Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines a quandary as "A state of perplexity or doubt." In this chapter, we encounter five topics with potential opposite and conflicting answers. The urgency of our quandary, however, is that inspired and inerrant Scripture does not allow contradictory answers regarding the presence of the Tetragrammaton in the Christian Greek Scriptures. The Tetragrammaton was either used in the original writings and is subject to textual verification at each of its appearances, or it was not, and therefore cannot be inserted into the translated text.

    We must recognize, however, that Jehovah God did not introduce our present quandary. It was never his intent to give us Scriptures which contained perplexity or doubt about its written content. Nor has he allowed the process of manuscript preservation to produce uncertainty regarding the original words used by the inspired Christian writers.^[1] Our quandary today is a result of conflicting reports regarding the contents of the historical Greek manuscripts which we now possess. Confusion will result when speculative wording is introduced into the inspired Christian writers' texts. The Tetragrammaton cannot be added to the Christian Greek Scripture text without perplexing results in the absence of any manuscript or historical evidence showing that it was used by the original writers.

[1] This statement does not disallow the need for textual criticism. The real foundation of the quandary of this chapter, however, goes beyond the issues of textual criticism. This quandary exists because accepting the presence of the Tetragrammaton in the Christian Greek Scriptures is contingent on elevating a hypothetical body of first-century Greek manuscripts to the status of primary inspiration. These hypothetical first-century manuscripts which purportedly contain the Tetragrammaton have never been specifically identified, have never been reported by the early patristics, and have left no copies preserved as extant manuscripts.

The quandary of יהוה or Κύριος

    The goal of this book is to evaluate the textual and historical evidence supporting the Tetragrammaton in the original Christian Greek Scriptures. We are particularly concerned with textual information which has come to light since the Christian Scriptures of the New World Translation was completed in the late 1940's. In this examination we have successfully avoided theological and subjective discussions of Scripture or the person of God.

    However, without losing sight of our goal and its objective approach, we must eventually confront the reason we are studying the Tetragrammaton in the first place. The presence—or absence—of the Tetragrammaton in the Christian Greek Scriptures is not a trivial exercise to determine irrelevant wording of ancient Greek manuscripts. Rather, the Tetragrammaton's presence—or absence—confronts us with momentous implications to our faith. Consequently, we must evaluate five topics from the Tetragrammaton or Kyrios debate which contain inherent quandary.

QUANDARY #1: A TRANSLATION DISCREPANCY

    A conflict between the two Christian Greek Scriptures published by the Watch Tower Society introduces our first quandary. The word Kyrios is the choice of the Greek text and is translated as Lord in the interlinear portion of the Watch Tower's Greek text, while the New World Translation uses the divine name Jehovah for the same passages. Thus, there seems to be simultaneous endorsement for two contradictory assertions. The first assertion by the Kingdom Interlinear Translation Greek text is that the Tetragrammaton was not used by the original writers.^[2] The second assertion is that the New World Translation properly restores the Tetragrammaton 237 times.

[2] This is the obvious assertion of the text inasmuch as the Westcott and Hort Greek text purports to reproduce the exact wording of the original documents.

    If the Greek text published by the Watch Tower Society is authentic, then the appropriate word is Kyrios. Generally, Kyrios is translated as Lord in reference to Jesus Christ. Lord is the preferred translation choice of the New World Translation in 406 cases.^[3] On the other hand, the New World Translation uses the divine name Jehovah in 237 instances. If Jehovah is indeed correct, then the Greek text is in error.^[4]

[3] Refer to Appendix C.

[4] Obviously, the original manuscripts were not written in English. The most accurate statement above would be "If יהוה is indeed correct, then the Greek text is in error."

    This conflict between the use of Kyrios and the Tetragrammaton at a single location presents a unique disparity. Thus, we encounter three assertions which cannot coexist without compromise:

1. First, we concur with the authors of "All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial" that "The Greek Scriptures we have today are substantially the same as when they were written…Sir Frederic Kenyon [is quoted as saying] 'The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed.'"^[5]

   [5] "All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial," p. 319.

2. The text of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation clearly demonstrates that Kyrios is the Greek word used and that the manuscripts substantiating its occurrence originated between the second, and never later than the fourth century C.E. Manuscript evidence given in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation clearly demonstrates that Kyrios was fully accepted by the Christian congregation as early as 104 years—to no later than 301 years—from the time of its original writing.

3. On the other hand, the "J" footnotes substantiating the use of the Tetragrammaton (translated as Jehovah in the New World Translation) are also given as evidence that the inspired Christian writers used יהוה, though this evidence is from a much later period of time. The earliest date given is 1385. If the third assertion is true, then the first assertion is compromised and the second becomes highly improbable as we have seen earlier. If the second assertion is true, the first assertion remains true, but the third assertion is invalidated.

    We struggle with this apparent discrepancy. If the Greek text is reliable, then all of its words must be reliable, and the preeminence given to the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew translations made in the 14th century C.E. cannot be justified.

    We understand the limitations the translators faced with the textual information which was available in the late 1940's. With the greater availability of manuscript information today, however, we must strive for a reconciliation of the above discrepancy. If we do not reach a satisfactory solution, we would have a Greek text which would be highly reliable at all other points, and yet would be consistently at fault in the single area of its transmission of the Tetragrammaton. That is, the Greek word Kyrios would be regarded as the correct reading and should be translated as Lord in all cases where it refers to Jesus' human ministry. Yet, in selected cases where the passage is referring to divine attributes, the Greek word Kyrios would be regarded as an error.

    Therefore, we must answer this first quandary. We are told that the Greek text of the Christian Scriptures is trustworthy for faith. Do we accept these Scriptures as published in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, or do we acknowledge the alternate wording of the New World Translation in these 237 instances as having precedence over the Greek text?

    This first quandary we encounter is particularly troubling for those of us seeking Jehovah's guidance in our lives from the Scriptures. The presence of Kyrios in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation and Jehovah (derived from the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew versions) in the New World Translation is not merely an issue of translation wording. The presence of either Kyrios or the Tetragrammaton represents a disparity in authenticity between the two texts. One of the two texts must be accepted as authoritative, while the other is rejected as inferior in these 237 instances. Both cannot be authentic.

QUANDARY #2: WHICH TEXT IS INSPIRED?

    In the first quandary, we encountered the problem of two contradictory texts. We now encounter the important implication of the inspiration of the text.

    How do we delineate the biblical text we accept as the inspired revelation of God? Is God's revelation in the Christian Scriptures confined to the best available Greek texts? Or do we acknowledge that sources other than the earliest Greek manuscripts, such as Hebrew translations created since the 14th century, carry greater authority?

    We agree among ourselves that the text we will accept as authentic is that which most closely reproduces the actual words of the original inspired Christian writers. Therefore, the trustworthiness of inspired Scripture is demonstrated by a historically verifiable text.

    We must first evaluate the Greek text of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation.^[6] In the book JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, the writers describe the Kingdom Interlinear Translation on page 610:

    As part of the earnest effort of the New World Bible Translation Committee to help lovers of God's Word to get acquainted with the contents of the original Koine (common Greek) text of the Christian Greek Scriptures, the committee produced The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures. This was first published by the Watch Tower Society in 1969 and then updated in 1985. It contains The New Testament in the Original Greek, as compiled by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort. At the right-hand side of the page appears the New World Translation text (the 1984 revision in the updated edition). But then, between the lines of Greek text, there is another translation, a very literal, word-for-word rendering of what the Greek actually says according to the basic meaning and grammatical form of each word. This enables even students who cannot read Greek to find out what is actually in the original Greek text. [Italics added.]

[6] The Greek text of Westcott and Hort is identified as a single text. Properly stated, however, verification of the Tetragrammaton does not come from a single text but from a composite of multiple Hebrew translations.

    On the same page, Thomas Winter is quoted from "The Classical Journal" as saying of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation:

    This is no ordinary interlinear: the integrity of the text is preserved, and the English which appears below it is simply the basic meaning of the Greek word. Thus the interlinear feature of this book is no translation at all. A text with instant vocabulary more correctly describes it.^[7]

[7] See a similar endorsement on the cover of The Watchtower, Feb. 1, 1998.

    There can be no debate that the Greek text of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation uses the word Greek Kyrios (Κύριος) 714 times throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures. This includes the entire 223^[8] instances in which the New World Translation renders Kyrios as Jehovah.^[9]

[8] Not all Jehovah references are derived from Kyrios. (See pages 18-19.)

[9] See the summary information on pages 50-51.

    On what basis can the divine name be reinstated to the Greek Scriptures of the New World Translation? There is only one acceptable justification for this translation choice. Since the inspired Christian Scriptures is the written record of the original authors, there would need to be incontrovertible evidence that the apostles themselves used the Tetragrammaton in their original writings. Further, this evidence would be admissible only if it could be textually verified in the most authoritative extant Greek manuscripts. Speculation regarding possible use cannot be employed to alter Jehovah's inspired Scriptures.

    We are thus faced with a second quandary. In regards to the 237 Jehovah references, is the most accurate reproduction of the inspired Word of God represented in the earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, or is it to be found in Hebrew translations from the 14th century and later?

    This second quandary is imposing. When we deny the authenticity of any portion of the best textual evidence for the Greek Scriptures, and when, in its place, we substitute the wording of a group of Hebrew translations which were based on those same Greek texts, we have redefined inspiration. We have denied the inspiration of the Greek texts in these 237 instances, and have given specific wording found in certain Hebrew versions a superior status of divine inspiration. Are we free to redefine inspiration in this way with no textual evidence of the Tetragrammaton in the original inspired Christian writings?

QUANDARY #3: BLASPHEMY AND THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES

    A third quandary is encountered in the inspired Christian writers' use of Hebrew Scripture quotations governed by laws forbidding blasphemy. This prohibition would prevent the Greek Scripture authors from citing a Hebrew Scripture verse which is true only of Jehovah and subsequently applying that verse to a mere created being. Yet, we frequently see a pattern in the Christian Greek Scriptures where the inspired Christian writers quoted a Hebrew Scripture verse which is true of Jehovah and then applied it to Jesus.

    Using Jehovah's holy name falsely is blasphemy and was met with serious consequences. (See Deuteronomy 5:11 and Leviticus 24:15-16.) The writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures knew this. The book Aid to Bible Understanding tells us that it constituted blasphemy if Jehovah's attributes were ascribed to another being. On page 239, under the heading "BLASPHEMY" IN CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURE TIMES, the authors say,

    Blasphemy includes the act of claiming the attributes or prerogatives of God, or ascribing these to another person or thing. (Compare Acts 12:21, 22.)

    Thus, in all instances where Hebrew Scriptures using the divine name were quoted in the Christian Greek Scriptures and then were applied to Jesus, the inspired Christian writers could have done only one of three things. (We are talking about the original writers-not later scribes and copyists):

a) They could have copied^[10] the Hebrew Scripture passage word-for-word in the Greek language and then inserted the Hebrew letters of the Tetragrammaton into the Greek text when the divine name was found.

[10] In most instances, the inspired Christian writers quoted Hebrew Scripture verses from the Septuagint (which was already written in Greek) rather than translating them into Greek from the original Hebrew language. Insight on the Scriptures says, "In a number of cases the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures evidently made use of the Greek Septuagint translation when quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures." (Vol. 1, p. 1206). In some cases, the inspired Christian writer actually translated the verses into the Greek language as he wrote. We are reporting the three possibilities above as though the inspired Christian writers were transcribing the Hebrew Scripture verses from the Greek language Septuagint. The effect of this argument would have been the same in those cases where the inspired Christian writers were translating from the Hebrew Scriptures, though it would have also involved the translation process. In addition, merely for the sake of this argument, we will also assume that the Septuagint copy which was used employed the Hebrew letters of the Tetragrammaton rather than the Greek word Kyrios.

b) The original writers could have intentionally blasphemed by copying the passage which referred to Jehovah, replacing the divine name with Kyrios. (This possibility is obviously unacceptable.)

c) Finally, they could have copied the Hebrew Scripture passage and intentionally inserted the title Kyrios in the place of the Tetragrammaton with the full understanding of the early Christian congregation that the action was appropriate and did not constitute blasphemy.

    We must object to the second possibility! To those of us who love and reverence Jehovah's revelation to man in the Holy Scriptures, the second possibility is neither worthy of Jehovah himself nor of the writers he chose to convey His message to mankind. We believe that "All Scripture is inspired of God…" (2 Timothy 3:16). We could never concede that God's chosen writers intentionally manipulated the text.

    Thus, we are left with only two possibilities. The first is that the original writers used the Tetragrammaton and, subsequently—either through negligence or through intentional manipulation of the text by later scribes and copyists—the Tetragrammaton was changed to Kyrios to make a direct reference to Jesus. The second possibility is that the writers themselves intentionally—and with the early Christian congregation's full knowledge and approval—used the title Kyrios (which frequently identified Jesus) in place of the Tetragrammaton. By doing this, they ascribed the attributes of Jehovah's name to Jesus.^[11]

[11] We have not said that the original writers substituted Kyrios for the Tetragrammaton. The idea of strict substitution is too rigid as a category. If the third possibility were true, then it would also be the case that the title Kyrios was applicable to either Jehovah or Lord [Jesus]. Certainly, many verses could be read using the divine name as found in the New World Translation. Jesus' statement to the Devil is a good example: "It is Jehovah your God you must worship…" (Luke 4:8). However, this flexibility of application would imply an equality between יהוה and Kyrios which is found in this third possibility rather than an inequality between them which requires that the separate identities be maintained. We will fully develop this idea in Chapter 14.

    Consider the importance of these two possibilities. First, if the original writers did use the Tetragrammaton, then we must be able to find strong manuscript evidence of its use in early Greek Scriptures. We cannot imagine that Jehovah would allow confusion between his divine name and the title of a mere created being without sufficient evidence to correct the error. On the other hand, what if the original writers did use Jesus' title in place of the Tetragrammaton? It was either the highest form of blasphemy or it was the strongest statement possible of the unique and total equality of Jesus with Jehovah.

    The importance of the final alternative should be clear. For example, consider Isaiah 45:21-24 which says:

    "Is it not I, Jehovah, besides whom there is no other God…By my own self I have sworn…that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear, saying, 'Surely in Jehovah there are full righteousness and strength.'"

    If the Apostle Paul used the Tetragrammaton in this quotation, Romans 14:11 would read as it does in the New World Translation:

    "'As I live,' says Jehovah, 'to me every knee will bend down, and every tongue will make open acknowledgment to God.'"

    On the other hand, if the Apostle Paul was referring to Jesus when he used the title Kyrios (which is the choice of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation), then the verse would read:

    "'As I live,' says the Lord (Jesus), 'to me every knee will bend down, and every tongue will make open acknowledgment to God.'"[NWT wording]^[12]

[12] It is interesting to note that the same author (the Apostle Paul) quotes Isaiah 45:21-24 in Philippians 2:10-11: "So that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend…and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Kyrios (Lord) to the glory of God the Father." However, with the same wording and the same human author, the New World Translation renders Kyrios as Lord in one case (Philippians 2:10-11), and as Jehovah (with added quotation marks) in the other (Romans 14:11). This introduces an interesting contradiction. If the Isaiah passage is read in context, it is very clear that Jehovah is saying, "Is it not I, Jehovah, besides whom there is no other God…There being none excepting me?…By my own self I have sworn…that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear…" In these two verses, the Greek text published in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation has both Jehovah and the Lord (Jesus) receiving the worship which the Isaiah passage has reserved solely for Jehovah. A careful reading of the 3 passages in their entirety-using the Kingdom Interlinear Text where applicable-is encouraged.

    If Paul himself used Jesus' title Kyrios, then either Paul was guilty of blasphemy, or, under the inspiration of God, he was identifying Jesus (Kyrios) with Jehovah.

    A logical question could be asked, "Can we know whether the original writers intended to use the Tetragrammaton or whether they purposely replaced the divine name with Kyrios when quoting these Hebrew Scriptures?" Without a statement from either the writers themselves or other reliable historical documents, we can know nothing of their decision process while writing. However, we can infer what they decided to do from the evidence we find in their writing. If the writers intended to use the Tetragrammaton, we would expect to find ample evidence within Greek manuscripts to substantiate its use in the original Christian Greek Scriptures. On the other hand, if they did not intend to use the Tetragrammaton, then we would expect to find clear evidence that they used the title Kyrios which is most frequently applied to Jesus. If the evidence shows that the original writers used Kyrios in these verse locations, then we know that they copied the Hebrew Scripture passage, intentionally inserting Jesus' title for the Tetragrammaton. By extension, we know that whatever the inspired Christian writers wrote was done under inspiration, with the full understanding of the early Christian congregation, and their action did not constitute blasphemy.

    More simply stated, the inspired Christian writers wrote exactly what they intended to write. When the addressee received the original letter, each word contained in the scroll was precisely the word the writer intended the congregation or individual to read. The textual process does not debate the author's intention. It is aimed only at restoring the words of the original document. When we have exactly reproduced the contents of the original document, we can be assured that we have the precise word which the author intended to communicate.

    For a complete perspective of the significance of this issue, the reader is encouraged to carefully study each reference in the two columns of Appendix B titled Hebrew Scripture quotation using the divine name and Hebrew Scripture quotation referring to the divine name. First, read the passage in its complete context from the Hebrew Scripture. Then, using a Kingdom Interlinear Translation, read both the English interlinear portion and the verse from the New World Translation. You will discover that the few examples given in this section inadequately illustrate how extensively the divine name from the Hebrew Scriptures was used in these verses.

    We must carefully examine the Hebrew Scripture verses cited by the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Many of these verses contain statements which are applicable only to Jehovah God. When these verses are cited by the inspired Christian writers as applying to Kyrios, they have committed blasphemy if Kyrios is a created being. Under inspiration, the Apostles would not blaspheme by applying a verse to another which was true only of Jehovah God. We face an insurmountable quandary when we introduce a condition^[13] which causes the inspired Christian writers to blaspheme in their use of Hebrew Scripture citations. As we have seen throughout this book, this problem is alleviated (though not eliminated) if the original manuscripts used the Tetragrammaton. If, however, there is no textual evidence for the Tetragrammaton in the original manuscripts, then we must reconcile the full impact of this quandary without resorting to inserting the Tetragrammaton into the text where it was not originally written.

[13] We introduce a condition foreign to the Scriptures' intent when we redefine Jesus' person outside of the understanding and intent of the inspired Christian writers.

QUANDARY #4: THE SUBJECT IS IDENTIFIED WITH "GOD…THE ALMIGHTY"

    A fourth quandary deals with the context of numerous passages referring to "God…the Almighty." If the inspired Christian writer used the Tetragrammaton in these verses, identification of יהוה with "God…the Almighty" is straightforward. However, if the inspired Christian writer used the word Kyrios, we are faced with the quandary wherein Kyrios is identified as God Almighty.

    When the Apostle John was on the Isle of Patmos, he was given a vision which we now know as the book of Revelation. John extolled a divine being numerous times throughout the book. At Revelation 1:8 he quotes this One as saying:

    "I am the Alpha and the Omega" says [then John wrote either "Lord"^[14] or "Jehovah"^[15] whom he identified as "God"], "the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty."

[14] Lord is the translation choice of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation at both Revelation 1:8 and 11:17.

[15] Jehovah is the translation choice of the New World Translation at both Revelation 1:8 and 11:17.

    Again, at Revelation 11:17 John wrote,

    "We thank you, [again, John wrote either "Lord" or "Jehovah" whom he again identified as "God"], the Almighty, the one who is and who was, because you have taken your great power and begun ruling as king."

    We need to see the sharp contrast between these two textual choices. We can compare the sense of the verse in the New World Translation and the Kingdom Interlinear Translation. (The quotation from the Kingdom Interlinear Translation comes directly from the interlinear portion. Consequently, the word order is that of the Greek sentence itself.)

    If John used the Tetragrammaton when he wrote these two verses, then it is clear that God and the Almighty refer to Jehovah. On the other hand, if John used the Greek word Kyrios,^[16] then the subject of these two verses is the one to whom the title Kyrios applies. Since John consistently used the title Kyrios to refer to Jesus throughout the book of Revelation,^[17] then it would be proper to understand that John was identifying the Lord (Jesus) with "God" and the "Almighty." This is particularly true for Revelation 1:8 because Revelation 1:17-18 (quoted below) identifies Jesus with the title First and Last which is identical in meaning with the title Alpha and Omega, which are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. Rev. 17:14 7:14 11:4 fn

    "Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last, and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever…"

[16] The Greek word Kyrios (Κύριος) meaning Lord, is the word used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation.

[17] According to the Kingdom Interlinear Translation Greek text, the Apostle John used the word Kyrios 19 times when referring to Lord. In addition, John used Kyrios twice in which the context identified another personage. (One instance is the second occurrence of "lord" in the phrase, "Lord of lords," [Kyrios of kyrios] found at 17:14. The other is John's address to one of the older persons at 7:14 which is translated as lord.) A third instance is unclear. (At 11:4 Kyrios appears as "lord of the earth" in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, and "Lord of the earth" in the New World Translation.) For a complete reference to all uses of the Greek word Kyrios in the book of Revelation, see the second section of Appendix C.

    There are other similar examples in the book of Revelation. Notice each of the following verses as quoted from the New World Translation and the Kingdom Interlinear Translation:

    Similar instances are found in the book of Revelation where the subject, whether Lord or Jehovah, is identified with God. (See Revelation 4:8 and 11, 15:3, 18:8, 19:6, 21:22, and 22:5-6.) Identical patterns are found in other portions of the Christian Greek Scriptures as well. The important issue to notice is this: if the Tetragrammaton was used by the original author in the verses cited, then the reference was to Jehovah, whom John was referring to as "God...the Almighty." On the other hand, if the Apostle John wrote the Greek word Kyrios (as given in the Greek text of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation and 5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts), then the Lord Jesus was identified with^[18] "God...the Almighty."

[18] The wording concerning Jesus as being "identified with," or "included with the subject as 'God ...the Almighty,'" is adequately self-explanatory at this point. We will make an important qualification in Chapter 14 regarding the dual usage of the word Kyrios. For now we will continue to use the statement as it reads. When referring to the Kingdom Interlinear Translation's use of Kyrios, we will simply report it as saying: "Jesus is identified with," or "Jesus himself is included with the subject as 'God ...the Almighty.'"

    Whether or not the original authors of the Greek Scriptures used the Tetragrammaton is of great importance to each of us. In the examples we have observed, if John did not use the Tetragrammaton at Revelation 1:8 or 11:17, then John, under inspiration, said that Jesus himself was included in the address with "God…the Almighty." Though the writers of the article "Salvation, What It Really Means" (The Watchtower, August 15, 1997, p. 6) reached their conclusion apart from the Greek text at these verses, they certainly understood the importance of the issue when they said,

    Has your church taught you the true relationship between God and Christ? Or have you been led to believe that Jesus himself is Almighty God? Your salvation depends upon having the correct understanding. (Emphasis added.)

    The fourth quandary was created by the absence of any textual evidence supporting apostolic use of the Tetragrammaton in the original writings. The title Kyrios is inextricably linked with the person of Jesus. Yet, such writers as John in the book of Revelation identify the title Kyrios with God Almighty.

QUANDARY #5: CERTAIN PASSAGES ASSIGN THE SUBJECT ATTRIBUTES OF GOD HIMSELF

    Though similar in result to passages which identify the subject of a verse with "God…The Almighty," there is a fifth quandary dealing with attribution rather than identification. Many passages unique to the Christian Greek Scriptures give the subject equality with the Father by attributing qualities to him which are reserved for Jehovah God. These include many passages in the Greek Scriptures where Kyrios (Lord) is translated Jehovah. These verses say something about the subject which could only be true of Jehovah. If the verse is not a quotation from the Hebrew Scriptures, then the passage must be carefully studied to see to whom the verse is referring in the Greek Scripture, because the subject is being given attributes which belong to Jehovah himself.

    Of the 237 occurrences of the name Jehovah in the Christian Greek Scriptures of the New World Translation, only 112 are quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in which the name of Jehovah is found in either the verse quoted or in its context.^[19] For example, Isaiah 45:23 says, "Is it not I, Jehovah…that to me every knee will bend down…" This is quoted in Romans 14:11, "'As I live,' says Jehovah, 'to me every knee will bend down…'" This is a direct quotation because the name of Jehovah is part of the citation.

[19] In some cases, the category into which a verse should be placed may be uncertain. For that reason, it is best to use these numbers as approximations rather than as exact figures. The reader may wish to do his own count. See footnote 7 on page 50.

On the other hand, 125^[20] of the 237 occurrences do not cite any Hebrew Scripture passages. They are merely passages which use Kyrios (Lord)-or occasionally Theos (God)-in the Christian Greek Scripture text. It is this last group of 125 occurrences of the name Jehovah in the New World Translation's Christian Greek Scriptures in which there is no quotation source in the Hebrew Scriptures which concern us here.

[20] See footnote 8 on page 50.

    From the perspective of the Watch Tower Society, there are many passages in the Christian Greek Scriptures in which the Tetragrammaton must be the original word used-otherwise, in many cases, the passage would be giving Jesus attributes of Jehovah God. Earlier in this chapter we briefly examined Philippians 2:10-11. This passage in Philippians equally illustrates this present quandary. Clearly, the quotation from Isaiah 45 is saying that every knee will bow to Jehovah. This devotion and worship is reserved for him alone. Yet Philippians 2 tells us that Jesus also will receive worship and devotion which belongs to Jehovah. Paul the Apostle ascribes to Jesus this same devotion which belongs to Jehovah God.

    Another example of attributes belonging to Jehovah is given at Revelation 4:11. This verse would read quite differently, depending on whether the Tetragrammaton or Kyrios was used.

    When we look at the Kingdom Interlinear Translation's Greek and English portion of this verse, we quickly understand the inherent conflict of this passage. The interlinear portion reads:

    The New World Translation quoted in the right hand margin renders the verse:

    "You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created."

    However, if we use the English word order of the New World Translation, the Kingdom Interlinear Translation would have us read the verse:

    "You are worthy, Kyrios, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created."

    The magnitude of this final quandary should be quite apparent. If the original writers used the Greek title Kyrios rather than the Tetragrammaton for such verses, then, under inspiration of God, Kyrios is vested with attributes which belong to Jehovah God himself.

Resolving the quandary

    Each of the preceding five topics result from an expectation that the Tetragrammaton was used by the inspired Christian writers. In the absence of textual evidence that the Tetragrammaton was included in the original writings, we feel a tension. In some cases this tension results from the conflict generated by the presence of both Kyrios and the Tetragrammaton for the same passage when comparing the New World Translation and the Kingdom Interlinear Translation. In other instances, the tension results from the absence of the Tetragrammaton in passages where it is anticipated.

    In both cases, the tendency is to resolve the Tetragrammaton or Lord quandary with a theological or logical explanation. Yet, neither of these responses are correct.

    In reality, these five topics represent a solitary quandary which is resolved with a single solution. We must determine historically and textually the exact word used by the inspired Christian writers, whether it is the Tetragrammaton or Kyrios. Subsequently, our understanding of the subject of each verse, whether it is Jehovah or Lord, must be based on the inspired wording of Scripture itself. We cannot force the text to say what the apostolic authors did not write in order to protect our theological position.

Concluding the Tetragrammaton or Lord debate

    This book asked the same question raised by the translators of the New World Translation when they began work in 1947: "Did the original inspired Christian writers use the Tetragrammaton in 237 instances while writing the Christian Greek Scriptures?"^[21]

[21] This question was introduced in the Overview on page vi.

    In order to answer that question, we avoided theological discussions or sectarian interpretations of Scripture. We turned to the only proper sources of information; the Greek Scripture manuscripts themselves.

    We carefully studied the best and oldest Greek manuscripts available today. We evaluated the entire Jehovah footnote system in the Westcott and Hort Greek text. In no case is there any indication in the earliest Greek manuscripts that the Tetragrammaton was ever used by the original Greek Scripture writers.

    We then evaluated numerous Hebrew version sources. Though we can easily find the Tetragrammaton used in these translations, we quickly realized that these translations were made from the very Greek text which has been demonstrated to contain Kyrios in 223 of the 237 Jehovah references. We also discovered that the probable Hebrew Gospel of Matthew written by the Apostle himself contained a circumlocution for The Name rather than the Tetragrammaton.

    Finally, we returned to questions related to Greek manuscripts and historical documents. We discovered that one portion of the Greek text of the Christian Scriptures is verifiable to within 25 years of its writing by the Apostle John. In many cases, the actual verses supposedly containing the Tetragrammaton can be verified as actually containing Kyrios to within little more than one hundred years of the original writing. We examined corroborative evidence and discovered that there was no mention of the Tetragrammaton in the Greek Scriptures by any early patristic. We also discovered that the time interval was too short to establish a heretical removal of the Tetragrammaton from the early Christian Scriptures, and that the ideological and geographical diversity would make such an effort impossible without leaving telltale traces.

    After exhaustive study, we must conclude that there is not a single trace of evidence in the Greek manuscripts themselves, or in the voluminous writings of the early patristics, to indicate that the Tetragrammaton was ever used in the first century manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

    The Tetragrammaton was not used by the inspired Christian writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Not one Greek manuscript has ever been produced as evidence to indicate otherwise.

    Today, with the additional new light of manuscript evidence which has become available since 1950,^[22] we must conclude that the Greek word Kyrios rather than the Tetragrammaton was used in each of the 223 Kyrios-based Jehovah references in the New World Translation. To rely on any other source to confirm the presence of the Tetragrammaton requires that we deny the authority and inspiration of the Greek text and seek another text to which we will ascribe higher authority.

[22] Throughout this book we have given the benefit of the doubt to the New World Bible Translation Committee regarding the textual information available to it. As we have suggested, there is certainly new light today which allows us to re-examine the inspired Christian authors' use of the Tetragrammaton. In fairness, however, it must be pointed out that from the standpoint of textual information alone, there was no Greek manuscript evidence available when work was begun on the New World Translation in 1947, which suggested the propriety of introducing the Tetragrammaton into the Christian Greek Scriptures. The willingness of the translators to give greater authority to Hebrew versions than to the known Greek text of their day raises grave concerns regarding their translation process. Nonetheless, we have been gracious on this point because we understand the perspective of those who are ones of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Chapter Summary. The claim that the Tetragrammaton appears in the Christian Greek Scriptures in conjunction with the evidence that it does not, creates five distinct areas of uncertainty.

1. A conflict between the two Christian Greek Scriptures published by the Watch Tower Society creates a significant quandary. The Kingdom Interlinear Translation uses the word Kyrios in the Greek text at 223 Jehovah references and translates the word as Lord in the interlinear English portion. On the other hand, the New World Translation inserts the divine name Jehovah in those same passages. Thus, there is a simultaneous endorsement of two contradictory assertions.

2. A second quandary is introduced because we now must determine which biblical text best represents the inspired revelation of God. If the presence of the Tetragrammaton is to be acknowledged in the New World Translation, we must then concede that Hebrew translations based on early Greek manuscripts carry greater authority than do these same Greek manuscripts themselves.

3. We encounter a third quandary in dealing with the subject of the improper use of Jehovah's name. The inspired Christian writers most certainly could not be guilty of blasphemy when they used Kyrios (Lord) rather than the Tetragrammaton when they were quoting certain Hebrew Scripture passages.

4. The context of numerous passages forces us to deal with a fourth quandary of identification. In certain instances, the inspired Christian writers used the title Kyrios (which identifies Jesus), in a context referring to "God…the Almighty."

5. Finally, we encounter a similar quandary wherein numerous Christian Greek Scripture references give the subject Kyrios equality with Jehovah by attributing qualities to him which are reserved for God alone.

    The only viable solution to these five quandaries is to determine historically and textually the exact word used by the inspired Christian writers in each of the 237 Jehovah references. In summary of our search of Greek manuscripts and surrounding historical data, we conclude that no evidence exists indicating that the Tetragrammaton was used by the inspired writers of the Greek Scriptures. To bring the Tetragrammaton into the Christian Scriptures requires that we deny the inspiration and authority of the Greek Scriptures themselves and seek a higher authority in Hebrew translations.