The Name of Jesus

You may have similar experience, whether it is yourself or you have relatives like that.

My dad has many names. I don’t even know how many. His different ID cards show different names; so do passports. In addition, there was one when he started school, one when married, and yet another business associates called him. All names are his. All names have the same referent: him.

I know of many friends who have one name on the passport and a different number in another form of identification. All names have the same referent.

Different names, even of the same person, speaks of a different message. They don’t all have to serve the purpose of identification.

I too have many.
My name was changed when my brother died. Parents had to change it in case I would die too.
Then I added an English first name.
But many names one me.

So very commonplace especially in my generation. Nothing to be alarmed about, nor ashamed.

That is why I have found so perplexing that when it comes to the name of Jesus, there is no turning room.

I have all the respect in the world for Christians who have a passionate reaction towards the utterance of “Jesus”.
Some sincerely believe that name is sacrosanct, shouldn’t be named in vain. I respect that.
Others equally strongly believe that the utterance carries power on its own. I understand that too.
Still others are convinced that the name recalls the person to mind, and there is no other plausible alternative. I too can appreciate.

I don’t intend to weaken any of these convictions.
I do wish to suggest that when the phrase “the name of Jesus” appears in the Bible, it has to be considered each time when it appears. It can’t uncritically be equated to “Jesus”, or that it must call to the mind of readers the person, who is known as Jesus.

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil 2:9-11 NIV)

Of course here “the name of Jesus” could be “the name that is Jesus”.
But I have demonstrated in the beginning that my dad had many names, my friends do too, and so do I.
Chances are you too.
So “the name of xxx” doesn’t have to say “the name that is xxx.”
It could refer to one of the other names xxx has that could have a particular emphatic significance. It’s that significance that is in focus, rather than xxx.

What would it be in this case?

I would suggest we should consider the “new name” of Jesus. “New” being it is just mentioned in its immediate context:

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name (v 9).

The name that is above every name.
The name that is unutterable.
The name that recalls the One in Scripture that is above all.
The Most High.
At that name, every other must be humbled and lowered.
That’s the emphatic significance of that name. It invites thinking and dwelling on the exalted state of Jesus, one that’s been traditionally enjoyed only by the Most High.

“. . . every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge . . .” (v 10-11).
How it resembles Isa 45: 23 in the OT referring to the Most High!

Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. (Isa 45:23)

The context at least invites us to consider this option.
And ponder its impact and hence deepen our appreciation when we recall Jesus.