Gisûʽ into the Urdu NT, see Bible House Papers, No. iii. p. 28.
That the name contains 4 vowels and one consonant doubled, and has the numerical value 888 (10+8+200+70+400+200), is shown by Sib. Or. i. 326ff. and by the speculations of the Marcosians (Iren. xv. 2; Hippol. vi. 50).
On the monograms for the name of Jesus see PRE [Note: RE Real-Encyklopädie fur protest. Theologic und Kirche.] 3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] xii. esp. p. 371 f.; Jerome, ‘de monogramma XPI’ in Anecdota Maredsolana, iii. 3 (1903), pp. 195–198; P. Cafaro, l’ebreo nome Gesu, Napoli, 1890, p. 390.
In the Ethiopian Church the name Jesus is avoided as a proper name (ZDMG [Note: DMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft.] xxviii. 309); in the Syriac Church it is ‘still very commonly used as a man’s name’ (Maclean, Dict. of the Dialects of Vernacular Syriac, 1901). It would be an interesting task to collect the proper names formed with Jesus as first or second part; they seem especially frequent in the Syriac and Persian Churches.
Eb. Nestle.