Jehovah
JEHOVAH
The ineffable name of God among the Hebrews. It never has the article before it, nor is it found in the plural form. The Jews never pronounced this name; and wherever it occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures, the substituted for it, in reading, the word ADONAI, Lord, or ELOHIM, God. See GOD. In the Hebrew Bible, it is always written with the vowels of one or the other of these words. Its ancient pronunciation is by many thought to have been Yahweh, but this is not certain. Its meaning is HE IS the same as I AM, the person only being changed. Thus it denotes the self-existence, independence, immutability, and infinite fullness of the divine Being, which is a pledge that he will fulfil all his promises. Compare Exo 3:14, I AM THAT I AM, the meaning of which see under the article GOD. In Exo 6:3, God says, “I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty; but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them;” yet the appellation Jehovah appears to have been known from the beginning, Gen 4:2 . We have reason to believe that God himself, who named man Adam, named himself JEHOVAH; but in his revelation to the patriarchs he had not appropriated to himself this name in a peculiar way, as he now did, nor unfolded the deep meaning contained in it. He had said to them, “I am God Almighty,” Gen 17:1 26:11; or, “I am Jehovah, the God of Abraham,” etc.; but never simply, “I am Jehovah.” It should be remembered that our English version translates this name by the word LORD, printed in small capitals.
Fuente: American Tract Society Bible Dictionary
JEHOVAH
One of the Scripture names of God, and peculiar to him, signifying the Being who is self-existent, and gives existence to others. The name is also given to Christ, Is. 40: 3. and is a proof of his godhead, Mat 3:3. Is. 6: Joh 12:41. the Jews had so great a veneration for this name, that they left off the custom of pronouncing it, whereby its true pronunciation was forgotten. They believe that whosoever knows the true pronunciation of it cannot fail to be heard of God.
Fuente: Theological Dictionary
Jehovah
Pronounced, by modern scholars, Yahveh or Yahweh (Hebrew: He Who is). Name of God in the Old Testament, occurring about 6000 times. It is the very name considered by the Jews as great, glorious, terrible, hidden, mysterious, to blaspheme which merited death (Leviticus 24). Designating The Being, or, as God Himself expresses it, “I am who am” (Exodus 3), it was revealed to Moses on Mount Horeb as the incommunicable name of God.
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Jehovah
The proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it the name by excellence, the great name, the only name, the glorious and terrible name, the hidden and mysterious name, the name of the substance, the proper name, and most frequently shem hammephorash, i.e. the explicit or the separated name, though the precise meaning of this last expression is a matter of discussion (cf. Buxtorf, “Lexicon”, Basle, 1639, col. 2432 sqq.).
Jehovah occurs more frequently than any other Divine name. The Concordances of Furst (“Vet. Test. Concordantiae”, Leipzig, 1840) and Mandelkern (“Vet. Test. Concordantiae”, Leipzig, 1896) do not exactly agree as to the number of its occurrences; but in round numbers it is found in the Old Testament 6000 times, either alone or in conjunction with another Divine name. The Septuagint and the Vulgate render the name generally by “Lord” (Kyrios, Dominus), a translation of Adonai—usually substituted for Jehovah in reading.
I. PRONUNCIATION OF JEHOVAH
The Fathers and the Rabbinic writers agree in representing Jehovah as an ineffable name. As to the Fathers, we only need draw attention to the following expressions: onoma arreton, aphraston, alekton, aphthegkton, anekphoneton, aporreton kai hrethenai me dynamenon, mystikon. Leusden could not induce a certain Jew, in spite of his poverty, to pronounce the real name of God, though he held out the most alluring promises. The Jew’s compliance with Leusden’s wishes would not indeed have been of any real advantage to the latter; for the modern Jews are as uncertain of the real pronunciation of the Sacred name as their Christian contemporaries. According to a Rabbinic tradition the real pronunciation of Jehovah ceased to be used at the time of Simeon the Just, who was, according to Maimonides, a contemporary of Alexander the Great. At any rate, it appears that the name was no longer pronounced after the destruction of the Temple. The Mishna refers to our question more than once: Berachoth, ix, 5, allows the use of the Divine name by way of salutation; in Sanhedrin, x, 1, Abba Shaul refuses any share in the future world to those who pronounce it as it is written; according to Thamid, vii, 2, the priests in the Temple (or perhaps in Jerusalem) might employ the true Divine name, while the priests in the country (outside Jerusalem) had to be contented with the name Adonai; according to Maimonides (“More Neb.”, i, 61, and “Yad chasaka”, xiv, 10) the true Divine name was used only by the priests in the sanctuary who imparted the blessing, and by the high-priest on the Day of Atonement. Phil [“De mut. nom.”, n. 2 (ed. Marg., i, 580); “Vita Mos.”, iii, 25 (ii, 166)] seems to maintain that even on these occasions the priests had to speak in a low voice. Thus far we have followed the post-Christian Jewish tradition concerning the attitude of the Jews before Simeon the Just.
As to the earlier tradition, Josephus (Antiq., II, xii, 4) declares that he is not allowed to treat of the Divine name; in another place (Antiq., XII, v, 5) he says that the Samaritans erected on Mt. Garizim an anonymon ieron. This extreme veneration for the Divine name must have generally prevailed at the time when the Septuagint version was made, for the translators always substitute Kyrios (Lord) for Jehovah. Ecclus., xxiii, 10, appears to prohibit only a wanton use of the Divine name, though it cannot be denied that Jehovah is not employed as frequently in the more recent canonical books of the Old Testament as in the older books. It would be hard to determine at what time this reverence for the Divine name originated among the Hebrews. Rabbinic writers derive the prohibition of pronouncing the Tetragrammaton, as the name of Jehovah is called, from Lev., xxiv, 16: “And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, dying let him die”. The Hebrew participle noqedh, here rendered “blasphemeth”, is translated honomazon in the Septuagint, and appears to have the meaning “to determine”, “to denote” (by means of its proper vowels) in Gen., xxx, 28; Num., i, 17; Is., lxii, 2. Still, the context of Lev., xxiv, 16 (cf. verses 11 and 15), favours the meaning “to blaspheme”. Rabbinic exegetes derive the prohibition also from Ex., iii, 15; but this argument cannot stand the test of the laws of sober hermeneutics (cf. Drusius, “Tetragrammaton”, 8-10, in “Critici Sacri”, Amsterdam, 1698, I, p. ii, col. 339-42; “De nomine divino”, ibid., 512-16; Drach, “Harmonic entre l’Eglise et la Synagogue”, I, Paris, 1844, pp. 350-53, and Note 30, pp. 512-16). What has been said explains the so-called qeri perpetuum, according to which the consonants of Jehovah are always accompanied in the Hebrew text by the vowels of Adonai except in the cases in which Adonai stands in apposition to Jehovah: in these cases the vowels of Elohim are substituted. The use of a simple shewa in the first syllable of Jehovah, instead of the compound shewa in the corresponding syllable of Adonai and Elohim, is required by the rules of Hebrew grammar governing the use of shewa. Hence the question: What are the true vowels of the word Jehovah?
It has been maintained by some recent scholars that the word Jehovah dates only from the year 1520 (cf. Hastings, “Dictionary of the Bible”, II, 1899, p. 199: Gesenius-Buhl, “Handwörterbuch”, 13th ed., 1899, p. 311). Drusius (loc. cit., 344) represents Peter Galatinus as the inventor of the word Jehovah, and Fagius as it propagator in the world of scholars and commentators. But the writers of the sixteenth century, Catholic and Protestant (e.g. Cajetan and Théodore de Bèze), are perfectly familiar with the word. Galatinus himself (“Areana cathol. veritatis”, I, Bari, 1516, a, p. 77) represents the form as known and received in his time. Besides, Drusius (loc. cit., 351) discovered it in Porchetus, a theologian of the fourteenth century. Finally, the word is found even in the “Pugio fidei” of Raymund Martin, a work written about 1270 (ed. Paris, 1651, pt. III, dist. ii, cap. iii, p. 448, and Note, p. 745). Probably the introduction of the name Jehovah antedates even R. Martin.
No wonder then that this form has been regarded as the true pronunciation of the Divine name by such scholars as Michaelis (“Supplementa ad lexica hebraica”, I, 1792, p. 524), Drach (loc. cit., I, 469-98), Stier (Lehrgebäude der hebr. Sprache, 327), and others. Jehovah is composed of the abbreviated forms of the imperfect, the participle, and the perfect of the Hebrew verb “to be” (ye=yehi; ho=howeh; wa=hawah). According to this explanation, the meaning of Jehovah would be “he who will be, is, and has been”. But such a word-formation has no analogy in the Hebrew language. The abbreviated form Jeho supposes the full form Jehovah. But the form Jehovah cannot account for the abbreviations Jahu and Jah, while the abbreviation Jeho may be derived from another word. The Divine name is said to be paraphrased in Apoc., i, 4, and iv, 8, by the expression ho on kai ho en kai ho erchomenos, in which ho erchomenos is regard as equivalent to ho eromenos, “the one that will be”; but it really means “the coming one”, so that after the coming of the Lord, Apoc., xi, 17, retains only ho on kai ho en. the comparison of Jehovah with the Latin Jupiter, Jovis. But it wholly neglects the fuller forms of the Latin names Diespiter, Diovis. Any connection of Jehovah with the Egyptian Divine name consisting of the seven Greek vowels has been rejected by Hengstenberg (Beitrage zur Einleiung ins Alte Testament, II, 204 sqq.) and Tholuck (Vermischte Schriften, I, 349 sqq.).
To take up the ancient writers: Diodorus Siculus writes Jao (I, 94); Irenaeus (“Adv. Haer.”, II, xxxv, 3, in P. G., VII, col. 840), Jaoth; the Valentinian heretics (Ir., “Adv. Haer.”, I, iv, 1, in P.G., VII, col. 481), Jao; Clement of Alexandria (“Strom.”, V, 6, in P.G., IX, col. 60), Jaou; Origin (“in Joh.”, II, 1, in P.G., XIV, col. 105), Jao; Porphyry (Eus., “Praep. evang”, I, ix, in P.G., XXI, col. 72), Jeuo; Epiphanius (“Adv. Haer.”, I, iii, 40, in P.G., XLI, col. 685), Ja or Jabe; Pseudo-Jerome (“Breviarium in Pss.”, in P.L., XXVI, 828), Jaho; the Samaritans (Theodoret, in “Ex. quaest.”, xv, in P. G., LXXX, col. 244), Jabe; James of Edessa (cf.. Lamy, “La science catholique”, 1891, p. 196), Jehjeh; Jerome (“Ep. xxv ad Marcell.”, in P. L., XXII, col. 429) speaks of certain ignorant Greek writers who transcribed the Hebrew Divine name II I II I. The judicious reader will peceive that the Samaritan pronunciation Jabe probably approaches the real sound of the Divine name closest; the other early writers transmit only abbreviations or corruptions of the sacred name. Inserting the vowels of Jabe into the original Hebrew consonant text, we obtain the form Jahveh (Yahweh), which has been generally accepted by modern scholars as the true pronunciation of the Divine name. It is not merely closely connected with the pronunciation of the ancient synagogue by means of the Samaritan tradition, but it also allows the legitimate derivation of all the abbreviations of the sacred name in the Old Testament.
II. MEANING OF THE DIVINE NAME
Jahveh (Yahweh) is one of the archaic Hebrew nouns, such as Jacob, Joseph, Israel, etc. (cf. Ewald, “Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache”, 7th ed., 1863, p. 664), derived from the third person imperfect in such a way as to attribute to a person or a thing the action of the quality expressed by the verb after the manner of a verbal adjective or a participle. Furst has collected most of these nouns, and calls the form forma participialis imperfectiva. As the Divine name is an imperfect form of the archaic Hebrew verb “to be”, Jahveh means “He Who is”, Whose characteristic note consists in being, or The Being simply.
Here we are confronted with the question, whether Jahveh is the imperfect hiphil or the imperfect qal. Calmet and Le Clere believe that the Divine name is a hiphil form; hence it signifies, according to Schrader (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, 2nd ed., p. 25), He Who brings into existence, the Creator; and according to Lagarde (Psalterium Hieronymi, 153), He Who causes to arrive, Who realizes His promises, the God of Providence. But this opinion is not in keeping with Ex., iii, 14, nor is there any trace in Hebrew of a hiphil form of the verb meaning “to be”; moreover, this hiphil form is supplied in the cognate languages by the pi’el form, except in Syriac where the hiphil is rare and of late occurrence.
On the other hand, Jehveh may be an imperfect qal from a grammatical point of view, and the traditional exegesis of Ex., iii, 6-16, seems to necessitate the form Jahveh. Moses asks God: “If they should say to me: What is his [God’s] name? What shall I say to them?” In reply, God returns three several times to the determination of His name. First, He uses the first person imperfect of the Hebrew verb “to be”; here the Vulgate, the Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and the Arabic version suppose that God uses the imperfect qal; only the Targums of Jonathan and of Jerusalem imply the imperfect hiphil. Hence we have the renderings: “I am who am” (Vulg.), “I am who is” (Sept.), “I shall be {who] shall be” (Aquila, Theodotion), “the Eternal who does not cease” (Ar.); only the above-mentioned Targums see any reference to the creation of the world. The second time, God uses again the first person imperfect of the Hebrew verb “to be”; here the Syriac, the Sumaritan, the Persian versions, and the Targums of Onkelos and Jerusalem retain the Hebrew word, so that one cannot tell whether they regard the imperfect as a qal or a hiphil form; the Arabic version omits the whole clause; but the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Targum of Jonathan suppose here the imperfect qal: “He Who Is, hath sent me to you” instead of “I Am, hath sent me to you: (Vulg.); “ho on sent me to you” (Sept.); “I am who am, and who shall be, hath sent me to you” (Targ. Jon.). Finally, the third time, God uses the third person of the imperfect, or the form of the sacred name itself; here the Samaritan version and the Targum of Onkelos retain the Hebrew form; the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Syriac version render “Lord”, though, according to the analogy of the former two passages, they should have translated, “He Is, the God of your fathers, . . . hath sent me to you”; the Arabic version substitutes “God”. Classical exegesis, therefore, regards Jahveh as the imperfect qal of the Hebrew verb “to be”.
Here another question presents itself: Is the being predicated of God in His name, the metaphysical being denoting nothing but existence itself, or is it an historical being, a passing manifestation of God in time? Most Protestant writers regard the being implied in the name Jahveh as an historical one, though some do not wholly exclude such metaphysical ideas as God’s independence, absolute constancy, and fidelity to His promises, and immutability in His plans (cf. Driver, “Hebrew Tenses”, 1892, p. 17). The following are the reasons alleged for the historical meaning of the “being” implied in the Divine name: The metaphysical sense of being was too abstruse a concept for the primitive times. Still, some of the Egyptian speculations of the early times are almost as abstruse; besides, it was not necessary that the Jews of the time of Moses should fully understand the meaning implied in God’s name. The scientific development of its sense might be left to the future Christian theologians. The Hebrew verb hayah means rather “to become” than “to be” permanently. But good authorities deny that the Hebrew verb denotes being in motion rather than being in a permanent condition. It is true that the participle would have expressed a permanent state more clearly; but then, the participle of the verb hayah is found only in Ex., ix, 3, and few proper names in Hebrew are derived from the participle. The imperfect mainly expresses the action of one who enters anew on the scene. But this is not always the case; the Hebrew imperfect is a true aorist, prescinding from time and, therefore, best adapted for general principles (Driver, p. 38). “I am who am” appears to refer to “I will be with thee” of v. 12; both texts seems to be alluded to in Os., i, 9, “I will not be yours”. But if this be true, “I am who am” must be considered as an ellipse: “I am who am with you”, or “I am who am faithful to my promises”. This is harsh enough; but it becomes quite inadmissible in the clause, “I am who am, hath sent me”. Since then the Hebrew imperfect is admittedly not to be considered as a future, and since the nature of the language does not force us to see in it the expression of transition or of becoming, and since, moreover, early tradition is quite fixed and the absolute character of the verb hayah has induced even the most ardent patrons of its historical sense to admit in the texts a description of God’s nature, the rules of hermeneutics urge us to take the expressions in Ex., iii, 13-15, for what they are worth. Jahveh is He Who Is, i.e., His nature is best characterized by Being, if indeed it must be designated by a personal proper name distinct from the term God (Revue biblique, 1893, p. 338). The scholastic theories as to the depth of meaning latent in Yahveh (Yahweh) rest, therefore, on a solid foundation. Finite beings are defined by their essence: God can be defined only be being, pure and simple, nothing less and nothing more; not be abstract being common to everything, and characteristic of nothing in particular, but by concrete being, absolute being, the ocean of all substantial being, independent of any cause, incapable of change, exceeding all duration, because He is infinite: “Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, . . . who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty” (Revelation 1:8). Cf. St. Thomas, I, qu. xiii, a. 14; Franzelin, “De Deo Uno” (3rd ed., 1883, thesis XXIII, pp. 279-86.
III. ORIGIN OF THE NAME JAHVEH (YAHWEH)
The opinion that the name Jahveh was adopted by the Jews from the Chanaanites, has been defended by von Bohlen (Genesis, 1835, p. civ), Von der Alm (Theol. Briefe, I, 1862, pp. 524-27), Colenso (The Pentateuch, V, 1865, pp. 269-84), Goldziher (Der Mythus bei den Hebräern, 1867, p. 327), but has been rejected by Kuenen (“De Godsdienst van Israel”, I, Haarlem, 1869, pp. 379-401) and Baudissin (Studien, I, pp. 213-18). It is antecedently improbable that Jahveh, the irreconcilable enemy of the Chanaanites, should be originally a Chanaanite god.
It has been said by Vatke (Die Religion des Alten Test., 1835, p. 672) and J.G. Müller (Die Semiten in ihrem Verhältniss zu Chamiten und Japhetiten, 1872, p. 163) that the name Jahveh is of Indo-European origin. But the transition of the Sanscrit root, div—the Latin Jupiter-Jovis (Diovis), the Greek Zeus-Dios, the Indo-European Dyaus into the Hebrew form Jahveh has never been satisfactorily explained. Hitzig’s contention (Vorlesungen über bibl. Theol., p. 38) that the Indo-Europeans furnished at least the idea contained in the name Jahveh, even if they did not originate the name itself, is without any value.
The theory that Jahveh is of Egyptian origin may have a certain amount of a priori probability, as Moses was educated in Egypt. Still, the proofs are not convincing: Röth (Die Aegypt. und die Zoroastr. Glaubenslehre, 1846, p. 175) derives the Hebrew name from the ancient moon-god Ih or Ioh. But there is no connection between the Hebrew Jahveh and the moon (cf. Pierret, “Vocabul. Hiérogl.”, 1875, p. 44). Plutarch (De Iside, 9) tells us that a statue of Athene (Neith) in Sais bore the inscription: “I am all that has been, is, and will be”. But Tholuck (op. cit., 1867, pp. 189-205) shows that the meaning of this inscription is wholly different from that of the name Jahveh. The patrons of the Egyptian origin of the sacred name appeal to the common. Egyptian formula, Nuk pu nuk but though its literal signification is “I am I”, its real meaning is “It is I who” (cf. Le Page Renouf, “Hibbert Lectures for 1879”, p. 244). As to the theory that Jahveh has a Chaldean or an Accadian origin, its foundation is not very solid: Jahveh is said to be a merely artificial form introduced to put meaning into the name of the national god (Delitzsch, “Wo lag das Paradies”, 1881, pp. 158-64); the common and popular name of God is said to have been Yahu or Yah, the letter I being the essential Divine element in the name. The contention, if true, does not prove the Chaldean or Accadian origin of the Hebrew Divine name; besides the form Yah is rare and exclusively poetic; Yahu never appears in the Bible, while the ordinary full form of the Divine name is found even in the inscription of Mesa (line 18) dating from the ninth century B.C. Yahu and Yah were known outside Israel; the forms enter into the composition of foreign proper names; besides, the variation of the name of a certain King of Hammath shows that Ilu is equivalent to Yau, and that Yau is the name of a god (Schrader, “Bibl. Bl.”, II, p. 42, 56; Sargon, “Cylinder”, xxv; Keil, “Fastes”, I. 33). But foreign proper names containing Yah or Yahu are extremely rare and doubtful, and may be explained without admitting gods in foreign nations, bearing the sacred name. Again, the Babylonian pantheon is fairly well known at present, but the god Yau does not appear in it. Among the pre-Semitic Babylonians, I is a synonym of Ilu, the supreme god; now I with the Assyrian nominative ending added becomes Yau (cf. Delitzsch, “Lesestücke”, 3rd ed., 1885, p. 42, Syllab. A, col. I, 13-16). Hommel (Altisrael. Ueberlieferung, 1897, pp. 144, 225) feels sure that he has discovered this Chaldean god Yau. It is the god who is represented ideographically (ilu) A-a, but ordinarily pronounced Malik, though the expression should be read Ai or Ia (Ya). The patriarchal family employed this name, and Moses borrowed and transformed it. But Lagrange points out that the Jews did not believe that they offered their children to Jahveh, when they sacrificed them to Malik (Religion semitique, 1905, pp. 100 sqq.). Jer., xxxii, 35, and Soph., i, 5, distinguish between Malik and the Hebrew God. Cheyne (Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, 1907, pp. 63 sqq.) connects the origin of Jahveh with his Yerahme’el theory; but even the most advanced critics regard Cheyne’s theory as a discredit to modern criticism. Other singular opinions as to the origin of the sacred name may be safely omitted. The view that Jahveh is of Hebrew origin is the most satisfactory. Arguing from Ex., vi, 2-8, such commentators as Nicholas of Lyra, Tostatus, Cajetan, Bonfrère, etc., maintain that the name was revealed for the first time to Moses on Mount Horeb. God declares in this vision that he “appeared to Abraham . . . by the name of God Almighty; and my name Adonai [Jahveh] I did not shew them”. But the phrase “to appear by a name” does not necessarily imply the first revelation of that name; it rather signifies the explanation of the name, or a manner of acting conformable to the meaning of the name (cf. Robion in “la Science cathol.”, 1888, pp. 618-24; Delattre, ibid., 1892, pp. 673-87; van Kasteren, ibid., 1894, pp. 296-315; Robert in “Revue biblique”, 1894, pp. 161-81). On Mt. Horeb God told Moses that He had not acted with the Patriarchs as the God of the Covenant, Jahveh, but as God Almighty.
Perhaps it is preferable to say that the sacred name, though perhaps in a somewhat modified form, had been in use in the patriarchal family before the time of Moses. On Mt. Horeb God revealed and explained the accurate form of His name, Jahveh. The sacred name occurs in Genesis about 156 times; this frequent occurrence can hardly be a mere prolepsis. Gen., iv, 26, states that Enos “began to call upon the name of the Lord [Jahveh]”, or as the Hebrew text suggests, “began to call himself after the name of Jahveh”. Jochabed, the mother of Moses, has in her name an abbreviated form Jo (Yo) of Jahveh. The pre-Mosaic existence of the Divine name among the Hebrews accounts for this fact more easily than the supposition that the Divine element was introduced after the revelation of the name. Among the 163 proper names which bear an element of the sacred name in their composition, 48 have yeho or yo at the beginning, and 115 have yahu or yah and the end, while the form Jahveh never occurs in any such composition. Perhaps it might be assumed that these shortened forms yeho, yo, yahu, yah, represent the Divine name as it existed among the Isralites before the full name Jahveh was revealed on Mt. Horeb. On the other hand, Driver (Studia biblica, I, 5) has shown that these short forms are the regular abbreviations of the full name. At any rate, while it is not certain that God revealed His sacred name to Moses for the first time, He surely revealed on Mt. Horeb that Jahveh is His incommunicable name, and explained its meaning.
———————————–
Besides the works referred to in the text, the reader may consult: RELAND, Deeds Excreitationum (Utrecht, 1707); SCHRADER in SCHENKEL’S Bibel Lexicon, s. v. Jahve; PHAT, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Jehovah; ROBERTSON SMITH in Brit. and Foreign Evan. Review (January, 1876), gives a summary of recent discussion of the subject; OEHLER, Real-Encyclopadie, S.V. Jehova.
A.J. MAAS Transcribed by Thomas M. Barrett Dedicated to Mary Kathryn French Barrett
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIIICopyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Jehovah
(, Yehovah’, Sept. usually /, Auth. Vers. usually the LORD), the name by which God was pleased to make himself known, under the covenant, to the ancient Hebrews (Exo 6:2-3), although it was doubtless in use among the patriarchs, as it occurs even in the history of the creation (Gen 2:4). The theory of Schwind (Semitische Denkm. 1792), that the record is of later origin than the Mosaic age, is based upon the false assumption that the Hebrews had previously been polytheistic. SEE GENESIS; SEE GOD.
I. Modern Pronunciation of the Name. Although ever since the time of Galatinus, a writer of the 16th century (De arcanis catholicae veritatis, lib. 3) not, as according to others, since Raymund Martin (see Gusset. Lex. p. 383) it has been the almost universal custom to pronounce the name (in those copies where it is furnished with vowels), Jehovah, yet, at the present day, most scholars agree that this pointing is not the original and genuine one, but that these vowels are derived from those of , Adonai. For the later Hebrews, even before the time of the Sept. version, either following some old superstition (compare Herod. 2:86; Cicero, De nat. deor. 3, 56) or deceived by a false interpretation of a certain Mosaic precept (Lev 24:16), have always regarded this name as too sacred even to be pronounced (Philo, De vit. Mosis, 3, 519, 529, ed. Colon.; Joseph. Ant. 2 ,12, 4; Talmud, Sanhed. 2, 90, a; Maimonides in Jad. Chasaka, 14, 10; also in More Nebochim, 1, 61; Theodoret, Quoest. 13 in Exodus; Eusebius, Praep. Evangel. 2, 305). Wherever, therefore, this ineffable name is read in the sacred books, they pronounced , Adonay, Lord, in its stead; and hence, when the Masoretic text came to be supplied with the vowels, the four letters were pointed with the vowels of this word, the initial taking, as usual, a simple instead of a compound Sheva. This derivation of the vowels is evident from the peculiar pointing after the prefixes, and from the use of the Dagesh after it, in both which particulars it exactly imitates the peculiarities of , and likewise from the varied pointing when following , in which case it is written and pronounced , Elohim, God, the vowels of which it then borrows, to prevent the repetition of the sound Adonay. That a similar law or notion prevailed even before the Christian era may be inferred from the fact that the Septuag. renders by , like ; and even the Samaritans observed the same custom, for they used to pronounce by the word , Shima, i.e. THE NAME (Reland, De Samaritanis, p. 12; Huntington, Letters, p. 33). (See, on this subject generally, Hadr. Reland, Decas exercitationum philol. de vera pron. nominis Jehova [Traj. ad Rhen. 1707]).
II. True Pointing of the Word. Maimonides (More Nebochim, 1, 62) gives an obscure account of the traditional and secret method of teaching its true pronunciation to the priests, but avers that it was unknown from its form. Many adduce the statements of Greek writers, as well profane as Church fathers, that the deity of the Hebrews was called Jao, (a few , ), Theodoret alone adding that the Samaritan pronunciation was IABE (Diod. Sic. 1, 94; Porphyry in Eusebius, Proep. Ev. 10, 11; Tzetzes, Chiliad. 7, 126; Hesychius often; Clemens Alex. Strom. 5, p. 666, Oxon.; Origen, in Dan. vol. 2, p. 45; Irenaeus, Hoeres. 2, 66; Jerome, in Psalms 8; Theodoret, Quoest. 15 in Exodus; Epiphanius, Hoer. 20). The Gnostics classed , as the Hebrew divinity, among their sacred emanations (Irenaeus, 1, 34; Epiph. Hoer. 26), along with several of his appellations (see Mather, Histoire du Gnosticisme, tab. 8-10; Bellermann, Ueber die Gemmen der Alten mit dem Abraxasbilde, fasc. 1, 2, Berlin, 1817, 1818); and that famous oracle of Apollo, quoted by Macrobius (Sat. 1, 18), ascribing this name () to the sun, appears to have been of Gnostic origin (Jablonski, Panth. AEgypt. 1, 250 sq.).
Hence many recent writers have followed the opinion of those who think that the word in question was originally pronounced , Yahvoh’, corresponding to the Greek . But this view, as well as that which maintains the correctness of the common pointing (Michaelis, Supplem. p. 524; Meyer, Bltter fr hhere Wahrheit, 11, p. 306), is opposed to the fact that verbs, of the class (8) from which this word appears to be derived do not admit such a pointing (Cholem) with their second radical. Moreover, the simple letters in would naturally be pronounced Jao by a Greek without any special pointing. Those, therefore, appear to have the best reason who prefer the pointing , Yahveh’ (not , Yahaveh’, for the first being a mappik-he [as seen in the form , kindred sum, esse] does not take the compound Sheva), as being at once agreeable to the laws of Hebrew vocalization, and a form from which all the Greek modes of writing (including the Samaritan, as cited by Theodoret) may naturally have sprung (=t, =o as a mater lectionis, and being silent; thus leaving a as the representative of the first vowel). From this, too, the apocapated forms and may most readily be derived; and it is further corroborated by the etymology. Ewald was the first who used in all his writings, especially in his translations from the O.T. Scriptures, the form Jahve, although in his youth he had taken ground in favor of Jehovah (comp. his Ueber d. Composition der Genesis, Brunswick, 1823). Another defender of Jahveh was Hengstenberg (Beitrge zur Einleit. ins A. T. Berlin, 1831-39, vol. 2). Strongest in defense of Jehovah is, among prominent German theologians, Hlemann, Bibelstudien (Leipzig, 1859-60), vol. 1.
III. Proper Signification of the Term. A clue to the real import of this name appears to be designedly furnished in the passage where it is most distinctively ascribed to the God of the Hebrews, Exo 3:14 : And God said to Moses, I shall be what I shall be ( ); and he said, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, The I SHALL BE has sent me to you (where the Sept. and later versions attempt to render the spirit of the Hebrew by ,, the Venetian Greek barbarously , Vulg. qui sum, A. Vers. I am). Here the Almighty makes known his unchangeable character, implied in his eternal self-existence, as the ground of confidence for the oppressed Israelites to trust in his promises of deliverance and care respecting them. The same idea is elsewhere alluded to in the Old Test., e.g. Mal 3:6, I am Jehovah; change not; Hos 12:6, Jehovah is his memento. The same attribute is referred to in the description of the divine Redeemer in the Apocalypse (Rev 1:4; Rev 1:8, , a phrase used indeclinably, with designed identification with Jehovah, see Stuart, Commentary, ad loc.), with which has been aptly compared the famous inscription on the Saitic temple of Isis ( , Plutarch, De Isid. et Osir. 9), and various parallel titles of heathen mythology, especially among Eastern nations. Those, however, who compare the Greek and Roman deities, Jupiter, Jove, , etc., or who seek an Egyptian origin for the name, are entirely in error (see Tholuck’s treatise transl. in the Bib. Repos. 1834. p. 89 sq.; Hengstenberg, Genuineness of the Pentateuch, 1, 213; for other Shemitic etymologies, see Frst, s.v.). Nor are those (as A. M’Whorter, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, Jan. 1857, who appears to have borrowed his idea from the Journ. of Sac. Lit. Jan. 1854, p. 393 sq.; see Tyler, Jehovah the Redeemer, Lond. 1861) entirely correct (see Frst’s Heb. Wrterb. s.v.) who regard as= , and this as the actual fut. Kal of the verb = , and so render it directly he shall be, i.e. He that shall be; since this form, if a verb at all, would be in the Hiphil (see Koppe ad Exod. loc., in Pottii Syll. 4, p. 59; Bohlen, ad Gen. p. 103; Vatke, Theolog. Bibl. p. 671) and would signify he that shall cause to be, i.e. the Creator; for the real fut. Kal is , Yihyeh’, as frequently occurs. It is rather a denominative, i.e. noun or adj., formed by the prepositive prefixed to the verb root, and pointed like and other nouns of similar formation (Nordheimer’s Hebr. Gram. 512; Lee’s Hebr. Gram. 159). The word will thus signify the Existent, and designate one of the most important attributes of Deity, one that appears to include all other essential ideas.
IV. Application of the Title. The supreme Deity and national God of the Hebrews is called in the O.T. by his own name Jehovah, and by the appellative ELOHIM, i.e. God, either promiscuously, or so that one or the other predominates according to the nature of the context or the custom of the writer. Jehovah Elohim, commonly rendered the Lord God, is used by apposition, and not, as some would have it, Jehovah of gods, i.e. chief or prince of gods. This is the customary appellation of Jehovah in Genesis 2, 3; Exo 9:30, etc. Far more frequent is the compounded form when followed by a genitive, as Jehovah God of Israel (Jos 7:13; Jos 8:30); Jehovah God of thy fathers (Deu 1:21; Deu 6:3); Jehovah God, thy God (Deu 1:31; Deu 2:7); Jehovah of hosts, i.e. of the celestial armies. SEE HOST.
It will be evident to the attentive reader that the term Lord, so frequently applied to Christ in the N.T., is generally synonymous with Jehovah in the Old Test. As Christ is called The Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty; and also, of him it is said, Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever; he must be Jehovah, the eternally existing and supreme God (Psa 102:25-27; Heb 1:10-12; Heb 13:8; Rev 1:4; Rev 1:8). See LOGOS. JAH (, Yah, Sept. , Auth. Vers. Lord, except in Psa 68:4) is a poetic form abbreviated from Jehovah, or perhaps from the more ancient pronunciation Jahveh. It is chiefly employed in certain customary formulas or refrains (as a proper title in Psa 89:9; Psa 94:7; Psa 94:12; Isa 38:11; Exo 15:2; Psa 118:4; Isa 12:2; Psa 68:5; Isa 26:4). This, as well as a modification of JEHOVAH, frequently occurs in proper names. SEE HALLELUJAH.
It should be remembered that the Hebrew name Jehovah is generally rendered, in the English version, by the word LORD (sometimes GOD), and printed in small capitals, to distinguish it from the rendering of and by the same word; it is rendered Jehovah only in Exo 6:3; Psa 83:18; Isa 12:2; Isa 26:4, and in the compound proper names following.
VI. Literature. For a full discussion of the questions connected with this sacred name, see, in addition to the above-cited works, Gataker, De noms. Dei tetragram, in his Opp. Crit. (Traj. ad Rhen. 1698); Meier, Lectio nom. tetragram exam. (Viterbo, 1725); Capellus, Or. de nom. Jehova, in his Critica Sac. p. 690; Crusius, Comment. de nominis tetragran. signif. (Lips. 1758); Malani, De Dei nom. juxta Heb. comment. crit. (Luccae, 1767) ; Koppe, Interpretat. formuloe, etc. (Gttingen, 1783), and in Pott’s Sylloge, 4, 50-66; Eichhorn, Biblioth. 5, 556-560; Wahl, D. Namen Gottes Jehova, excurs. 1 to his Habbakuk; J. D. Michaelis, De Jehova ab AEgypts culto, etc. in his Zerst. kl. Schrift. (Jena, 1795); Brendel, War Jehova bei den Heb. bloss ein Nationalgott? (Landsb. 1821) [see Theol. Annal. for 1822, p. 384]; R. Abr. ben-Ezra, Sepher Hasshem, mit Comm. by Lippmann (Fulda, 1834); Landauer, Jehova u. Elohim (Stuttg. 1836); Gambier, Titles of Jehovah (London, 1853); De Burgos, De nomine tetragrammato (Frankf. 1604; Amsterd. 1634); Fischer, id. (Tub. 1717); Jahn, De (Wittenb. 1755); Rafael ben-David, (Venice, 1662); Reineccius, De (Leipz. 1695- 6); Snoilshik, id. (Wittenb. 1621); Stephani, id. (Leips. 1677); Sylburg, De Jehova (Strasburg, 1643); Volkmar, De nominibus divinis (Wittenb. 1679); Kochler, De pronunciatione et vi (Erlangen, 1867); Kurtz, Hist. of the Old Covenant, 1, 18 sq.; 2, 98, 215. SEE ELOHIM.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Jehovah
the special and significant name (not merely an appellative title such as Lord [adonai]) by which God revealed himself to the ancient Hebrews (Ex. 6:2, 3). This name, the Tetragrammaton of the Greeks, was held by the later Jews to be so sacred that it was never pronounced except by the high priest on the great Day of Atonement, when he entered into the most holy place. Whenever this name occurred in the sacred books they pronounced it, as they still do, “Adonai” (i.e., Lord), thus using another word in its stead. The Massorets gave to it the vowel-points appropriate to this word. This Jewish practice was founded on a false interpretation of Lev. 24:16. The meaning of the word appears from Ex. 3:14 to be “the unchanging, eternal, self-existent God,” the “I am that I am,” a convenant-keeping God. (Comp. Mal. 3:6; Hos. 12:5; Rev. 1:4, 8.)
The Hebrew name “Jehovah” is generally translated in the Authorized Version (and the Revised Version has not departed from this rule) by the word LORD printed in small capitals, to distinguish it from the rendering of the Hebrew _Adonai_ and the Greek _Kurios_, which are also rendered Lord, but printed in the usual type. The Hebrew word is translated “Jehovah” only in Ex. 6:3; Ps. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4, and in the compound names mentioned below.
It is worthy of notice that this name is never used in the LXX., the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Apocrypha, or in the New Testament. It is found, however, on the “Moabite stone” (q.v.), and consequently it must have been in the days of Mesba so commonly pronounced by the Hebrews as to be familiar to their heathen neighbours.
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Jehovah
All the titles by which the living and true God was made known to Israel have now been brought under consideration with the exception of one, namely, Jehovah (), which occurs about 5500 times in the O.T. this name has been preserved by our translators in a few passages, but the word Lord, spelt in small capitals, has usually been substituted for it. The LXX set a precedent for this course by almost invariably adopting the word , Lord, as a rendering, the only exception being Pro 29:26, where , Ruler or Master, is found.
The shorter form, Jah, occurs in Exo 15:6; Exo 17:16, in each of which passages our translators have rendered it Lord; it is also found a few times in Isaiah, and in thirty-five passages in the Psalms, the earliest instances being Psa 77:11; Psa 89:8. We are familiar with it in the expression Hallelujah, i.e. Praise Jah, also in compound names suc has Elijah and Jehoshua.
It is a strange fact, with respect to the word Jehovah , that critics should differ as to its pronunciation, its origin, and its meaning. The first difficulty has arisen from the mystery with which the Jews have always surrounded this sacred and (as they hold) incommunicable name; but we may rest content with the traditional pronunciation of the word until there is stronger re as on than appears at present for the substitution of Jahveh, or of some other form. The Assyrians represent it in Israelitish names by the forms Yahu and Yahava (Sayce). The doubt about the signification of the name is owing probably rather to the finiteness of the human understanding than to any uncertainty as to the revelation of Jehovah contained in Scripture. [ in some foreign translations of the Bible the name Jehovah is rendered The Eternal. Perhaps there is no word which, on the whole, conveys the meaning of the name so well; but, after all, the truth which it represents is too many-sided to be rendered by any one word.]
Whatever may be the opinion about Elohim , it is generally agreed that Jehovah is not a generic or class name, but a personal or proper name. Maimonides says that all the names of God which occur in Scripture are derived from his works except one, and that is Jehovah ; and this is called ‘the plain name,’ because it teaches plainly and unequivocally of the substance of God. A Scotch divine has said, ‘ in the name Jehovah the Personality of the Supreme is distinctly expressed. It is everywhere a proper name, denoting the person of God, and Him only; whence Elohim partakes more of the character of a common noun, denoting usually, indeed, but not necessarily or uniformly, the Supreme. The Hebrew may say the Elohim , the true God, in opposition to all false Gods; but he never says the Jehovah , for Jehovah is the name of the true God only. He says again and again my god, but never my Jehovah , for when he says “my God” he means Jehovah . He speaks of the God of Israel, but never of the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah . He speaks of the living God, but never of the living Jehovah , for he cannot conceive of Jehova has other than living.’ [See Fairbairn’s Dict. of the Bible, art. Jehovah .]
The meaning, and, in all probability, the etymology [There has been much difference of opinion as to the formation of the word; but it may be noted that the v introduced into the name may be illustrated by the in the name of Eve.] of this name, is to be looked for in Exo 3:14, where, in answer to the question of Moses as to the name of the Elohim who was addressing him, the Lord said to Moses, ‘I Am That I Am’ [The words above rendered ‘I am that I am’ are almost unapproachable, after all. Owing to the vagueness of the Hebrew tense (which is the same in both parts of the sentence) we might render them in various ways, but none are better than our own, denoting as they do a Personal, Continuous, Absolute, Self-determining Existence. It ought to be observed that the Hebrew word rendered I AM occurs in several important prophetic passages, in which it has generally been rendered ‘I will be,’ Thus, in this same chapter of Exodus, and the 12th verse, we read, ‘Certainly I will be with thee;’ so in Gen 26:3. ‘I will be with thee and will bless thee;’ and in Gen 31:3, ‘I will be with thee.’ in these and similar passages we might render the words ‘I am with thee.’ They mark an eternal, unchanging Presence. Compare the identical words used by the Lord (Jesus Christ?) in Act 18:10. ‘I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee;’ also Joh 8:58, ‘Before Abraham came into being I am.’]–‘Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you . Jehovah , the Elohim of your fathers– of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, hath sent me unto you; this is my Name for ever, and this is my Memorial [Compare Hos 12:5, ‘ Jehovah is his memorial, i.e. the name by which his attributes were always to be brought to mind.] unto all generations.’ Again, in the sixth chapter (verses 2, 3), we read, ‘I am Jehovah , and I appeared unto Abraham, and unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by (the name of) El-Shaddai, and, as regards my name Jehovah , I was not fully known by them; yet, verily, I have established (or rather, taking the tense as a prophetic future,–I will establish) my covenant with them to give them the l and of Canaan.’ These two passages taken together elucidate the following points: first, that though the name Jehovah was in frequent use as the title of the Elohim of the Patriarchs, yet its full significance was not revealed to them; secondly, that it was to be viewed in connection with the fulfilment of God’s covenant and promise that now, after the lapse of some hundred years, the true import of the name was to be unfolded by the manifestation of a personal living Being, working in behalf of Israel, so as to fulfil the promises made to the Fathers. Thus the sublime idea of an unchanging, ever-living God, remaining faithful to his word through many generations, began to dawn up on the mind of Israel, and that which was hoped for, and sealed up in the Name during the Patriarchal age, began to work itself out into a substantial reality. God’s personal existence, the continuity of his dealings with man, the unchangeableness of his promises, and the whole revelation of his redeeming mercy, gather round the name Jehovah . ‘Thus saith Jehovah ,’ not ‘thus saith Elohim ,’ is the general introduction to the prophetic messages. It is as Jehovah that God became the Saviour of Israel, and as Jehovah He saves the world; and this is the truth embodied in the name of Jesus, which is literally Jehovah – Saviour.
It is supposed by some critics that the contributors to the early Books of the Bible were of different schools of thought, some believing in Elohim , some in Jehovah , and some in both. this is no place for discussing such a theory. Undoubtedly some writers preferred to use one name and some another. this is demonstrated by a comparison of parallel texts in Kings and Chronicles. [See Deuterographs.] Taking the Books as they stand, the important point to notice is that the various names of God are used by the sacred writers advisedly, so as to bring out the various aspects of his character and dealings. Thus, the first chapter of Genes is sets forth Creation as an act of power; hence Elohim is always used. The second chapter, which properly begins at the fourth verse, brings Elohim into communion with man; hence He is called Jehovah Elohim in the third chapter it may be observed that the Serpent avoids the use of the name Jehovah in the fourth chapter the offerings of Cain and Abel are made to Jehovah , and this is the case with the whole sacrificial system, both under the Patriarchal and the Levitical dispensation in many cases the offerings to Jehovah are accompanied by the calling on his name (see Gen 12:8; Gen 13:4); and probably from the earliest days the Name of Jehovah was taken as the embodiment of that hope for the human race which found its expression in sacrifice and in prayer (see Gen 4:26).
Although man had fallen, Jehovah had not forsaken him; his Spirit still strove with man (Gen 6:3), but the judicial aspect of his nature had to be exercised in punishment, as we see from the history of the Deluge, the confusion of tongues, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha in Gen 9:26, Jehovah is called the God of Shem; and in 14:22, He is identified by Abram with El-Elion, ‘the Most High God,’ who is ‘the Possess or of heaven and earth.’
In Gen 15:1, we are introduced to the expression which afterwards became so familiar, ‘the Word of Jehovah ;’ and throughout that remarkable chapter the name Elohim does not occur, because it is the name Jehovah which God adopts when making his communications and covenants with man in chap. 16 ‘the angel of Jehovah ‘ is spoken of for the first time, and appears to be identical with Jehovah Himself; He is also described by Abraham as ‘the Judge of all the earth’ (chap. 18:25).
The Patriarchs are frequently represented as worshipping and holding spiritual communication with Jehovah , who seems to have revealed Himself in a human form to these privileged children of Adam, whether through visions or otherwise (see Gen 18:1-2; Gen 28:13-17; Gen 32:24-30).
In Exo 24:10, we are told of the Elders that ‘they saw the God of Israel . and did eat and drink.’ What a marvellous sight, and what a mysterious feast is here recorded! But this God of Israel must have been Jehovah , whom Jacob or Israel worshipped, and who was now revealing Himself to fulfil the promises made to the fathers. [The LXX had not the courage to translate this literally, but rendered it, ‘They saw the place where the God of Israel stood.’]
Jehovah is represented as in constant communication with Moses; and when He threatened that He would not go up to the l and of Canaan with the people because of their idolatry, the law-giver took the sacred tent which already existed (for there must have been worship from the beginning), and pitched it without the camp, and ‘the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the do or of the tabernacle, and talked with Moses. and Jehovah spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend’ (Exo 33:9-11). Then it was that Moses besought this august Being to show him his glory, and his merciful answer was given and the revelation made: ‘Jehovah , the merciful and gracious El, long-suffering, and abounding in loving-kindness and truth. Keeping loving-kindness for thousands, pardoning iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means hold men guiltless; visiting the iniquity of the fathers up on the children, and up on the children’s children, unto the third and fourth generation’ (Exo 34:6-7).
Here, then, we have the full meaning of the name Jehovah , and we find that it sums up both the merciful and the judicial aspects of the Divine character, so that while the title Elohim sets forth God’s creative and sustaining Power, Shaddal his Bounty, and Elion his Sublimity, the name Jehovah sets forth his essential and unswerving principles of mercy and judgment, and presents Him as a Father, a Friend, and a Moral Governor.
Fuente: Synonyms of the Old Testament
Jehovah
Jahaveh or Yahaveh is probahly the correct form (the vowel pointing in Jehovah is derived from A-d-o-n-ay) from the substantive verb haawah (found only six times in the Bible; obsolete in Moses’ time; retained in Chaldee and Syriac from a time anterior to the division of the Semitic languages), for the more modern haayah, to be; a proof of the great antiquity of the name: “I AM THAT I AM” is the key of the name (Exo 3:14), expressing unchanging Being. The name was old and known long before; it appears compounded in Jo-chebed and Mor-iah, and simply in Genesis 2 and afterward. But its significance in relation to God’s people was new, and now first becoming experimentally known. (See GENESIS; GOD; EXODUS.)
Exo 6:2-3; “I am JEHOVAH, and I appeared unto Abraham,… by the name of God Almighty (El-Shaddai), but by My name JEHOVAH was I not known”: its full and precious import is only now about to be revealed. To the patriarchs He was known, when giving the promises, as GOD, Almighty to fulfill them (Gen 17:1); to Moses as Jehovah unchangeably faithful (Mal 3:6) in keeping them; compare Heb 13:8, which identifies Jesus with Jehovah. Elohim can do all that He wills; Yahweh will do all that He has promised. Elohim (the plural expressing the fullness of God’s powers) is appropriate to creation (Genesis 1 – 2:3); JEHOVAH ELOHIM to paradise and to the covenant of grace at the fall; the combination identifies the Jehovah of the moral government with the Elohim of creation.
If JEHOVAH had been a name of more recent introduction, the whole nation would never have accepted it with such universal reverence. Elohim appears in the trial of Abraham’s faith (Genesis 22); Jehovah, in its triumph. The last 19 chapters of Genesis, from Jacob’s meeting the angels and Esau, have Elohim alone (except in the history of Judah and Pharez, Genesis 38; and Joseph’s first entrance into Egypt, Genesis 39; and Jacob’s dying exclamation, Gen 49:18; the beginning and close of the long period of sorrow and patient waiting) to prepare by contrast for the fuller revelation to Moses, when Jehovah is made known in its full and experimental preciousness. “To be made known” (Exo 6:3) means to be manifested in act (Psa 9:17; Psa 48:3-6), making good in fact all that was implied in the name (Eze 20:9) (nodatiy).
The name was not new to Israel, for it occurs before Exo 6:3 in Exo 3:16; Exo 4:1. ELOHIM, from aalah “to be strong” (Furst), rather than from Arabic aliha, “astonishment”, alaha, “worship” (Hengstenberg), the Deity, expresses His eternal power and Godhead manifested in nature, commanding our reverence; JEHOVAH the Personal God in covenant with His people, manifesting boundless mercy, righteousness, and faithfulness to His word. So “Immanuel” is used not of the mere appellation, but of His proving in fact to be what the name means (Isa 7:14). The “I AM” (Exo 3:14) is to be filled up thus: I am to My people all whatever they want. Prayer is to supply the ellipsis, pleading God’s covenanted promises: light, life, peace, salvation, glory, their exceeding great reward, etc. I am all that My word declares, and their threefold nature, body, soul, and spirit, requires. I am always all this to them (Joh 8:58). “Before Abraham began, to be (Greek) I am” (Mat 28:20).
The Jews by a misunderstanding of Lev 24:16 (“utters distinctly” instead of “blasphemeth”) fear to use the name, saying instead “the name,” “the four lettered name,” “the great and terrible name.” So Septuagint, Vulgate, and even KJV (except in four places “Jehovah”: Isa 12:2; Isa 26:4; Exo 6:3; Psa 83:18) has “THE LORD,” which in CAPITALS represents JEHOVAH, in small letters Adonai. Maimonides restricts its use to the priests’ blessings and to the sanctuary; others to the high priest on the day of atonement, when entering the holy of holies. The Samaritans pronounced the name Yabe (Theodoret); found also in Epiphanius; Yahu in such names as Obadiah (Obad-yahu).
So that Jahveh (or Yahveh or Yahweh) seems the correct pronunciation. The Hebrew said the Elohim, in opposition to false gods; but never the Jehovah, for Jehovah means the true God only. Again, My God, Elohay, but not My Jehovah, for Jehovah by itself means this covenant relation to one. Again, the Elohim of Israel; but not the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah. Again, the living Elohim, but not the living Jehovah; for Jehovah means this without the epithet. Jehovah is in Old Testament the God of redemption. The correlative of Elohim is man, of Jehovah redeemed man. Elohim is God in nature, Jehovah God in grace (Exo 34:6-7).
Elohim is the God of providence; Jehovah is the God of promise and prophecy; hence, the prophets’ formula is, “thus saith Jehovah,” not Elohim. Elohim is wider in meaning, embracing the representatives of Deity, angels and human judges and rulers (Psa 82:6; Joh 10:34-35). Jehovah is deeper, the incommunicable name. The more frequent use of the name Jehovah from Samuel’s time is due to the religious revival then inaugurated, and to the commencement of the regular school of prophets. In the first four verses of the Bhagavat God says to Brahma, “I was at first … afterward I AM THAT WHICH IS, and He who must remain am I.” (Sir W. Jones).
Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary
JEHOVAH
See YAHWEH.
Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary
Jehovah
JEHOVAHSee God, 2 (f).
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Jehovah
The glorious incommunicable name of the I AM THAT I AM. In addition to what was offered under the article God, (which see) I would beg to observe, that this ineffable and mysterious name belongs to each glorious person of the GODHEAD, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and is used in common by each and by all. It implies every perfection of the divine nature, in the eternity, immensity, sovereignty, omnipotency, invisibility, etc. of the Lord. We find it sometimes joined with certain leading characters of the GODHEAD, all descriptive of the divine glory, as for example:
Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures
Jehovah
je-hova, je-hova. See GOD, NAMES OF, II, 5.
Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Jehovah
Jehovah, or rather perhaps Jahveh, the name by which God was pleased to make Himself known, under the covenant, to the ancient Hebrews (Exo 6:2-3). The import of this name has been considered under the head God.
Fuente: Popular Cyclopedia Biblical Literature
Jehovah
[Jeho’vah] See GOD.
Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary
Jehovah
Jehovah (je-ho’vah), he will be. A title of the supreme Being, indicative of eternal and immutable self-existence. Exo 6:3. It is similar to the title “I am.” Exo 3:14. In the English Bible it is usually translated “Lord” and printed in small capitals. It occurs first in the second chapter of Genesis. As distinct from Elohim, it signifies the God of revelation and redemption, the God of the Jews, while Elohim is the God of nature, the Creator and Preserver of all men. See Jah, God.
Fuente: People’s Dictionary of the Bible
Jehovah
(Hebrew Yahveh, of doubtful origin and meaning) Personal name of God or the supreme being in Hebrew theological and philosophical writings, common only since the 14th century; the national god of Israel since Mosaic times. Neither name was originally pronounced as written on account of its holiness, but was replaced by Elohim and Adonai. — K.F.L.
Fuente: The Dictionary of Philosophy
Jehovah
Jeho’vah. (I am; the eternal living one). The Scripture appellation of the supreme Being, usually interpreted as signifying self-derived and permanent existence. The Jews scrupulously avoided every mention of this name of God, substituting in its stead, one or other of the words with whose proper vowel-points it may happen to be written. This custom, which had its origin in reverence, was founded upon an erroneous rendering of Lev 24:16 from which it was inferred that the mere utterance of the name constituted a capital offence. According to Jewish tradition, it was pronounced, but once a year, by the high priest on the Day of Atonement when he entered the Holy of Holies; but on this point, there is some doubt.
When Moses received his commission to be the deliverer of Israel, the Almighty, who appeared in the burning bush, communicated to him, the name which he should give as the credentials of his mission: “And God said unto Moses, “I AM THAT I AM (ehyea asher ehyeh); and he said, ‘Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.’ ” That this passage is intended to indicate the etymology of Jehovah, as understood by the Hebrews, no one has ventured to doubt.
While Elohim exhibits God displayed in his power as the creator and governor of the physical universe, the name Jehovah designates his nature as he stands in relation to man, as the only almighty, true, personal, holy Being, a spirit and “the father of spirits,” Num 16:22, compare Joh 4:24, who revealed himself to his people, made a covenant with them, and became their lawgiver, and to whom all honor and worship are due.
Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary
Jehovah
, the proper and incommunicable name of the Divine Essence. That this divine name, Jehovah, was well known to the Heathens, there can be no doubt. Sanchoniathon writes Jebo; Diodorus, the Sicilian, Macrobius, St. Clemens Alexandrinus, St. Jerom, and Origen, pronounce Jao; Epiphanius, Theodoret, and the Samaritans, Jabe, Jave. We likewise find in the ancients, Jahoh, Javo, Javu, Jaod. The Moors call their god Jaba, whom some believe to be the same as Jehovah. The Latins, in all probability, took their Javis, or Jovis Pater, from Jehovah.
The Jews, after their captivity in Babylon, out of an excessive and superstitious respect for this name, left off to pronounce it, and thus lost the true pronunciation. The Septuagint generally renders it , the Lord. Origen, St. Jerom, and Eusebius, testify that in their time the Jews left the name of Jehovah written in their copies in Samaritan characters, instead of writing it in the common Chaldee or Hebrew characters; which shows their veneration for this holy name: and the fear they were under, lest strangers, who were not unacquainted with the Chaldee letters and language, should discover and misapply it. The Jews call this name of God the Tetragrammaton, or the name with four letters. It would be waste of time and patience to repeat all that has been said on this incommunicable name: it may not be amiss, however, to remind the reader,
1. That although it signifies the state of being, yet it forms no verb.
2. It never assumes a plural form.
3. It does not admit an article, or take an affix.
4. Neither is it placed in a state of construction with other words;
though other words may be in construction with it.
It seems to be a compound of , the essence, and , existing; that is, always existing; whence the word eternal appears to express its import; or, as it is well rendered, He who is, and who was, and who is to come,
Rev 1:4; Rev 11:17; that is, eternal, as the schoolmen speak, both a parte ante, and a parte post. Compare Joh 8:58. It is usually marked by an abbreviation, , in Jewish books, where it must be alluded to. It is also abbreviated in the term , Jah, which, the reader will observe, enters into the formation of many Hebrew appellations. See JAH.