Septuagint Error in Lev. 24:16 & The Ineffable Name Doctrine

Between 100- 300 AD, both Jews and Christians were gradually promoting the Ineffable Name doctrine -- that it was sinful  to just use the true name of God in speech -- formed from the 4 letters known as the Tetragrammaton. I believe the name is Yahweh. Others Jehovah, etc.

This stemmed evidently from a mistranslation in 257 BC of Leviticus 24:16 in the Septuagint Bible.

 The Septuagint Greek translation of 257 BC reads:

“And he that names the name of the Lord, let him die
death: let all the congregation of Israel stone him with
stones; whether he be a stranger or a native, let him
naming the name of the Lord.” (Brenton – LXX)

What it says instead in Hebrew, as the NIV renders it, is:

anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death. (Lev. 24:16 NIV.)

One can readily see that naming the name of God became wrong by a mistranslation. Only blasphemy -- essentially an insult -- of God's name was wrong under the true words of the passage.

That the Septuagint is to blame is indirectly revealed by the coincidence that as early as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the error emerges -- which means 250 BC-110 AD. In the Manual of Discipline in the Qumran scrolls, we find this ban on the use of the name:

Any man who mentions anything by the Name which is honored above all shall be set apart (i.e. banished) (Man. of Disc. 6:27)

In the Yoma in the Mishnah we similarly find: 

One does not pronounce the ineffable name outside (of the temple).  (Yoma 3:8; 4:1,2; 6:1,2; 8:9.)

Incidentally, Lesson About What Jesus Truly Said at the Trial

Professor Howard has demonstrated that the earliest Christian Gospels likely had "Yahweh" in many places, but due to the rise of the Ineffable Name doctrine, they were replaced with versions that removed the name Yahweh.

Here, I will demonstrate that something was removed from the text of Jesus' trial that only once replaced, the verdict finally makes sense.

We are told in the gospel texts that were permitted to survive that Jesus said at His trial that He would return seated on the "right hand of POWER." But I believe the ineffable name doctrine caused a scribe to remove YHWH -- the Tetragrammaton -- and what Jesus actually said was YAHWH. This explains why the priest then rent his garment, claiming Jesus had thereby blasphemed when simply saying He was the Son of Man coming to return on the "right hand of power." Those words alone would not conceivably be blasphemy. Something was removed so we cannot see what the priest thought was the blasphemy -- and that certainly was because Jesus must have uttered the name of YHWH.

Thus, because of the Septuagint version of Leviticus, any verbalization of the name YHWH had become considered to be blasphemy, Jesus broke that erroneous translation's rule.

Reflecting the procedure at Jesus' trial, the legal procedures reflected in the Sanhedrin rules near the early 200s say one could not be convicted of blasphemy unless one had exactly pronounced the sacred name:

"The blasphemer" is not culpable unless he exactly pronounces the name. (Sanh. 7:5,  quoted from The Sacred Name (Qadesh La Yahuwah Press, 1995) at 156. 

The footnote goes on to say, "William Arnold brings our attention to the fact that the Hebrew expression ... literally means that the blasphemer, to be guilty, must pronounce the sacred name YHWH 'exactly.'"

In other words, blasphemy, based upon the mistranslated Septuagint, came to be correctly  pronouncing the sacred name.

They even laid down a very specific procedure for bringing a conviction of blasphemy.  According to the Mishnah, the following is an example of that procedure:

Rabbi Joshua ben Karha says: On every day they examined the witnesses with a substituted name, "May Jose smite Jose."  When sentence was to be given they did not declare him guilty of death with the substituted name, but  they sent out all the people and asked the chief among the witnesses and said to him.  "Say exactly what you heard." and he says it; and the judges stand up on their feet and rend their garments, and they may not mend them again.  And the second witness says, "I also heard the like," and the third says, "I also heard the like." (Ibid.)

Even at a trial, because of their Septuagint mistranslation, the rabbis used a substitute name for Yahweh when interrogating witnesses.  And then only just before the conclusion did they actually have the chief witness exactly pronounce the sacred name when quoting the defendant. 

Then the judges, even though the Torah clearly forbids the high priest tearing his garment, were to rend their garments in a demonstration of being appalled, according to the Mishnah:

The judges stand up on their feet and rend their garments, and they may not mend them again. (Sanh. 7:5)

This completed the procedure for convicting a blasphemer.

Based upon such evidence, I agree with the conclusion in Did the Messiah Say The Heavenly Father's Name that Jesus being quoted as referencing "Power" was a deliberate scribal euphemism for what Jesus truly said -- YHWH:

Now let's examine the trial in which Yahushua was sentenced to death.

Matt 26:64 (KJV) Yahushua saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. 66 What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.

In light of these verses, it is fascinating to study the historical context of what was going on. Based on the above scripture, it is evident that the official charge against the Messiah was "blasphemy". The word "Power" in verse 64 was a popular 'euphemism' or substitution for the divine name Yahweh. Now according to the Mishna:

"He who blasphemes is liable only when he will have fully pronounced the Divine Name. Said R. Joshua ben Qorha, "on every day (of the trial) they examine the witnesses with a substituted name. When sentence was to be given they did not declare him guilty of death with the substituted name, but they put everyone out and ask the most important of the witnesses, saying to him, "Say, what exactly did you hear?" And he says what he heard. And the judges stand on their feet and tear their clothing, and they may not mend them again.(m.San. 7:5)"

Therefore, it is evident that historically no man could be sentenced for blasphemy unless he had actually spoken the Divine Name. This is further proven when we see that the High Priest "rent his clothes" upon hearing the name since Yahushua was his own witness (as he said "what further need have we of witnesses?").

 Study Notes

For a detailed article on the origins of the Ineffable Name Doctrine, see David Roger's "God's Name" from Bible Truth (2004).