Name above all Names

[liamconnor]

In Phil 2 Paul ascribes to Jesus "the name that is above all names".

Some scholars see this as the tetragrammaton; YHWH.

Many object.

For those that object, what name is above the name YHWH?

(this is directed to those who hold the Bible as authoritative, at least to some degree)

[JehovahsWitness]

... what name is above the name YHWH?

PHILIPIANS 2:9 - NWT
For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name

Various other translations
http://biblehub.com/philippians/2-9.htm

QUESTION: Does Philipians 2:9 indictate Jesus is YHWH?

• Paul was NOT speaking in the absolute indeed the Greek word translated into the English "every" (some translations read "all", as in: "all names/ "all other names") here is a form of PAS. This word does not necessarily mean absolutely every thing. It can used in a relative sense without the thought of total inclusion of all things. In short, Paul did not say that is the name above every name in existence; Jesus name was exalted above all names, with one exception, logically that being the name of the one doing the exalting.

NOTE : In the bible a "name" is associated with ones position, authority and/or reputations so an elevated “name� could be used as a figurative expression indicating Jesus' exalted position or could be a reference to a title he received on his ascension (compare Mt. 28:18; 1Cor.15:27:28; Dan 7:13-14)

QUESTION: Could Phil 2:9 not be indicating YHWH and Jesus are EQUAL, both omnipotent Almighty and Eternal?

• The context in Philippians chapter 2 shows, Jesus received his elevated name after his resurrection; ergo before that, he did not possess it. YHWH has always possed absolute and infinite power and authority so obviously Jesus cannot be YHWH, nor can he have the authority that name (YHWH) implies. Further Paul elsewhere speaks of Jesus being elevated not above the Father but to his “right handâ€�. In the bible the "right hand" is symbolic of a person being position of privilege as a premiere assistant (Even today, in English we refer to a person's "Right hand man"), it does not mean being equal to the supreme ruling power (compare Rm.8:34).

CONCLUSION Giving that Paul acknowledges Jesus as being given authority and exalted by an Almighty God, it is a reasonable conclusion - without imposing trinitarian theology on the verse - that Paul was indeed speaking in the relative sense. Jesus is second to no other creature (created being) in existence and superior to everyone and everYthing in heaven and earth with the obvious exception of the one that GAVE him (Jesus) his authority, namely YHWH the Father (Jehovah God).

*Dy reads: “ . . . every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.� Kx and CC read similarly, but a footnote in Kx acknowledges: “ . . . the Greek is perhaps more naturally rendered ‘to the glory,’� and NAB and JB render it that way.� [/quote]



RELATED POSTS

(various trinitarian objections)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 785#872785

[Overcomer]

That verse is taken from one of my favourite passages in the Bible -- the Hymn to Christ in Philippians 2. In fact, I wrote an essay on it a few years back. I think it's important to see that sentence in context to fully understand it. Here's the entire passage from the New International Version of the Bible:

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

7
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.

8
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

9
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,

10
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

11
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.


This passage presents the three existences of Christ -- pre-Incarnate, Incarnate and post-Incarnate.

Verse 6 points to his existence prior to coming to earth. It's the verb "being" that tells us that. It's a present participle rather than a finite verb which indicates that Christ has always existed.

The word "nature", also translated as "form" in some versions, refers to the qualities which make someone who he is. In this case, by saying Jesus was in very nature God, it's saying that he has all the qualities that make him God. To put it another way, it describes his very essence and that essence is divine. It is stating that Christ is God and has always existed as such.

When it says he didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped, it's saying that he willingly humbled himself to come to earth as a man. But it isn't talking about ontological equality. It's talking about functional equality which is explained in verses 7 and 8.

The phrase "he made himself nothing" doesn't mean that he divested himself of his divinity. It means that he set aside his divine rights and abilities such as omniscience, omnipotence, etc. to live as a man constrained by time, space and knowledge just as human beings have to live. Therefore, the verses refer to his Incarnation.

Verses 9-11 speak of Christ's exaltation to come. The Greek word for "exalted" (transliterated as "huperupsoo") literally means "super-exalted" or "raised to the highest rank". This is the one and only time that particular Greek word is used in the Bible and Christ is the only being to whom it is applied.

Lastly, what is the name above all names? We know it can't be "Jesus" because he already had that name and the wording suggests it's a new name. Theologians say it is "LORD", the very name of God himself, that is, Yahweh. But note that the name represents a change in function, not in essence, because we have already seen back in the opening verses that Jesus is God in essence. The fact that these last verses echo Is. 45:23, using the same language and the title deemed only appropriate for Yahweh to describe Jesus, confirms this interpretation.

It's interesting to note that scholars believe this hymn was written only a matter of a year or two after Christ's death and resurrection, indicating that Christ's followers recognized the deity of Christ very early on.

There's more about "the name above all names" here:

http://blogs.bible.org/impact/hal_warre ... _all_names

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

First, the relevant Greek here is:

τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲ� πᾶν ὄνομα, (Phi 2:9 BGT)

PAN = all/every

Onama = name

To Hyper = above.

There is no word in here that means "every other".

Second, even if your translation had merit, it would still beg the question, "What is that name"?

Is it Jesus? Well, he already had that name; and it was a very common name: 1/20 men in Palestine during that time would have had a "name that is above every other name". Hardly worth writing about, Paul.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 3 by Overcomer]

I believe I agree with your interpretation, though I had to skim through it. I sense R. Baukham's influence...? An excellent scholar.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

First, the relevant Greek here is:

τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲ� πᾶν ὄνομα, (Phi 2:9 BGT)

PAN = all/every

Onama = name

To Hyper = above.

There is no word in here that means "every other".

Second, even if your translation had merit, it would still beg the question, "What is that name"?

Is it Jesus? Well, he already had that name; and it was a very common name: 1/20 men in Palestine during that time would have had a "name that is above every other name". Hardly worth writing about, Paul.

And you've completely missed the point of really well done post by JW. "Every other" is not the focus. It's God huperupsoó or 'highly exalting' Jesus. What is higher than God? How can God [the Father] exalt God [Jesus] above God [the trinity]? To exalt Jesus means that Jesus was lower in status. Yet after his 'obedience' (Phi 2:8) Jesus was exalted. How can part of God be lower that another part of God at anytime? If one has eyes they will see that Jesus is not part of Almighty God.

[brianbbs67]

One thing for sure, Christ's name was not Jesus. That was a Greek replacement for the Hebrew which most likely was Yahshua/yehshua/Yahoshua(it was a very common name).

Could not God, the king, elevated one to the Highest in the kingdom? Doesn't mean higher than the king. Just highest in this kingdom of heaven and earth.

[liamconnor]

One thing for sure, Christ's name was not Jesus. That was a Greek replacement for the Hebrew which most likely was Yahshua/yehshua/Yahoshua(it was a very common name).

Could not God, the king, elevated one to the Highest in the kingdom? Doesn't mean higher than the king. Just highest in this kingdom of heaven and earth.

I think most here are aware that Jesus is a translation.

The problem is that Paul says God gave to Jesus "the name that is above all names". What is that name?

The obvious candidate is the tetragrammaton.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 6 by 2timothy316]

And you've completely missed the point of really well done post by JW. "Every other" is not the focus. It's God huperupsoó or 'highly exalting' Jesus. What is higher than God? How can God [the Father] exalt God [Jesus] above God [the trinity]? To exalt Jesus means that Jesus was lower in status. Yet after his 'obedience' (Phi 2:8) Jesus was exalted. How can part of God be lower that another part of God at anytime? If one has eyes they will see that Jesus is not part of Almighty God.

God (the father) exalts Jesus (God + man). This is quite different from God (the father) exalting the Logos (i.e. the son).

[brianbbs67]

One thing for sure, Christ's name was not Jesus. That was a Greek replacement for the Hebrew which most likely was Yahshua/yehshua/Yahoshua(it was a very common name).

Could not God, the king, elevated one to the Highest in the kingdom? Doesn't mean higher than the king. Just highest in this kingdom of heaven and earth.

I think most here are aware that Jesus is a translation.

The problem is that Paul says God gave to Jesus "the name that is above all names". What is that name?

The obvious candidate is the tetragrammaton.

Not a translation, transliteration.

But, as to the point. Christ's name was elevated. That verse in Phil. references Paul in Eph 1:16-23. (according to KJ edition) God had no reason or need to elevate His.