Jehovah's Witnesses believe God is the Father whose name is the Hebrew YHVH, the Tetragrammaton, which was the name the Apostles called on to be saved.

However, after calling on the name to be saved, the New Testament states that those who believe and accept what has been done to restore the relationship between God and man should acknowledge they are sons of God by calling the Father "Abba:"

For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” (Romans 8:15) [ESV]

And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” (Galatians 4:6)

The term "Abba" is from the Aramaic אַבָּא vocative form, originally a term of endearment, later used as a title and personal name; rarely used in reference to God which is transliterated into Greek as ἀββα. It was taken over by Greek speaking Christians as a liturgical formula.1

The use of "Abba" by the Greek speaking Christians is not surprising given Paul's instruction. Historically what is described with the name, is similar to animal sacrifice which those who rejected God's act of salvation believe is still necessary but the Apostles and all who believe understand are no longer required. In other words, where the Jewish people were told to call on the name of YHVH to be saved and to call on "the Father" (eg. in prayer) before the death and resurrection of Jesus, and still do, those who had been saved were to use "Abba."

Moreover, "Abba" is also how Jesus addressed His Father in the garden of Gethsemane:

And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” (Mark 14:36)

How do Jehovah's Witnesses explain the requirement to use the name which was and still is associated with the Old Testament and its sacrificial system and not address God the Father in the way which acknowledges the current condition? In other words, since Paul says "Abba" is how someone who has been saved because the OT law has been fulfilled and is a child of God should address God the Father, how is instructing someone to use the Jewish name "Jehovah" consistent with the message of salvation Paul preached in the New Testament?

  1. Fredrick William Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, The University Chicago Press, 2000, p. 1
  • Most Jehovah's Witnesses are not born again. They believe only 144,000 are chosen for this role, to rule from heaven as kings and priests alongside Jesus over the inhabitants of the paradise earth. Nevertheless, we do address God as Father in our prayers as well as Jehovah. – 4castle Jun 22 at 21:10
  • Mathew 6:9 “our father in the heavens hallowed be thy name” You are saying that name is Abba? – Kris Jun 22 at 21:12
  • Can one not call him father while also acknowledging his name and sanctifying it? – Kris Jun 22 at 22:10
  • What then is the name referred to in the “Our Father” prayer in Matt 6:9? What does it mean to hallow or sanctify that name? – Kris Jun 23 at 3:20
  • 1
    @Kris I realise this question is not asking about the name Jesus inherited, but the answer given by 4castle seemed to imply that a name can refer to a position, such as King. We know that “Father” is not a proper noun but according to the logic in that post, then the position of Father could also be applied to Jehovah as a name. Or have I misunderstood? – Lesley Jun 23 at 15:09

Jehovah's Witnesses do not ascribe different importance between the so-called Old and New Testaments. They view the Bible as one unified message. Certainly, the Law of the Hebrew Scriptures was brought to a finish by Jesus Christ, but there are also many timeless facts contained in the Hebrew scriptures about God, one of which is his name.

I am Jehovah. That is my name. — Isaiah 42:8

Then God said once more to Moses: “This is what you are to say to the Israelites, ‘Jehovah the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered from generation to generation.
Exodus 3:15

May people know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth.
Psalm 83:18

On the other hand, the Bible does not teach that "Father" is a personal name of God, but rather it is used as a title, just as your own fleshly father's personal name is not Father, though the word functions grammatically as a proper noun when you're addressing him with that title.

Christians can and should address God as their Father, as exemplified by Jesus, but nowhere does any scripture say that we should stop using God's personal name, Jehovah. The Bible teaches that God's name is the same for all eternity.

For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.” — Romans 10:13

| improve this answer | |
  • Like the answer, but it may help to ref which edition/translation of the bible you are citing from; I usually do, and it helps readers who may have a translation different from the one you prefer. Here is the meta on that – KorvinStarmast Jun 23 at 13:15
  • Maybe I didn't ask properly so let me give an example. The OT calls for animal sacrifice to Jehovah, but no one who believes in what Jesus accomplished on the cross believes those sacrifices are now required. So if the Christ event (life, death, and resurrection of Jesus) brings about a change to the OT sacrificial system and that same event brings a change in the believer's (in the Christ event) relationship to God (now they are children), why must the old address continue? Why not use the address, Abba, which expresses the current relationship and acknowledges what God has done for man? – Revelation Lad Jun 23 at 14:27
  • @RevelationLad JWs do address God as Father. But we don't do it exclusively, because different aspects of God's personality can be expressed by using different forms of address. The name Jehovah is full of meaning. – 4castle Jun 23 at 14:39
  • I edited the question. Hopefully it betters states what I see as a conflict between calling on a "name" to be saved and how a saved person speaks because they are saved. – Revelation Lad Jun 23 at 15:12
  • 1
    @Lesley Unfortunately there are no extant Greek manuscripts containing Romans 10:13 from the 1st century C.E., but there are manuscripts containing Joel 2:32 from the 1st century where the name Jehovah appears in Hebrew, so the direct quotation would have contained the name Jehovah. (Read more in Appendix C of the NWT) – 4castle Jun 23 at 16:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.