“Jesus” is the name of the Incarnate Son of God, but not of God the Father, or of the Son considered apart from the Incarnation (as when speaking of the Persons of the eternal Trinity), or of the Holy Spirit.
Notice that we don’t say “In the name of the Father, and of Jesus, and of the Holy Spirit.”
“Jesus” is the name of the Incarnate Son of God”
Not to be picky, but since this is a technical article the name of the Son of God is really “Yeshua.”
That’s what mom and step-dad called Him, anyway.
Somewhere along the lines a Greek editor decided we were too stupid to handle his given name, not sure.
I LOVE this! The working of the Trinity debated on FR! Is this a great country and a great website or what!
I wont bother defending my position because, um, wait, it’s coming to me, ..., yeah, because I’m right.
I’ve been mulling over Colossians 1:12-20 and what it means that Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
And of course, we can’t say that one person is PART of God, because God is simple.
I guess in keeping with that line of thought, I have considered the Tetragrammaton to be a name for God THROUGH being a Name for the 2nd Person.
And, as long as I’mbeing vgue and impressionistic, we have the archaic credal formulation Kyrios Iesous — which would seem to make an ID between the two names, to judge by the use of Kyrios in the LXX.
Just a thought. The whole thing needs more thought.