From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Jehovah" at Exodus 6:3
(1611 King James Version)

Jehovah (pronounced /dʒɨˈhoʊvə/) is an anglicized spelling of "the proper name of God".^[1] It is a transliteration of Hebrew יְהֹוָה‎, a vocalization of the sacred Tetragrammaton יהוה, the name that, according to the Bible, God revealed to his people.^[2] יְהֹוָה appears 6,518 times in the traditional Masoretic Text, in addition to 305 instances of יֱהֹוִה (Jehovih).^{[3 ]} The earliest available Latin text to use a vocalization similar to Jehovah dates from the 13th century.^[4]

Pronunciation

The name Iehova at a Norwegian church.^[5]

The Jehovah form of the Tetragrammaton is said to be testified by Semitic and Greek phonetic texts and artifacts of the early Christian era.^[6][7] Others say that it is the pronunciation Yahweh that is testified in both Christian and pagan texts of the early Christian era.^{[6][8][9][10][11]}

Some proponents of the rendering Jehovah, including Karaite Jews^[12], state that although the original pronunciation of יהוה has been lost, well-established English renderings of other Hebrew personal names are accepted in normal usage, such as Joshua, Isaiah or Jesus, for which the original pronunciations may be unknown.^[13]

According to a Jewish tradition developed during the third to second centuries BC, the Tetragrammaton is written but not pronounced. When read, substitute terms replace the divine name where יְהֹוָה appears in the text. It is widely assumed, as proposed by the 19th-century Hebrew scholar Gesenius, that the vowels of the substitutes of the name, i.e. "Adonai" (Lord) and "Elohim" (God), were inserted by the Masoretes to indicate that these substitutes were to be used.^[14] When יהוה precedes or follows Adonai, the Masoretes placed the vowel points of Elohim into the Tetragrammaton, producing a different vocalization of the Tetragrammaton יֱהֹוִה, which was read as Elohim.^[15] In accordance with this reasoning, the form יְהֹוָה (Jehovah) has been characterized as a "hybrid form",^[6][16] and even "a philological impossibility".^[17]

Early modern translators disregarded the practice of reading Adonai (or its equivalents in Greek and Latin) in place of the Tetragrammaton and instead combined the four Hebrew letters of the text with the vowel points that, except in synagogue scrolls, accompanied them, resulting in the form Jehovah.^[18] This form, already in use by Roman Catholic authors such as Ramón Martí, achieved wide use in the translations of the Protestant Reformation.^[19] In the 1611 King James Version, Jehovah occurred seven times.^[20] In the 1901 American Standard Version, it was still the regular English rendition of יהוה, in preference to "the LORD".^[21] It is also used in Christian hymns such as the 1771 hymn, "Guide Me, O Thou Great Jehovah".^[22]

Development

The most widespread theory is that the Hebrew term יְהֹוָה has the vowel points of אֲדֹנָי (adonai). Using the vowels of adonai, the composite hataf patah ֲ under the guttural alef א becomes a sheva ְ under the yod י, the holam ֹ is placed over the first he ה, and the qamats ָ is placed under the vav ו, giving יְהֹוָה (Jehovah). When the two names, יהוה and אדני, occur together, the former is pointed with a hataf segol ֱ under the yod י and a hiriq ִ under the second he ה, giving יֱהֹוִה, to indicate that it is to be read as (elohim) in order to avoid adonai being repeated.^[23]

A 1552 Latin translation of the Sefer Yetzirah, using the form Iehouah for the "magnum Nomen tetragrammatum".

The pronunciation Jehovah is believed to have arisen through the introduction of vowels of the qere—the marginal notation used by the Masoretes. In places where the consonants of the text to be read (the qere) differed from the consonants of the written text (the kethib), they wrote the qere in the margin to indicate the desired reading. In such cases, the kethib was read using the vowels of the qere. For a few very frequent words the marginal note was omitted, referred to as q're perpetuum.^[17] One of these frequent cases was God's name, which was not to be pronounced in fear of profaning the "ineffable name". Instead, wherever יהוה (YHWH) appears in the kethib of the biblical and liturgical books, it was to be read as אֲדֹנָי (adonai, "My Lord [plural of majesty]"), or as אֱלֹהִים (elohim, "God") if adonai appears next to it. This combination produces יְהֹוָה (yehovah) and יֱהֹוִה (yehovih) respectively. יהוה is also written ’ה, or even ’ד, and read ha-Shem ("the name").^[23]

Scholars are not in total agreement as to why יְהֹוָה does not have precisely the same vowel points as adonai. The use of the composite hataf segol ֱ in cases where the name is to be read, "elohim", has led to the opinion that the composite hataf patah ֲ ought to have been used to indicate the reading, "adonai". It has been argued conversely that the disuse of the patah is consistent with the Babylonian system, in which the composite is uncommon.^[23]

Vowel points of יְהֹוָה and אֲדֹנָי

The spelling of the Tetragrammaton and connected forms in the Hebrew Masoretic text of the Bible, with vowel points shown in red.

The table below shows the vowel points of Yehovah and Adonay, indicating the simple sheva in Yehovah in contrast to the hataf patah in Adonay. As indicated to the right, the vowel points used when YHWH is intended to be pronounced as Adonai are slightly different to those used in Adonai itself.

The difference between the vowel points of ’ǎdônây and YHWH is explained by the rules of Hebrew morphology and phonetics. Sheva and hataf-patah were allophones of the same phoneme used in different situations: hataf-patah on glottal consonants including aleph (such as the first letter in Adonai), and simple sheva on other consonants (such as the 'y' in YHWH).^[24]

Introduction into English

The "peculiar, special, honorable and most blessed name of God" Iehoua,
an older English form of Jehovah
(Roger Hutchinson, The image of God, 1550)

According to the Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon, the pronunciation Jehovah was unknown until 1520 when it was introduced by Galatinus, who defended its use. However, this deduction has been revised, as the term Jehovah can be traced back at least to the Pugio fidei of Raymund Martin, written in about 1270.^[25]

In English it appeared in William Tyndale's translation of the Pentateuch ("The Five Books of Moses"),^[26] published in 1530 in Germany, where Tyndale had studied since 1524, possibly in one or more of the universities at Wittenberg, Worms and Marburg, where Hebrew was taught.^[27] The spelling used by Tyndale was "Iehouah"; at that time, I was not distinguished from J, and U was not distinguished from V.^[28] The original 1611 printing of the Authorized King James Version used "Iehovah". Tyndale wrote about the divine name: "IEHOUAH [Jehovah], is God's name; neither is any creature so called; and it is as much to say as, One that is of himself, and dependeth of nothing. Moreover, as oft as thou seest LORD in great letters (except there be any error in the printing), it is in Hebrew Iehouah, Thou that art; or, He that is."^[29]

The name Jehovah appeared in all early Protestant Bibles in English, except Coverdale's translation in 1535.^[30] The Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible used "the Lord", corresponding to the Latin Vulgate's use of "Dominus" (Latin for "Adonai", "Lord") to represent the Tetragrammaton. The Authorized King James Bible also, which used Jehovah in a few places, most frequently gave "the LORD" as the equivalent of the Tetragammaton. The name Jehovah appeared in John Rogers' Matthew Bible in 1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560, Bishop's Bible of 1568 and the King James Version of 1611. More recently, it has been used in the Revised Version of 1885, the American Standard Version in 1901, and the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures of the Jehovah's Witnesses in 1961.

At Exodus 6:3-6, where the King James Version has Jehovah, the Revised Standard Version (1952),^[31] the New American Standard Bible (1971), the New International Version (1978), the New King James Version (1982), the New Revised Standard Version (1989), the New Century Version (1991), and the Contemporary English Version (1995) give "LORD" or "Lord" as their rendering of the Tetragrammaton, while the New Jerusalem Bible (1985), the Amplified Bible (1987), the New Living Translation (1996, revised 2007), the English Standard Version (2001), and the Holman Christian Standard Bible (2004) use the form Yahweh.

Hebrew vowel points

Modern grammars of biblical Hebrew, such as Duane A Garrett's A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew^[32] agree that the Hebrew vowel points now found in printed Hebrew Bibles were invented in the second half of the first millennium AD, long after the texts were written. This is indicated in the authoritative Hebrew Grammar of Gesenius,^[33] and in encyclopedias such as the Jewish Encyclopedia,^[34] the Encyclopaedia Britannica,^[35] and Godwin's Cabalistic Encyclopedia,^[36] and is acknowledged even by those who claim that the grammars are perpetuating "scholarly myths".^[37]

Jehovist scholars, who believe pronounced /jəˈhoʊvə/ to be the original pronunciation of the divine name, argue that the Hebraic vowel-points and accents were known to writers of the scriptures in antiquity. Some members of Karaite Judaism, such as Nehemia Gordon, hold this view.^[13] The antiquity of the vowel points and of the rendering Jehovah was defended by various scholars, including Michaelis,^[38] Drach,^[38] Stier,^[38] William Fulke (1583), Johannes Buxtorf,^[39] his son Johannes Buxtorf II,^[40] and John Owen ^[41] (17th century); Peter Whitfield^[42][43] and John Gill^[44] (18th century); John Moncrieff ^[45] (19th century); and more recently by Thomas D. Ross,^[46] G. A. Riplinger,^[47] John Hinton,^[48] and Thomas M. Strouse (21st century).^[43]

Jehovist writers such as Nehemia Gordon (1972-) have acknowledged that there is general agreement among scholars that the original pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton was Yahweh, and that the vowel points now attached to the Tetragrammaton were added to indicate that Adonai was to be read instead, as seen in the alteration of those points after prefixes. He wrote: "There is a virtual scholarly consensus concerning this name" and "this is presented as fact in every introduction to Biblical Hebrew and every scholarly discussion of the name".^[49] Gordon disputed this consensus and wrote, "We have seen that the scholarly consensus concerning Yahweh is really just a wild guess", and went on to say that the vowel points of Adonai are not correct.^[50] He argued that "the name is really pronounced Yehovah with the emphasis on 'vah'. Pronouncing the name Yehovah with the emphasis on 'ho' (as in English Jehovah) would quite simply be a mistake."^[51]

Proponents of pre-Christian origin

Eighteenth-century theologian John Gill in his writing, A Dissertation Concerning the Antiquity of the Hebrew Language, Letters, Vowel-Points and Accents,^[52] argued for an extreme antiquity of their use,^[53] rejecting the idea that the vowel points were invented by the Masoretes. Gill presented writings, including passages of Scripture, that he interpreted as supportive of his Jehovist viewpoint that the Hebrew Scriptures must have included vowel-points and accents.^[54] He claimed that the use of Hebrew vowel points, and therefore of the name Jehovah (pronounced /jəˈhoʊvə/), is documented from before 200 BC, and even back to Adam by citing Jewish tradition that Hebrew was the first language. He argued that throughout this history the Masoretes did not invent the vowel points and accents, but that they were delivered to Moses by God at Sinai, citing^[55]Karaite authorities^[56] Mordechai ben Nisan Kukizov (1699) and his associates, who stated that "all our wise men with one mouth affirm and profess that the whole law was pointed and accented, as it came out of the hands of Moses, the man of God,"^[38] The argument between Karaite and Rabbinic Judaism on whether it was lawful to pronounce the name represented by the Tetragrammaton^[55] is claimed to show that some copies have always been pointed (voweled)^[48] and that some copies were not pointed with the vowels because of "oral law", for control of interpretation by some Judeo sects, including non-pointed copies in Synagogues.^[57] Gill claimed that the pronunciation pronounced /jəˈhoʊvə/ can be traced back to early historical sources which indicate that vowel points and/or accents were used in their time.^[58] Sources Gill claimed supported his view include:

• The Book of Cosri and commentator Rabbi Judab Muscatus, which claim that the vowel points were taught to Adam by God.^[59]
• Saadiah Gaon (927 AD)^[60]
• Jerome (380 AD)^[61]
• Origen (250 AD)^[62]
• The Zohar (120 AD)^[63]
• Jesus Christ (31 AD), based on Gill's interpretation of Matthew 5:18^[64]
• Hillel the Elder and Shammai division (30 BC)^[65]
• Karaites(120 BC)^[55]
• Demetrius Phalereus, librarian for Ptolemy II Philadelphus king of Egypt (277 BC)^[66]

Gill quoted Elia Levita, who said, "There is no syllable without a point, and there is no word without an accent", as showing that the vowel points and the accents found in printed Hebrew Bibles have a dependence on each other, and so Gill attributed the same antiquity to the accents as to the vowel points.^[67] Gill acknowledged that Elia Levita, "first asserted the vowel points were invented by "the men of Tiberias", but made reference to Levita's condition that "if anyone could convince him that his opinion was contrary to the book of Zohar, he should be content to have it rejected." Gill then alludes to the book of Zohar, stating that rabbis declared it older than the Masoretes, and that it attests to the vowel-points and accents.^[68]

William Fulke, John Gill, John Owen, and others held that Jesus Christ referred to a Hebrew vowel point or accent at Matthew 5:18, indicated in the King James Version by the word tittle.^{[69] [70]}Fulke argued that the words of this verse, spoken in Hebrew, but then transliterated into Greek of the New testament, are proof that these marks were applied to the Torah at that time.^{[71] [72]} John Lightfoot (1602-1675) claimed the Hebrew vowel points were of the Holy Spirit's invention, not of the Tiberians', characterizing the latter as "lost, blinded, besotted men".^[73]

In Peter Whitfield's 1847 A Dissertation on the Hebrew Vowel-Points. Shewing that they are an Original and Essential Part of the Language, he examined the positions of Levita and Capellus, giving many biblical examples to refute their notion of the novelty of vowel points. In his introduction, he claimed that the Roman Catholic Church favored Levita's position because it allowed the priests to have the final say in interpretation. The lack of authoritative vowel points in the Hebrew Old Testament, he said, leaves the meaning of many words to the interpreter. The word "Masoretes" comes from Hebrew māsar, which means "to hand over", "to transmit".^[74] Recalling this, Whitfield then gave 10 reasons for holding that the Hebrew vowel points and accents have to be used for Hebrew to be "clearly understood":

• I. The necessity of vowel-points in reading the Hebrew language (pp. 6-46). Without vowels, he said, simple pronunciations so necessary in learning a language are impossible. He reproved as naiveté Levita's suggestion that the master could teach a child with a thrice-rehearsed effort (pp. 22-23). He gave several biblical examples as proving this necessity.
• II. The necessity for forming different Hebrew conjugations, moods, tenses, as well as dual and plural endings of nouns (pp. 47-57). That both Hebrew verbs, including the seven conjugations, the moods and tenses, and the Hebrew nouns, with singular, dual and plural endings, are based on vowel diagnostic indicators is, he claimed, without controversy. The tremendous complexity of the Hebrew language without vowels argues against any oral tradition preservation inscripturated through the recent invention of vowels. Whitfield argued: "Whoever will consider a great many instances of these differences, as they occur, will own, he must have been a person of very great sagacity, who could ever have observed them without the points" (p. 48).
• III. The necessity of vowel-points in distinguishing a great number of words with different significations which without vowel-points are the same (58-61). Whitfield gave many examples of the same consonants with different points constituting different words. The diacritical mark (dot) above the right tooth or the left tooth of the shin/sin letter makes a great difference in some words. He said that if he gave all the examples, he would need "to transcribe a good part of the Bible or lexicon" (p. 58).
• IV. The inconsistency of the lateness of vowel-points in light of the Jew's zeal for their language since the Babylonian captivity (62-65). The Jews were zealous for their language, Whitfield observed, and they would not have been careless to let the inscripturated vocalization disappear through careless or indifferent oral tradition from the time of the captivity onward. He cited several ancient authorities describing the Jews' fanaticism about protecting the minuteness of their Scripture.
• V. The various and inconsistent opinions of the advocates for the novelty of vowel-points concerning the authors, time, place, and circumstances of their institution (66-71). Whitfield argued that the advocates for the recent vowel system had a wide variety of suggestions. Concerning the authors, some maintained that the inventor[s] were the Tiberian Jews while others suggested that it was Rabbi Judah Hakkadosh (c. AD 230). Some said the points were invented after the Talmud (c. AD 200-500), by the Masoretes (AD 600), or in the 10th century or the 11th century. For the place some had posited Tiberias whereas others had suggested the Asia Minor.
• VI. The total silence of the ancient writers, Jew and Christian, about their recent origin (72-88). Whitfield cited both early rabbins and Jerome as neglecting to refer to the late (post-Mosaic) origin of vowel-points.
• VII. The absolute necessity to ascertain Divine authority of the Scripture of the OT (89-119). Whitfield affirmed that Scripture is based on words and words are based on consonants and vowels. If there are no vowels in the Hebrew OT originals, then there is no Divine authority of the Hebrew OT Scriptures, he argued, citing 2 Tim. 3:16. He then gave a vast listing of passages that change meaning when points are lost, and thereby undermining divine authority.
• VIII. The many anomalies or irregularities of punctuation in the Hebrew grammar (120-133). This objection by Whitfield to the novelty of vowel-points was the many exceptions to vowel-point rules, anomalies and irregularities that demand a codified system for their exceptions to emphasize a particular point of grammar and truth.
• IX. The importance of the Kethiv readings versus the Keri marginal renderings (134-221). The existence of Kethiv (Aramaic for "write") readings in the Hebrew text and Keri (Aramaic for "call") readings in the margin of Hebrew manuscripts showed, he said, that the rabbins were serious about preserving the original words, including the vowel-points, when a questionable word arose in a manuscript. The pre-Christian antiquity of the Keri readings in the margin demanded the pre-Masoretic antiquity of the vowel points.
• X. The answer to two material questions (222-282). Whitfield responded to two of three significant questions in this section: 1) why does the LXX and Jerome's version differ from the Hebrew text in corresponding vowels on proper names? 2) Why the silence of the Jewish writers on the pointing prior to the 6th century of Christianity? and 3) Why were unpointed copies used in the Jewish synagogues? Briefly, he responded to the first questions by stating that the differences in the translations and the Hebrew pointed texts cannot be attributed to the vowels, since he said that the translators obviously did use the pointed copies, and that the Jewish commentators, coeval with the Masoretes, did in fact refer to the points. The third question, answered later in his book, was responded to by saying that there is no historical proof that unpointed copies were used exclusively in the synagogues.^[43][75]

The 1602 Spanish Bible (Reina-Valera/Cipriano de Valera) used the name Iehova and gave a lengthy defense of the pronunciation Jehovah in its preface.^[38]

Proponents of later origin

Despite Jehovist claims that vowel signs are necessary for reading and understanding Hebrew, modern Hebrew is written without vowel points.^[76][76] The Torah scrolls do not include vowel points, and ancient Hebrew was written without vowel signs.^[77][78]

The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in 1946 and dated from 400 BC to 70 AD,^[79] include texts from the Torah or Pentateuch and from other parts of the Hebrew Bible^[80][81] and have provided actual documentary evidence that, in spite of the above claims to the contrary, Hebrew was in fact then written without vowel points.^[82][83] In fact, according to Menahem Mansoor's The Dead Sea Scrolls: A College Textbook and a Study Guide, the vowel points found in printed Hebrew Bibles were devised in the ninth and tenth centuries AD.^[84]

Gill's view that the Hebrew vowel points were in use at the time of Ezra or even at the origins of the Hebrew language went against the consensus of Gill's own time,^[85] and which presented the following grounds for rejecting his theory:

• The argument that vowel points are necessary for learning to read Hebrew is refuted by the fact that the Samaritan text of the Bible is read without them and that several other Semitic languages, kindred to Hebrew, are written without any indications of the vowels.
• The books used in synagogue worship have always been without vowel points, which, unlike the letters, have thus never been treated as sacred.
• The Qere Kethib marginal notes give variant readings only of the letters, never of the points, an indication either that these were added later or that, if they already existed, they were seen as not so important.
• The Kabbalists drew their mysteries only from the letters and completely disregarded the points, if there were any.
• In several cases, ancient translations from the Hebrew Bible (Septuagint, Targum, Aquila of Sinope, Symmachus, Theodotion, Jerome) read the letters with vowels different from those indicated by the points, an indication that the texts from which they were translating were without points. The same holds for Origen's transliteration of the Hebrew text into Greek letters. Jerome expressly speaks of a word in Habakkuk 3:5, which in the present Masoretic Text has three consonant letters and two vowel points, as being of three letters and no vowel whatever.
• Neither the Jerusalem Talmud nor the Babylonian Talmud (in all their recounting of Rabbinical disputes about the meaning of words), nor Philo nor Josephus, nor any Christian writer for several centuries after Christ make any reference to vowel points.^[86][87]

Early modern arguments

In the sixteen and seventeenth centuries, various arguments were presented for and against the transcription of the form Jehovah.

Discourses rejecting Jehovah

Discourses defending Jehovah

Summary of discourses

In A Dictionary of the Bible (1863), William Robertson Smith summarized these discourses, concluding that "whatever, therefore, be the true pronunciation of the word, there can be little doubt that it is not Jehovah".^[90] Despite this, he consistently uses the name Jehovah throughout his dictionary and when translating Hebrew names. Some examples include Isaiah [Jehovah's help or salvation], Jehoshua [Jehovah a helper], Jehu [Jehovah is He]. In the entry, Jehovah, Smith writes: "JEHOVAH ( יְהֹוָה, usually with the vowel points of אֲדֹנָי ; but when the two occur together, the former is pointed יֱהֹוִה, that is with the vowels of אֱלֹהִים, as in Obad. i. 1, Hab. iii. 19:"^[91] This practice is also followed by many modern publications, such as the New Compact Bible Dictionary (Special Crusade Edition) of 1967 sponsored by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Peloubet's Bible Dictionary of 1947.

Usage in English

The following works render the Tetragrammaton as Jehovah, either exclusively or occasionally:

• William Tyndale, in his 1530 translation of the first five books of the English Bible, at Exodus 6:3 renders the divine name as "Iehovah". In his note to this edition he wrote: "Iehovah is God's name... Moreover, as oft as thou seeist LORD in great letters (except there be any error in the printing) it is in Hebrew Iehovah."
• The King James (Authorized) Version, 1611: four times as the personal name of God (in all capital letters): Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 26:4; and three times in place names: Genesis 22:14; Exodus 17:15; and Judges 6:24.
• Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible by J.N. Young, 1862, 1898 renders the Tetragrammaton as "Jehovah" 6,831 times.
• A literal translation of the Old Testament (1890) and the New Testament (1884), by John Nelson Darby, renders the Tetragrammaton as "Jehovah" 6,810 times in the main text.
• The American Standard Version, 1901 edition, renders the Tetragrammaton as "Je-ho’vah" in all 6,823 places where it occurs in the Old Testament.
• The Modern Reader's Bible, 1914, by Richard Moulton, uses "Jehovah" at Ps.83:18; Ex.6:2-9; Ex.22:14; Ps.68:4; Jerm.16:20; Isa.12:2 & Isa. 26:4
• The New English Bible, published by Oxford University Press, 1970; e.g. Gen 22:14; Exodus 3:15,16; 6:3; 17:15; Judges 6:24
• The Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (1985) by Jay P. Green, Sr., renders the Tetragrammaton as "Jehovah" 6,866 times.
• The Living Bible, published by Tyndale House Publishers, Illinois 1971; e.g. Gen 22:14, Exodus 3:15; 4:1-27; 17:15; Lev 19:1-36; Deut 4: 29, 39; 5:5, 6; Judges 6:16, 24; Ps 83:18; 110:1; Isaiah 45:1, 18; Amos 5:8; 6:8; 9:6
• The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1961 and revised 1984: "Jehovah" appears 7,210 times, i.e. 6,973 in the Old Testament and 237 times in the New Testament.
• In the Emphatic Diaglott (1864), a translation of the New Testament by Benjamin Wilson, the name "Jehovah" appears 18 times.

The Bible in Today's English (Good News Bible), published by the American Bible Society, 1976, uses "The Lord" in its translation, stating in its preface, "the distinctive Hebrew name for God (usually transliterated Jehovah or Yahweh) is in this translation represented by 'The Lord'." A footnote to Exodus 3:14 states, "Yahweh, traditionally transliterated as Jehovah." Recent translations into English use Yahweh, not Jehovah.^[92]

The word Jehovah displayed at the Roman Catholic Church named St. Martinskirche, Olten, Switzerland, 1521.

Following the Middle Ages, many Catholic churches and public buildings across Europe were decorated with the name, Jehovah. For example, the Coat of Arms of Plymouth (UK) City Council bears the Latin inscription, "Turris fortissima est nomen Jehova",^[93] derived from Proverbs 18:10.

Jehovah has been a popular English word for the personal name of God for several centuries. For this reason, some religious groups, notably Jehovah's Witnesses^[94] and the King-James-Only movement, make prominent use of the name.

Greek and Latin sources

Neophytus Vamvas' most widely available translation of the Holy Bible in modern Greek

Under the heading "יהוה c. 6823", the editors of the Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon write that יְהֹוָה occurs 6,518 times in the Masoretic Text and that it is read as "Adonai" or "Elohim".^{[3 ]}

Greek transcriptions similar to "Jehovah"

• Ιουώ (Iouō): Pistis Sophia^{[95 ]} (2nd cent.)
• Ιεού (Ieou): Pistis Sophia^{[95 ]} (2nd cent.)
• Ιεηωουά (Ie-ee-ōoua): Pistis Sophia^[96] (2nd cent.)
• Ιευώ (Ievō): Eusebius^[97] (c. 315)
• Ιεωά (Ieōa): Hellenistic magical texts^[98] (2nd-3rd centuries), M. Kyriakakes^[99] (2000)
• Ιεχοβά (like Jehova[h]): Paolo Medici^[100] (1755)
• Ιεοβά (like Je[h]ova[h]): Greek Pentateuch^[101] (1833), Holy Bible translated in modern Greek by Neophytus Vamvas^[102] (1850)
• Ιεχωβά (like Jehova[h]): Panagiotes Trempelas^[103] (1958)

Latin and English transcriptions similar to "Jehovah"

Excerpts from Raymond Martin's Pugio Fidei adversus Mauros et Judaeos (1270, p. 559), containing the phrase "Jehova, sive Adonay, qvia Dominus es omnium" (Jehovah, or Adonay, for you are the Lord of all).

Geneva Bible, 1560. (Psalm 83:18)

A Latin rendering of the Tetragrammaton has been the form "Jova", sounding very similar to "Jehovah".
(Origenis Hexaplorum, edited by Frederick Field, 1875.)

Transcriptions of יְהֹוָה similar to Jehovah occurred as early as the 12th century.

• Ieve: Petrus Alphonsi^[104] (c. 1106), Alexander Geddes^[105] (1800)
• Jehova: Raymond Martin (Raymundus Martini)^[106] (1278), Porchetus de Salvaticis^[107] (1303), Tremellius (1575), Marcus Marinus (1593), Charles IX of Sweden^[108] (1606), Rosenmüller^[109] (1820), Wilhelm Gesenius (c. 1830)^[110]
• Yohoua: Raymond Martin^[106] (1278)
• Yohouah: Porchetus de Salvaticis^[107] (1303)
• Ieoa: Nicholas of Cusa (1428)
• Iehoua: Nicholas of Cusa (1428), Peter Galatin (Galatinus)^[111] (1516)
• Iehova: Nicholas of Cusa (1428), Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples (1514), Sebastian Münster (1526), Leo Judae (1543), Robert Estienne (1557)
• Ihehoua: Nicholas of Cusa (1428)
• Jova: 16th century^[112], Rosenmüller^[109] (1820)
• Jehovah: Paulus Fagius (1546), Calvin (1557), King James Bible (1671 [OT] / 1669 [NT]), Matthew Poole^[113] (1676), Benjamin Kennicott^[114] (1753), Alexander Geddes^[105] (1800)
• Iehouáh: Geneva Bible (1560)
• Iehovah: King James Version (1611), Henry Ainsworth (1627)
• Jovae: Rosenmüller^[109] (1820)
• Yehovah: William Baillie^[115] (1843)

See also

• Adon
• Allah
• Ea
• El
• Ellil
• Elohim
• God
• God in the Bahá'í Faith, God in Christianity, God in Islam, God in Judaism
• Gott
• I am that I am
• Jah
• Jehovah's Witnesses
• Names of God
• Names of God in Judaism
• Tetragrammaton (YHWH)
• Theophoric names:

• Jehoshaphat, Jehonadab, Tobijah
• Jeho*,[24],[25]

• Yahweh
• Yam (Ya'a, Yaw)

• "Tetragrammaton" in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica.
• "Jehovah_(Yahweh)" in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica.

References

This article incorporates text from the 1901–1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, a publication now in the public domain.

From Wikiquote

Jehovah is a variant of the personal name of the single god in Judaism and Christianity. Other variations of it include Yahweh, YHWH, Yahwe, Yahveh, YHVH, Yahve, Wahvey, Jahvey, Jahweh, JHVH.

Attributed

• ⁶ And Jehovah went on to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:

 ⁷ “Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man; I shall question you, and you inform me.  ⁸ Really, will you invalidate my justice? Will you pronounce me wicked in order that you may be in the right?

• ²And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am Jehovah: ³And 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.
  • Exodus 6:2-3
  • Text written by Moses or possibly Ezra according to the documentary hypothesis

• My name is Jehovah, and I know the end from the beginning.
  • The Book of Abraham 2:8 in the Pearl of Great Price

• 38 And Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:

 2 “Who is this that is obscuring counsel By words without knowledge?  3 Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man, And let me question you, and you inform me.  4 Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth? Tell [me], if you do know understanding. Job

• Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?
  • Amos 3:6

• "YOU are my witnesses," is the utterance of Jehovah, "and I am God"
  • Isaiah 43:12

• This is my Son, the beloved; listen to him.
  • Mark 9:7

About Jehovah

• Men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.
  • David, Psalms 83:18

• In the name of the great Jehovah, and the Continental Congress!
  • Ethan Allen

See also

• Allah

External links

Wikipedia has an article about:

Jehovah

• Jehovah. Christian Answers Network.
• Yĕhovah (Strong's H3068)

From LoveToKnow 1911

(There is currently no text in this page)

Definition from Wiktionary, a free dictionary

English

Etymology

Transliteration of Hebrew יהוה Causative form (Hiphil) of the verb "havah" (הוה) "to be / to become". "He causes to be" or "He comes to be". The word deliberately uses the vowel sounds from "adonai" (אדני) "lord".

Proper noun

Jehovah

1. (religion) The personal name of God in the Hebrew Scriptures; in Hebrew, יהוה (YHVH)
2. A Jehovah's Witness.
   • I've never had Jehovahs at my door, but the other day two Mormons came to my door.

Translations

See also

• hallelujah
• Jah
• Yahweh

From BibleWiki

Je·ho′vah the causative form, the imperfect state, of the Heb. verb ha·wah′ (become); meaning “He Causes to Become”.

The Creator of the universe and all things in it.

The special and significant name (not merely an appellative title such as Lord /Adonai) by which God revealed himself to the ancient Hebrews Ex 6:3. 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 an 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, Rev 1:8.)

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 83¹⁸; Isa 12:2; Isa 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, 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.

what mentions this? (please help by turning references to this page into wiki links)

Jehovah (Jewish Encyclopedia)

A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash"). This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the kere" (marginal reading of the Masorites: אֲדֹנָי = "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading: יהוה = "Yhwh")—"Adonay" (the Lord) being substituted with one exception wherever Yhwh occurs in the Biblical and liturgical books. "Adonay" presents the vowels "shewa" (the composite ( ֲ ) under the guttural א becomes simple ( ְ ) under the י), "holem," and "kamez," and these give the reading ( יְהֹוָה ) (= "Jehovah"). Sometimes, when the two names ( יהוה ) and ( אדני ) occur together, the former is pointed with "hatef segol" ( ֱ ) under the י — thus, יֱהֹוִה (="Jehovah")—to indicate that in this combination it is to be pronounced "Elohim" ( אֱלֹהִים ). These substitutions of "Adonay"and "Elohim" for Yhwh were devised to avoid the profanation of the Ineffable Name ( hence יהוה is also written ’ ה, or even ’ ד, and read "ha-Shem" = "the Name ").

The reading "Jehovah" is a comparatively recent invention. The earlier Christian commentators report that the Tetragrammaton was written but not pronounced by the Jews (see Theodoret, "Question. xv. in Ex." [Field, "Hexapla," i. 90, to Ex. vi. 3]; Jerome, "Præfatio Regnorum," and his letter to Marcellus, "Epistola," 136, where he notices that "PIPI" [= ΠIΠI = יהוה ] is presented in Greek manuscripts; Origen, see "Hexapla" to Ps. lxxi. 18 and Isa. i. 2; comp. concordance to LXX. by Hatch and Redpath, under ΠIΠI, which occasionally takes the place of the usual κύριος, in Philo's Bible quotations; κύριος = "Adonay" is the regular translation; see also Aquila).

"Jehovah" is generally held to have been the invention of Pope Leo X.'s confessor, Peter Galatin ("De Arcanis Catholicæ Veritatis," 1518, folio xliii.), who was followed in the use of this hybrid form by Fagius (= Büchlein, 1504-49). Drusius (= Van der Driesche, 1550-1616) was the first to ascribe to Peter Galatin the use of "Jehovah," and this view has been taken since his days (comp. Hastings, "Dict. Bible," ii. 199, s.v. "God"; Gesenius-Buhl, "Handwörterb." 1899, p. 311; see Drusius on the tetragrammaton in his "Critici Sacri, i. 2, col. 344). But it seems that even before Galatin the name "Jehovah" had been in common use (see Drusius, l.c. notes to col. 351). It is found in Raymond Martin's "Pugio Fidei." written in 1270 (Paris, 1651, iii., pt. ii., ch. 3, p. 448; comp. T. Prat in "Dictionnaire de la Bible," s.v.). See also Names of God.

The pronunciation "Jehovah" has been defended by Stier ("Hebr. Lehrgebäude") and Hölemann ("Bibelstudien.," i.).

The use of the composite "shewa" "hatef segol" ( ֱ ) in cases where "Elohim" is to be read has led to the opinion that the composite "shewa" "hatef patah" ( ֲ ) ought to have been used to indicate the reading "Adonay." It has been argued in reply that the disuse of the "patah" is in keeping with the Babylonian system, in which the composite "shewa" is not usual. But the reason why the "patah" is dropped is plainly the non-guttural character of the "yod"; to indicate the reading "Elohim," however, the "segol" (and "hirek" under the last syllable, i.e., יֱהֹוִה ) had to appear in order that a mistake might not be made and "Adonay" be repeated. Other peculiarities of the pointing are these: with prefixes ("waw," "bet," "min") the voweling is that required by "Adonay": "wa-Adonay," "ba-Adonay," "me-Adonay." Again, after "Yhwh" (= "Adonay") the "dagesh lene" is inserted in בגדכפת, which could not be the case if "Jehovah" (ending in ה) were the pronunciation. The accent of the cohortative imperatives ( (image) ), which should, before a word like "Jehovah," be on the first syllable, rests on the second when they stand before ( יהוה ) , which fact is proof that the Masorites read "Adonay" (a word beginning with "a").

Bibliography: Schrader-Schenkel, Bibellexikon, iii. 147 et seq.; Köhler, De Pronunciatione Tetragrammatis, 1867; Driver, Recent Theories on the . . . Pronunciation, etc., in Studia Biblica, i., Oxford, 1885; Dalman, Der Gottesname Adonaj und Seine Gesch. 1889; Dillmann, Kommentar zu Exodus und Leviticus, p. 39, Leipsic, 1897; Herzog-Hauck, Real-Encyc. viii., s.v. Jahve.

Jehovah (Catholic Encyclopedia)

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.

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.

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 (Catholic Encyclopedia)|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" (Apoc., i, 8). Cf. St. Thomas, I, qu. xiii, a. 14; Franzelin, "De Deo Uno" (3rd ed., 1883, thesis XXIII, pp. 279-86.

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.