Evolution of the Lord's 'True' Name
reviewed by Don R. Hender
There is 'much to do about' determining what some have 'determined'
to be the 'true name' of our Lord and God of the Christian world. In some cases it
comes down to 'much to do about nothing' or at least 'nothing much'. It's like putting
'single quotes' within or without side of the period at the end of a sentence. For very
good communicative meanings and inferences, to me it makes better sense to place some
single quotes within the ending period of the sentence, especially when the single
quoted material only extends to a fragmented part of the whole of the sentence and not
the whole of the sentence. It makes real good sense to put the 'single quote' out side
of the ending period when it applies to the 'whole of the sentence' or at least the major
portion of the sentence. But when the single quotes applies to only one item 'in' the
sentence, it actually seems to be 'counter communicative' to extend the single quote
beyond the end of the sentence to include the end of sentence marker 'the period.' or
'the period'. Certainly the single qouted material DOES NOT apply to the 'whole of the
sentence'. So why is the 'period' by the 'general law' of 'single quotes' including
the end of sentence marker as if the single quote applies to the whole of the sentence
when it 'DOES NOT.' So much for the 'Tom Foolery' of the English Language rules that
just DO NOT make good common sense but just applies some many arbatary rules in such an
This seems to be a point in fact about the extended discussion and even arguments over
'THE' 'true name' of the Lord. And the silliest part of those discussions
are that they are for the most part discussing 'translitterations' of various language
forms into other unrelated languages from the original language of the scriptures—'HEBREW'.
Truth is, 'written ancient Hebrew' is written without 'vowels' and even a full set of
such consonants as are in other languages into which the Hebrew is translated and/or
transliterated. Get around the difference between those two words if you can—'translated
and transliterated'. So where does a discussion go that speaks of whether 'the name' is
truely to be begin with its first letter being 'I', 'J', or 'Y'? ['Y?' as if the the
whole of the sentence applies to 'Y.' and not 'I' or 'J' nonsense.]
In ancient Hebrew there is no vowels so 'X' the 'I' to begin with. Yet Indiana Jones' dad
would not have lived without that 'I.' ['I'.] Watch the movie! When the 'original' has
no written vowels how is 'I' even a legitimate consideration but according to some
unrelated language's 'transliterated' and/or 'translated' form of the word such as
English. And then how does that one language's transliterated form of the word even
'translate' or 'transliterate' into all the other languages to be so considered the
'one true form of the word'? Come on you American English gurues or gurus, force your
language form on the rest of the world.
ONE QUOTED BIT OF 'INFORMATION STATES:
***** Note that Joshua = Yoshua [Yeshua] or Yahushua [Yehushua] because ther is no "J"
sound [or letter "J"] in Hebrew. The "J" with its "J" sound didn't come into the English
language until about 500 years ago [2015-500=1515 works—better get his facts
right*]. In fact, the [letter] "J" isn't even found in the original 1611 King James version.
* "The letter J was first distinguished from 'I' by the Frenchman Pierre Ramus in the 16th century,
but did not become common in Modern English until the 17th century, so that early 17th century works
such as the first edition of the King James Version of the Bible (1611) continued to print the name
with an I."
And the truth as far as the diference between 'J' and 'Y' or 'I,' there is even less
of any substancial discussion or agrument basis to stand on either. In the 'official'
1611 King James' version of the Bible the English language had no letter 'J' at all
in the original book. So the Greek or Latin word beginning with 'I' would be found to begin such as
'Ieseos' or 'Iesus' etc. And it good Old Testament translation of 'Joshua' or 'Jehoshua'
were to be properly followed according to the Hebrew, then those names would have
been 'properly' translated with the letter 'Y' beginnings. Remember in 1611 Old
English there just was NO COMMONLY USED LETTER 'J' in the original King James Bible! But that
Bible did not exist during the time of the Crusades, so Indie saved daddy by using
the 'i' of the Latin or Greek for 'IEHOVAH'?
Truth is 'the name' in Hebrew, when switch about allowing for Hebrew being read 'right to left' to being
in the Enlish manner of reading 'left to right' is 'YHVH'. When left in the Hebrew order the letters
are 'HVHY', which the Hebrews read the 'Y' first, then 'H', then 'V' and they 'H'. Follow that?
Hebrew 'left to right' written and read order of—.
"And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi:"
~ Exodus 17:15
This I suggest in application to today ought to be translated 'The Lord [Jehovah] is my Ensign'.
Of course Moses would likely have written it in Hebrew as shown above in yellow. And it is the
inspired text of Moses which may be used to point us to the true origin of the 'True Name of our Lord'.
And in the accompanying testament vision of Zechariah, it can further be comfirmed as to when 'the name'
was first installed. But it is a New Testament verse which pinpoints the likely actual exact occasion(s)
of the giving of the name to our Lord and Redeemer, our Deliverer. And there is actual confirming
testimony of an 'Early Christian Father' Eusebius of Ceasarea that can be used to frame the whole of it.
The Origin of 'THE NAME' of Our Lord and God
There are a number of ways in which I could present this 'evolution' of the name of the Lord. Since I
am but mortal man and consumed by the order of the ages of time, I will attempt to present it
chronologically from the beginning. When one stays to the chronology of the events it does take one
outside of the order of when the scriptures which reference the events have been written and given to
man. That is to say the chronological order of events is not the same as being in scriptural order of
scripture books, chapters and verses.
The Firstborn Spirit Son of God the Father [Elohim]
The 'Firstborn' spirit son of God the Father [Elohim] was Jehovah, also known as the Word. He was the
'firstborn of every creature' (Colossians 1:15 (4-20)). In his Ecclesiastical History of the Christian
Church, Bishop Eusebius of Ceasarea puts it together very well (EHC
Book 1 Chapter 2 Paragraph 2). As the 'Firstborn', Jehovah was the rightful heir of the Father and
the logical son of God to stand in the stead of the Father in all things (Lev. 16:32) as was a part
of the type-shadowings of the ancient temple/tabernacle performances.
The Selection of the Deliverer in the Grand Council in Heaven
When it came time for the Father to set out the Father's Plan of Happiness for his children, the Father,
being already a Celestial God on High, would select one from amoung his spirit children to act in the
name of the Father and perform the Acts of Redemption of all the children of God who would accept the
Father's plan (D&C 130:5). The Father would formally asked the body of his children, 'Who shall I send.'
And Jehovah responded, 'Here am I, send me.' Further details of that selection process and the events
surounding it may be had by a study of the scriptures (Abraham 3:27-28; Moses 4:1-4; 1 John 4:14;
Hebrew 1:1-14; and other scripture
references of the standard works). Thus Jehovah was selected to be the redeeming Savior of all mankind,
that is of those who kept their first estate. He would be the 'Deliverer' to who God's children would
look to for their salvation.
The Anointing and Empowering of the Firstborn Son
It was then and there in Heaven that the Father did 'foreordain', anoint, consencrete and empower
Jehovah to stand in his stead in all things pertaining to this temporal creation. And this was
done before the foundation of the world, before the world was created, as is was Jehovah the anointed
who under the direction of the father did so create it. (1 Peter 1:20 (10-20); Acts 10:42 (-43); Romans
8:28-34; Ephesians 1:3-12; 2 Timothy 1:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14; Acts 4:27; etc.) The then spirit son
Jehovah was endowed with the power of God and by that 'divine investiture' of the priesthood and power
of God would/did Jehovah create the heavens and the earth under the direction of the father. (See:
ECH Eusebius, Book 1, Chapter 2 Paragraphs 3 & 4)
It would likely have been in connection with these events of the selection and anointing of Jehovah
that the first extending 'naming' of our Lord did take place. Jehovah had been selected and anointed
to be the Redeemer, Savior and Deliverer of God's children in from their fall to the temporal world,
which also Jehovah was empowered to create. It is purely logical the the his name became 'Jehovah-Delivered'
and/or 'Jehovah-Savior', the combined form being that of Jehoshua meaning Jehovah - Deliverer or
Jehovah - Savior and has thence been elaborated as being 'Jehovah is Salvation'. That name Jehoshua
would be in short form that of Joshua and/or such as Jeshua etc. [One may put in the 'Y' instead of
the English 'J' according to one's own language preference. Chances are that all such language
variations are not exactly what the Adamic language was at any rate as all the languages were 'babeled'
at the time of 'Babel'.]
The Temporal Creation of Heaven and Earth
And it was by this anointing and empowerment that the Spirit God Jehovah, working under the direction
of the Father, did proceed to create the heavens and the earth. Those events are so well known and
atested to throughout the scriptures that no particular references are here given. But to Bishop
Eusebius' historical testimony of how it was, was so well known to him that he included it in his
Ecclesiastical History are just previously referenced and linked. Over that times of creation did
Lucifer, who rebelled against God and His Christ, Lucifer being of the nature of a 'firebrand' against
the authority of God, did persuade others to follow him in his war of words against God. And thus
the next confirming event also took place.
The Council of Determination and Proclamation
Lucifer opposed God's selection of Jehovah, even though Jehovah was the rightful heir of the Father,
he being the Firstborn son in the spirit. And due to the manner of his opposition Lucifer began known
by the name of Satan or the accuser or opposer. Thus when the earth had been completed in its creation
preparation, it came time to 'determine' the fate of Lucifer and his followers and to reconfirm the
Father selection and appointment of Jehovah as 'Jehoshua'. There is a vision given to Zechariah to
see and write the event of that preexistent Council of Determination and/or Proclamation. It is
found in Zechariah Chapter 3 and may be read there. As most
people attempt to do, the then Jews adapted Zechariah's vision to themselves and performed it as one
of their performances. If they understood that Jehoshua was Jesus Christ and not the current priest
of the temple Joshua, we may have had less of directly determinable understanding of it actually being
of the preexistent event envolving God, Jehovah and Lucifer.
As in many such visions taken from the all seeing eye of God, Zechariah had a messenger guide showing
him the vision and what to take notice of. He was shown Jehovah as Jehoshua and Lucifer as Satan
standing before God the Father. God the Father rebukes Satan and condemns him and it would be immediately
after this council determination that Lucifer and his angels would be cast out of heaven down to earth
without ever to receive a body of flesh and bone. The Father then would review through the plan of
Jehovah taking upon himself the sins of the world and what would be required of him to successfully
perform to bring it about even down to the daily of the Lord, the Millennium' and to also include the
empowerment of the finally judgment of the Father's children.
The Further Creation Processes
It would be then at this time that 'man would be created'. That is Jehovah under the direct direction
and afiliation of Elohim, as it would seem, would create man, that is the temporal tabernacle of
man's spirit for the spirit to dwell in', in the image of 'us' Gods. (Gensis 1:26-27). Verse 26 uses
the plural pronouns of reference of 'us' and 'our' as both Jehovah and Elohim were present. To
Mahonri Moriancumr, Jehovah discloses that he created the body of man after the image of his spirit,
for at the time he was a God of Spirit, not having received his temporal body yet at that time (see
Ether 3). And thus we learn that our spirit is what its 'glove' looks like 'head, sholders, knees
and toes; eyes, ears, mouth and nose.'
In reverence to the Lord, his 'name' was not often used in common daily language though we do know
that he did use the name of Jehovah. But there are a number of names by which he is/was also known
by which happened to also be given to man. The name David means beloved and it was Jehovah who was
the 'Beloved' son of God before the name was given to David. The name 'Melchizedek' was also one
of the title names of Jehovah the 'King of Righteousness', which was given to the man, the leader
of the people of the earlier Jerusalem, the 'city of peace', to whom Abraham paid his tithes. Further
it is not Jesus being named after Joshua, but rather it is Moses who renamed Oshea the son of Nun
by that holy name of Jehovah, Jehoshua (Numbers 13:16). And further, according to Eusebius, even
Aaron was given one of the names of Jehovah is that he was 'the aointed' of Moses. (See also
EHC, Eusebius, Book 1, Chapter 3, Paragraph 2
The Names of Jesus and Christ
We have established what the 'Hebrew' transliterated 'name' is, that being Jehoshua or Jahoshua or
Yehoshua etc. And we now fast forward to the other such names as are also in use. Our New Testament
record states that Joseph and Mary were commanded to name their son JESUS. But Jesus is a Greek/Latin
name that has been further transliterated into and English form. In Hebrew the name JESUS is
Joshua or more formally 'Jehoshua' [both still being transliterations]. But even in the Greek and the
Latin forms the name began with the letter 'I' because the letter 'J' was yet to be born into the
Futher the name Christ is but the rough language equivalent of the word and meaning of Messiah in
Greek. But yet both being 'transliterated' into their English forms again. But to all of that, one
must come to the conclusion that all languages since the tower of Babel are not the original laguage
of Adam and/or God. So when Joseph Smith gave us the inspired vision of the book of Moses what was
he to do? For certainly Moses in those writings did name the Lord by his proper names of meaning
Jehovah the Deliverer/Saviour and 'the anoited one'. So would Joseph be given the Adamic names to
use? Nope. Joseph just used what would be most readily understood in the language of the people,
English. And he used Jesus and Christ.
So what is the 'true' name of our Lord and God? Well he has many and many transliterations and
translations into many languages of those names and titles. I've identified over 1500 so far and
I really haven't gotten into all of the languages per-say. To that I conclude that a 'rose' is
a 'rose' and should smell as sweet by any such name given. Oh, and the ancient Hebrew name of
Just be sure to read the HEBREW characters names from right to left or you will be saying those
names backwards—as if you could read Hebrew and not know that already. And try to change
Jehovah and Jehoshua into Yehovah and Yehoshua or you'll offend a modern Jew or someone who thinks
they are thinking like a Jew. Actually faithful Jews do not appreciate you saying or using the
name at all. And don't become to confused because if you are a 'true' Christian and not a 'JW',
then God is the same being as Jesus, but if you are Catholic they are different 'persons' but
not in the standard difinition of 'persons' that you would normally understand them as being. And
for sure watch out for us Mormons, we like to give Jesus a Father, but we call him Elohim and
do believe Jesus and Jehovah are the same God and Lord. What else? Oh, don't forget the 'I'.
Not the 'iota' one, but the Greek and Latin one or you'll not be able to help Harrison save his
In truth and kidding aside, I believe that God appreciates you calling him by any appropiate name
associated with him as long as you do it sincerely and not in vain. Pray to him every day and often.
He is real and hears your prayers of the heart. It is the false pride of men that fail to believe
in him and think themself as his better. And sadly those who contend one against the other over his
name are often just as prideful and think they know more than they do, which 'we' do not.