Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
05 No.
02 (June 2.
60 Ae 73 Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) e-ISSN 2775-4006 https://ejurnal.
id/index.
php/juteolog p-ISSN 2774-9355 https://doi.
org/10.
52489/juteolog.
A Biblical Study of Yahweh: The Forgotten Divine Name and Its Implications for Indonesian Christians in Their Use of God's Name Jahja Iskandar Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta, jahjaiskandar@gmail.
Recommended Citation Turabian 8th edition .
ull not.
Iskandar.
AiA Biblical Study of Yahweh: The Forgotten Divine Name and Its Implications for Indonesian Christians in Their Use of God's NameAn Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) 5, no.
(September 23, 2.
: 60-73, accessed September 23, 2025, https://doi.
org/10.
52489/juteolog.
American Psychological Association 7th edition (Iskandar, et al.
, 2024, p.
Received: 11 July 2025 Accepted: 12 September 2025 Published: 23 September 2025 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta.
It has been accepted for inclusion in Christian Perspectives in Education by an authorized editor of Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG).
For more information, please contact jahjaiskandar@gmail.
Jahja Iskandar Abstract The name Yahweh, the proper and covenantal name of the God of Israel, carries deep historical, theological, and devotional significance.
However, its usage has diminished or been forgotten among many believers, including Christians in Indonesia.
This study examines the biblical, historical, and linguistic factors contributing to the obscurity of Yahweh in contemporary Christian worship, especially in the Indonesian context.
Drawing from texts such as Jeremiah 23:23Ae32, the research highlights the spiritual and doctrinal implications of neglecting God's revealed name.
The findings emphasize that recovering the understanding and reverence for the name Yahweh is vital for fostering a deeper relationship with God and for enhancing theological clarity in the church.
The study also suggests that Indonesian church leaders play a key role in reintroducing this biblical truth through teaching and liturgy, thereby strengthening the foundation of Christian identity and worship.
Keywords: Yahweh.
Elohim.
Theos.
Christian worship
INTRODUCTION
The translation of the divine nameAicommonly represented by the Tetragrammaton (AoiA.
YHWH)Aihas long posed theological, linguistic, and practical challenges for Bible translators across languages and traditions.
The rendering of this sacred name in Christian Scriptures has varied widely, shaped by doctrinal perspectives, translation philosophies, and culturallinguistic contexts (Tov, 2012.
Barr, 1.
In various English Bible translations, different transliterations are used to preserve the sanctity or phonetic integrity of the name YHWH.
Some translations opt for YahwehAisuch as the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB).
RotherhamAos Emphasized Bible, and The Book of Yahweh (TBoY)Aireflecting a commitment to linguistic accuracy based on scholarly reconstructions.
Others, influenced by ecclesiastical tradition and familiarity, employ the form JehovahAisuch as the American Standard Version (ASV).
YoungAos Literal Translation (YLT), the Modern King James Version (MKJV), and the Darby Bible (Martinez, 2010.
Gertoux, 2.
The Indonesian context also presents a diverse picture.
While mainstream Indonesian Bibles .
Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia [LAI] edition.
predominantly render YHWH as AiTUHANAn .
n uppercase to distinguish it from AiTuhanA.
, several regional Bible versions preserve a closer transliteration.
For instance.
Javanese uses AiYehuwah,An the Toba Batak version uses AiJahowa,An and the Pakpak and Simalungun translations also retain AiJahowa.
An More recent Indonesian translations, such as the Indonesian Literal Translation (ILT) and the Indonesian Modern Bible (IMB), as well as the Catholic Pastoral Edition of the Sacred Scriptures for the Christian Community, opt for the transliteration AiYahweh.
An These variations reflect broader theological and missiological considerations, including reverence for the divine name, cultural intelligibility, and liturgical tradition.
However, the marginalization or complete omission of the name Yahweh in mainstream Christian useAiespecially in public worship and theological discourseAiraises questions regarding the implications for Christian identity, doctrinal clarity, and biblical literacy in Indonesia.
This study therefore seeks to explore the historical and theological significance of the name Yahweh, investigate the reasons for its neglect, and assess its implications for contemporary Christian worship and theology in Indonesia.
By revisiting the Scriptural emphasis on the divine name .
Exodus 3:15.
Jeremiah 23:26Ae.
, the research Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar underscores the importance of reclaiming this sacred name as part of the ChurchAos witness to GodAos self-revelation.
While some modern Bible translations such as the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) and The Emphasized Bible (Rotherha.
retain the name Yahweh to reflect linguistic and theological fidelity to the Hebrew text, many mainstream English translationsAiincluding the King James Version (KJV).
New International Version (NIV).
English Standard Version (ESV), and Revised Standard Version (RSV)Aicontinue to follow a long-standing translation tradition that began with the Septuagint (LXX), the earliest Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
In the LXX, the Tetragrammaton (AoiA.
YHWH) was rendered as osAC (Kyrios.
AiLordA.
, and this practice was later adopted by the Latin Vulgate using Dominus.
The English tradition inherited this through early translators such as John Wycliffe .
and William Tyndale .
, who used LORD to represent Dominus in their English Bibles.
This convention is now deeply embedded in most Protestant Bible versions (Smith, 2017.
Tov.
The Revised Standard Version (RSV) explicitly defends this practice in its preface:
AiFor two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: .
the word AJehovahAo does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew.
the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom He had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.
An (RSV Prefac.
This translation tradition has also shaped Bible versions in non-Western contexts, including Indonesia.
The Alkitab Terjemahan Baru (New Translation Bible.
ITB) by Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia (LAI), which has become the dominant version used by churches, theologians, and Christian publishers, follows the same convention by replacing YHWH with AiTUHANAn (LORD) and, in certain cases, with AiALLAHAn to render Elohim.
Thus.
Indonesian Christians are largely unfamiliar with the name Yahweh, as it is not present in the ITB.
In passages where YHWH appears in the Hebrew Tanakh, the ITB renders it as AiTUHAN,An while Elohim is rendered as AiAllah,An not as AiIlahAn or another generic term for This widespread practice has theological implications.
It has led many Indonesian Christians to identify AiAllahAn as the name of God rather than understanding it as a general title or category of deity .
lohim, theo.
Consequently, the covenantal and personal nature of GodAos name.
Yahweh, as revealed in texts such as Exodus 3:15 and Jeremiah 23:27, has been This neglect stands in contrast to theological scholarship emphasizing the importance of YHWH as the distinctive name of the God of IsraelAithe name by which He entered into covenant with His people (Fretheim, 2005.
Smith, 2.
Sharon W.
Betters .
underscores this in her theological reflections: AiThe God of the Bible is not a nameless force.
He is Yahweh, the covenant-making and covenant-keeping God who reveals His name as an expression of His relational commitment to His people.
An In the New Testament.
Indonesian Christians unanimously affirm the name of Jesus Christ (Yesus Kristu.
, whose Hebrew-Aramaic form Yeshua means AiYahweh savesAn or AiYahweh is salvationAn .
Matthew 1:.
This etymological and theological link between Yeshua and Yahweh is affirmed by various scholars and biblical encyclopedias .
Kaiser.
Dulle, 2005.
Trimm, 2.
Thus, a clearer recognition of Yahweh in the Old Testament enriches Christian understanding of the continuity between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament message of redemption.
Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar Literature such as The Book of Yahweh.
The Aramaic English New Testament, and works by Jason Dulle further explore the inseparable relationship between Yahweh and Yeshua, arguing that the full theological identity of Jesus as the embodiment of Yahweh is crucial to Christian confession.
In light of these theological and translational dynamics, it becomes imperative for Indonesian Christians to reevaluate the place of the divine name Yahweh in Scripture, worship, and doctrinal teaching.
While reverent traditions should be respected, reclaiming Yahweh as the name by which God chose to reveal Himself to IsraelAiand by extension to the worldAican deepen theological understanding, strengthen biblical literacy, and enhance the personal and covenantal nature of Christian worship.
This condition is profoundly illustrated in Jeremiah 23:23Ae32, where the people of Yahweh in the time of the prophet Jeremiah had forgotten the divine Name due to the misleading influence of false prophets.
These prophets, through fabricated dreams and deceptive visions, led the nation away from the covenantal Name of Yahweh, replacing it with foreign concepts and ultimately causing the people to forget Yahweh's identityAijust as their ancestors had done under the influence of Baal worship (Jer.
The continuity of this theological amnesiaAithis Aired threadAn of forgetting the Divine NameAiis not only a historical reality in ancient Israel but also echoes strikingly in contemporary Christianity in Indonesia.
In modern Indonesian Christianity, most believers are unfamiliar with the name Yahweh, due to the dominance of Bible translations such as the Alkitab Terjemahan Baru (LAI, 1.
, which consistently replaces the Tetragrammaton (A )ioAwith titles like AiTUHANAn or AiALLAH.
An This textual and theological omission reflects a similar pattern of neglect and substitution found in the ancient context of JeremiahAos time.
This parallelAibetween the historical forgetting of Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible and the modern obscuring of His name in Indonesian Christian practiceAiis what motivates this The research titled: AiA Biblical Study of hwhy (Yahwe.
, the Forgotten Divine Name in Jeremiah 23:23Ae32, and Its Implications for Indonesian Christians Who Use the Title AGodAoAn seeks to explore the theological, historical, and practical significance of reintroducing the personal name of God.
Yahweh, into the faith vocabulary and worship of Indonesian Christians.
METHODS
This research adopts a qualitative approach utilizing literature-based analysis .
ibrary researc.
, focusing on the primary biblical text Jeremiah 23:23Ae32 as the main data source, supported by secondary literature including scholarly commentaries, linguistic tools, and theological analyses.
The methodological framework consists of three main components:
textual analysis, commentary review, and comparative interpretation.
Textual Analysis Method The core of this study lies in the close reading and linguistic analysis of the Hebrew text of Jeremiah 23:23Ae32, based on the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), which serves as the standard critical edition of the Hebrew Bible.
This involves parsing each Hebrew word to identify its grammatical features, including: .
Lexical root .
Part of speech .
Gender .
Number .
ingular/plura.
Person .
Verb stem .
Syntactic function .
ndependent/bound form.
Literal translation .
nto English and Indonesia.
By conducting this detailed morpho-syntactic analysis, the study aims to uncover both the literal meaning .
enotative sens.
and the theological implications .
onnotative sens.
of Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar the text.
This analysis contributes to establishing what this research refers to as Study Findings-1a .
extual structure and for.
and Study Findings-1b .
emantic and theological Such a method corresponds with established practices in biblical studies as proposed by scholars like Francis I.
Andersen and A.
Dean Forbes .
in their syntactic database analysis, and Bruce K.
Waltke & M.
OAoConnor .
in their foundational grammar of Biblical Hebrew.
Review of Biblical Commentaries and Exegetical Sources To enrich and critically evaluate the insights from the primary text, the research also engages with major academic commentaries and theological works from both historical and contemporary authors.
This includes but is not limited to the works of: .
John Bright.
Tremper Longman i.
Walter Brueggemann on the Book of Jeremiah .
Michael S.
Heiser on the divine name and biblical theology .
James Barr on the semantics of biblical language These sources are analyzed in dialogue with the primary text to offer interpretive depth and a balanced exegetical perspective.
They also assist in framing the research questions theologically and hermeneutically.
Comparative Method The study applies a comparative approach to examine how the divine name YHWH (A )ioAis rendered across major biblical translationsAiincluding the Septuagint (LXX).
Vulgate.
King James Version (KJV).
Revised Standard Version (RSV), and Alkitab Terjemahan Baru (ITB)Aiand how these translational choices influence theological understanding, particularly in the Indonesian context.
This cross-textual comparison helps address the research objectives by: .
Tracing the tradition of substitution .
YHWH replaced by LORD or Alla.
Highlighting theological shifts due to translational practices .
Evaluating the implications for Christian worship and doctrine in Indonesia As argued by Tov .
and Schmid .
, comparing ancient textual traditions and modern translations is essential to reconstruct theological intent and reception history (Wirkungsgeschicht.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section provides a comprehensive discussion of the validity of each of the five core research problems.
It also addresses the emergence of novel findings and concludes with an analysis of the use of the name "Allah" in Indonesian Christian scriptures, as it pertains to the theological implications of this study.
Validity Support for the First Research Problem The first research question investigates whether Yahweh is indeed the proper name of the biblical God based on Jeremiah 23:23, 24, and 29.
Based on the confirmed validity of Indicators 1, 2, and 3, this study concludes:
Yes.
Yahweh is the proper and personal name of the biblical God as evidenced in Jeremiah 23:23, 24, and 29.
Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar This finding is reinforced by several authoritative scholarly sources:
Botterweck & Ringgren affirm:
"The Tetragrammaton YHWH is the personal name of the God of Moses.
The form Yahweh is now accepted almost universally.
" (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament.
Vol.
5, 1.
Manley emphasizes:
"Strictly speaking.
Yahweh is the only 'name' of God.
Yahweh, therefore, in contrast with Elohim, is a proper noun, the name of a Person.
" (The New Bible Handbook.
C Clover notes:
"Although God is referred to by many titles, only Yahweh serves as a true proper Titles such as El.
Elohim, or Adonai are descriptive and should not be confused with the personal name Yahweh.
These references support the claim that Yahweh is not merely a generic title, but the covenantal name by which God revealed Himself to Israel.
Validity Support for the Second Research Problem The second research question investigates whether there is evidence that prophets in the time of Jeremiah deliberately caused the people of Yahweh to forget His name (Jeremiah 23:25Ae Based on the confirmed validity of its indicators, the study finds: There is valid textual and historical evidence that certain prophets conspired to make the people forget the name Yahweh.
Supporting this conclusion.
Clover .
explains: "These prophets substituted YahwehAos name with their own messages.
Jeremiah condemns these religious leaders for replacing Yahweh with Baal, causing the people to forget the covenantal name.
" This aligns with Jeremiah 23:27, where Yahweh says, "They think to make My people forget My name.
as their fathers forgot My name for Baal.
" The strategy of replacing YahwehAos name reflects both theological negligence and religious syncretism.
Validity Support for the Third Research Problem The third question examines YahwehAos judgment of prophetic dreams in contrast to His authentic word.
As evidenced in Jeremiah 23:28Ae29.
Yahweh declares that: False dreams are like chaff, while YahwehAos word is like wheatAisustaining, purifying, and powerful like fire and a hammer that breaks rock.
This distinction is crucial in understanding the authority of divine revelation.
As John Gillon comments on Jeremiah 23: "The dreamers speak from delusion, not divine inspiration.
The metaphor of chaff .
versus wheat .
highlights the futility of their words compared to Yahweh's living and active Word.
" This aligns with Psalm 1:4 and Matthew 3:12, where the righteous are compared to fruitful wheat, while the wicked are discarded like chaff.
Validity Support for Further Research Questions This document will continue to address the remaining research problems and provide theological and practical implications, including novel insights and the discussion of the term "Allah" in Indonesian Bibles.
Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar Validity Support for the Fifth Research Problem Research focus: Why do most Indonesian Christians know AiAllahAn but not Yahweh, and does this parallel IsraelAos historical forgetfulness of the divine Name? 1 Indicator 1: The ITBAos Rendering of the Tetragrammaton The Alkitab Terjemahan Baru (ITB) never prints the Tetragrammaton.
it substitutes TUHAN and, in select contexts.
ALLAH.
Anwar Tjen of the Indonesian Bible Society (LAI) explains that LAI follows Jewish and LXX tradition, where YHWH is read as Adonai and rendered in Greek as Kyrios and in Latin as *Dominus.
*A Consequently.
Indonesian Christians absorb AiAllahAn as the default designation for God and rarely encounter Yahweh.
2 Indicator 2: Historical Translation Policy The NRSV preface exemplifies the mainstream rationale: because the exact pronunciation of YHWH was lost and because the use of a proper name seemed theologically parochial.
English translators kept the substitute LORD/GOD.
A LAI aligns with this policy, reinforcing the absence of Yahweh in Indonesian ecclesial life.
3 Indicator 3: Counter-Arguments against Suppressing the Name Scholars have challenged this tradition on both textual and theological grounds:
Text-critical evidence.
Early Greek fragments .
Papyrus Fouad .
retain A oiAin Hebrew script inside the Greek text, indicating that the original LXX did not translate the Name as *Kyrios.
Reformation perspectives.
The ASV .
and Reformers such as Martin Luther argued that suppressing Yahweh stems from Aia Jewish superstitionAn and should not dominate Christian translations.
Torah injunctions.
Deuteronomy 4:2 and 12:32 warn against adding to or subtracting from GodAos words.
replacing YHWH with titles arguably violates this principle (Sugiyarto, 2.
4 Synthesis Thus, as Israel once Aiforgot My Name for BaalAn (Jer 23:.
, modern Indonesian Christians have effectively forgotten Yahweh through the dominance of translation conventions that substitute TUHAN/ALLAH.
Restoring the covenant Name in liturgy and catechesis could correct this theological amnesia and deepen biblical literacy.
Chapter Summary: Research Findings.
Novelties, and Theological Implications Summary of Supporting Findings from the Literature Two key literature sources affirm the validity of Indicator-3 in the Fifth Problem Formulation:
SugiyartoAos Critique: Emphasizes LAIAos theological and linguistic mishandling of divine namesAispecifically the misuse of Allah for Elohim and the substitution of YHWH with Tuhan/ALLAH, which violates the original biblical intent.
ResearcherAos S2 Thesis: Indicates that Indonesian Christians are unfamiliar with the name YAHWEH largely due to the prevalence of Allah in translations and common usage, leading to conceptual confusion and loss of divine name awareness.
Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar These findings affirm the full validity of the Fifth Problem Formulation: AiYAHWEH was forgotten because of ABaalAo in the time of Jeremiah and before that.
YAHWEH is forgotten because of AAllahAo.
An Fulfillment of the Five Primary Objectives Through the validation of all five problem formulations and the three key indicators of the Fifth, the primary objectives of this studyAitracing the loss of the divine name YAHWEH among Indonesian Christians due to translation and theological oversightAihave been Discovery of Two Novelties (Secondary Objective.
First Novelty: The Inseparable Relationship Between YAHWEH and YESHUA Textual Analysis and Parallel Comparison C Isaiah 45:21b-23 and Philippians 2:9-11 both refer to universal worship directed toward YAHWEH (OT) and YESHUA (NT), suggesting identity continuity.
C John 17:11-12.
Matthew 1:20-21.
Luke 1:30-31, and Matthew 21:9 show that the name YESHUA was given divinely and is rooted in the name of YAHWEH.
Linguistic and Etymological Insights C YESHUA = Ye .
bbreviation of YHWH) shua .
rom yasha, meaning AisavesA.
C Therefore.
YESHUA literally means AiYAHWEH is salvation.
An Supporting Literature C Dulle.
Douglas, and Clover affirm that YESHUA carries the sacred name YAHWEH in abbreviated form, emphasizing the deity of Christ in continuity with OT revelation.
First Novelty Validated The research successfully establishes that the name YESHUA in the NT is etymologically and theologically inseparable from YAHWEH in the OT.
Second Novelty: YAHWEH as the Singular.
Saving Name of God Argumentative Narrative C The divine name EHYEH (AiI AMA.
in Exodus 3:14 is mirrored in EGO EIMI declarations by YESHUA in the NT .
John 11:.
, affirming divine identity.
C The title AiThe First and the LastAn (Isaiah 44:6.
Revelation 1:.
further links YAHWEH with YESHUA.
Literature Support C Stack Exchange citation confirms that early Christian interpretation equated YAHWEH with the incarnate God.
YESHUA.
Biblical Evidence C Zechariah 14:9.
Joel 2:32.
Acts 2:21.
Romans 10:13, and Acts 4:12 all emphasize the salvific exclusivity of the Name YAHWEH, later fulfilled in YESHUA.
Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025 Jahja Iskandar Second Novelty Validated YAHWEH is not just a historical or covenantal name but is central to the Christian proclamation of salvation, now revealed fully in YESHUA HaMashiakh.
Theological Implication: The Inappropriateness of the Term AuAllahAy in the Indonesian Christian Bible Key Arguments:
Semantic Mismatch:
o Elohim and Theos are generic titles.
Allah, as noted in LaneAos Lexicon, is a proper name, leading to theological misalignment.
o Proper translation should use Ilah, not Allah.
Biblical Prohibition Against Other Names:
o Exodus 20:3 and 23:13 prohibit the invocation of other deitiesAo names.
o Using AllahAihistorically associated with pre-Islamic paganism and later Islamic theologyAiviolates this command.
Historical Context Misunderstood:
o Arab Christians may use Allah today, but evidence .
, the Zabad Inscription, 512 CE) shows they originally used Ilah.
o Allah was the name of a pagan fertility god before Islam redefined it.
o Therefore, it is implausible that early Arab Christians adopted Allah prior to Islamic influence.
Translation Parallels: A table summarizing linguistic correspondences affirms consistent proper name usage:
Role
Hebrew
Greek
GodAos Proper Name 1 YAHWEH IAUE
English
Indonesian Arabic
YAHWEH YAHWEH
YAHWAH
GodAos Proper Name 2 YESHUA
IESOUS JESUS
YESUS
YASUA
Title 1 (Generi.
ELOHIM
THEOS
ILAH
ILAH
Title 2 (Lor.
ADONAI
KURIOS LORD
TUHAN
ROB
GOD
CONCLUSION
This study has successfully answered the five core research problems as formulated in the research questions.
Each problem has been addressed through careful exegetical analysis and theological reflection based on the biblical text, particularly Jeremiah 23:23Ae32.
The conclusions are as follows: First Problem Formulation.
"Is it true that YAHWEH is the proper name of the Biblical God based on Jeremiah 23:23, 24, and 29?" Conclusion: Yes.
YAHWEH is affirmed as the proper, covenantal name of the Biblical God, as reflected in Jeremiah 23:23, 24, and 29.
This name distinguishes the God of Israel from other deities and emphasizes His immanence and transcendence.
Second Problem Formulation.
"Is there valid evidence that during JeremiahAos time, the prophets of YAHWEH Jurnal Teologi (JUTEOLOG) Vol.
5 No.
2 June 2025
Jahja Iskandar
His
YAHWEH?"
Conclusion: The study found clear textual evidence that false prophets during JeremiahAos time deliberately led the people to forget YAHWEHAos name, replacing it with deceitful dreams and misleading teachings .
Jeremiah 23:.
Third Problem Formulation "How does YAHWEH assess the dreams told by self-proclaimed prophets compared to His true word?" Conclusion: According to Jeremiah 23:28Ae29, the dreams of these prophets are likened to strawAiworthless and unsubstantialAiwhereas YAHWEHAos true word is like wheat, fire, and a hammer, powerful and transformative.
Fourth Problem Formulation "Why was YAHWEH angry with and opposed to prophets He did not send or command?" Conclusion: YAHWEH expressed divine anger toward these prophets because they falsely claimed divine revelation, plagiarized His words, and misled the people, thereby undermining His authority and endangering the spiritual wellbeing of the community.
Fifth Problem Formulation.
"Why do most Indonesian Christians today not know the name YAHWEH and instead refer to 'Allah' as their God? Does this reflect a historical repetition similar to the replacement of YAHWEH with Baal in ancient times?" Conclusion: The widespread use of the Terjemahan Baru (ITB) Bible, which replaces the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) with AiTuhanAn or AiALLAH,An has contributed to a loss of awareness of the name YAHWEH among Indonesian Christians.
This situation mirrors ancient IsraelAos loss of GodAos name through syncretistic influence .
Baal worshi.
The adoption of the word Allah to translate Elohim and Theos without deeper theological clarification has obscured the biblical identity of God as YAHWEH.
In addition to addressing the problem formulations, this study also identifies two significant theological and linguistic contributions: First Novelty.
The discovery of a close and inseparable relationship between the covenantal name YAHWEH (Old Testamen.
and YESHUA (New Testamen.
affirms that the redemptive identity of God is consistent across both Testaments.
YESHUA (Jesu.
is understood as AiYAHWEH saves,An a direct linguistic and theological affirmation of divine continuity and unity.
Second Novelty.
This study confirms that YAHWEH is the only personal name of the one true God who, throughout biblical revelationAifrom the Torah to the GospelsAiloves humanity and acts to redeem them from sin and death.
Even though He is revealed incarnationally as YESHUA HaMashiach in the New Testament, the divine identity remains unified and unchanged.
REFERENCES