This question regarding the Divine Name has been around for hundreds of years, and there are a number of Bible translations that have restored the Divine Name to the Hebrew Scriptures . One of these versions is the American Standard Version of 1901. However, in recent times this issue has attracted even more attention due to a particular translation of the Bible. The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, translated by the Watchtower organization, not only restored the divine name to the Hebrew portion of the Bible, but also used that name 237 times in the New Testament. In his Introduction he explains the restoration of the divine name. Since the Bible sets forth the sacred will of the Sovereign Lord of the universe, it would be a great indignity, indeed an affront to His majesty and authority, to omit or conceal His unique divine name, which appears clearly in the Hebrew text almost 7,000 times in the form (YHWH). Therefore, the main feature of this translation is the restoration of the divine name to its rightful place in the English text. This was done, using the commonly accepted English form "Jehovah" 6,973 times in the Hebrew Scriptures and 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Although some Bibles have used the divine name in the New Testament. (see Appendix C) This version has been severely criticized for its use of Jehovah 237 times. A recent critic, Lynn Lundquist, who wrote a book called "The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures." Lundquist argues that the Greek word Kurios should only be translated in English Bibles as "Lord." Even though the translators of the Northwest Territories knew that no Christian Greek manuscript existed containing the complete form of the Tetragrammaton, they remain...... middle of paper ...... cockroaches represent the emphasis, respectively, on readability and on literal fidelity to the source text. However, in reality there is no clear boundary between dynamic and formal equivalence. Generally speaking, the two represent a spectrum of translation approaches. Depending on the method used for a translation, we will encounter the situation presented below. Regarding the name of Jesus, some translators have inserted the name of Jesus into the English text of the New Testament where no manuscript support exists. In the following table, we evaluate 16 Bibles on their use of Jesus in the New Testament. As you can see by the numbers, the name varies by almost 1000 occurrences from ASV to NCV. These translators obviously used either dynamic equivalence or formal equivalence in reference to the name of Jesus. Is this an acceptable method of translation? It has been accepted for over 100 years.