When my wife was pregnant with our children, we spent many dinners and evenings reading names to each other from the baby name books. And until we settled on a final name, not wanting to call the baby, “baby,” we came up with interim names — monickers that tickled us as we read through the seemingly unending lists of names. So it was that one of the children came to be christened, “Balfour Trafalgar.”
The child had a name. Yet it was obvious that we would not put that name on the birth certificate. It was a nonsensical name. It was a name devoid of meaning or import to us. Her final name needed to be something that was fitting of her character and of our desires for her. Balfour Trafalgar would never do.
Names reveal something about the one who does the naming. And in Scripture, names often reveal something about the person who bears the name as well. So it is with Jesus Christ.
The names given to Him were not given haphazardly. They were given to reveal essential components of his character. In Matthew 1, we are given two of those names — Jesus and Immanuel.
Now the name Jesus was not an uncommon name among the Jewish people; in the Hebrew tongue it was pronounced “Yeshua” — Joshua. But Joseph is not commanded to use that name because Jesus is just a common man. He is commanded to use that name because of the meaning of the name — God saves. For, as important as Jesus’ arrival on earth was, what was of greater importance was the purpose for which He came — to be the Savior of mankind.
Reading Matthew too quickly, one might think that Jesus came to serve primarily as the Messianic ruler (v. 1) who would overthrow the political oppression of Rome, or that He arrived only for the benefit of the people of Israel. So Joseph is explicitly told that this saving work of his son would be to “save His people from their sins.” Yes, Jesus was the Christ — the Messiah — but His name emphatically affirmed that He came to accomplish a work of redeeming men from the wrath of God for their sins. The person of Christ cannot be separated from the saving work of Christ.
And because He is Savior from sin, Jesus is also Immanuel. Because of familiarity, it’s easy to gloss over the significance of this name. We sing of Immanuel, we name our churches Immanuel and we read this story at least a couple of times each year. And we forget the power that is in that name.
The only place this name occurs in all of Scripture is here, and Is. 7:14 and Is. 8:8. So the name is unique. And it certainly denotes the omnipresence of God, something affirmed throughout Scripture (e.g., Deut. 31:6; Ps. 46:7, 11; Heb. 13:5).
But this name asserts more than God’s omnipresence. While it certainly is true that He is omnipresent, this name also points to a real result that is derived from the saving work of Jesus. When Adam and Eve sinned, that sin broke their fellowship with God. While He was still omnipresent and therefore nearby them, He was not with them in the same way as He was prior to their sin. And even all the sacrifices offered on behalf of the sinner in the Old Testament could only provide a temporary restoration of His presence.
But when Christ atoned for sin, He came to be with His people, never to be taken away. His “with us” status would never be removed. He is eternally present. Our fellowship with Him is secure. So Joseph could be courageous in taking Mary into his home, knowing that God was ever with Him.
And as D. A. Carson has noted, for us who follow Joseph in belief, “No greater blessing can be conceived than for God to dwell with his people.…Jesus is the one called ‘God with us’: the designation evokes John 1:14, 18. As if that were not enough, Jesus promises just before his ascension to be with us to the end of the age (28:20; cf. also 18:20), when he will return to share his messianic banquet with his people (25:10).”
The coming child to Joseph and Mary is Jesus — God saves. And He is Immanuel — God with us. It’s not just a name. It’s a promise.
Words of Grace 