Skip to content

Web Research: The Tetragrammaton as Divine Name — Personal Name or Shared Identity?

Study Context

  • Series: Trinity (trin-12)
  • Prior Study: trin-11 established the Angel of YHWH as pre-incarnate Christ
  • Core Question: Does the divine name YHWH function as a personal name identifying a single divine person, or as a name expressing divine nature/identity that can be shared by persons within that identity?

1. Etymology of YHWH from Hayah — Scholarly Debate

Source: Bart Ehrman, "YHWH: Meaning and Etymology of the Tetragrammaton"

  • URL: https://www.bartehrman.com/yhwh/
  • Key Claims:
  • Anne Marie Kitz proposes the name may derive from a verb signifying "to be," "to exist," "to bring into being," or "to occur"
  • The word 'ehyeh in Exodus 3:14 "directly relates etymologically to Yahweh" with the meaning "I am"
  • Patrick Miller proposes an alternative origin: YHWH as a shortened form of "El who creates the hosts," suggesting connection to the Canaanite high god El — emphasizing creative rather than merely existential aspect
  • Robert Alter supports the original pronunciation as "YAH-weh" (scholarly consensus)
  • Thomas Romer argues for 'Yaho' or 'Yahu'; Max Reisel contends for YeHuaH
  • "Jehovah" was created by combining Adonai's vowel points with YHWH's consonants during the medieval period
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — Exodus 3:14 etymology must be checked against Hebrew morphology

Source: Ethan R. Longhenry, "Understanding the Tetragrammaton"

  • URL: https://www.deverbovitae.com/articles/understandingtetragrammaton/
  • Key Claims:
  • YHWH derives from Hebrew verb hayah (to be)
  • 'Ehyeh is "a first person common singular imperfect form of the verb hayah, to be"
  • Converting from first person ('ehyeh, "I am") to third person yields yihyeh, which becomes YHWH through consonant glide changes (w/y interchange)
  • Probable sense: "He Is" or "He Will Be" — derived from Exodus 3:14
  • Early Christian witnesses (Clement, Theodoret, Epiphanius) preserve pronunciation traditions
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the Qal "He Is" vs Hiphil "He Causes to Be" debate needs verification in Hebrew grammars

Source: General scholarly consensus from multiple search results

  • Key Claims:
  • The Hiphil (causative) stem reading yields "He Brings into Existence" or "He Causes to Be" — emphasizing dynamic creative agency rather than static being
  • William Foxwell Albright and Frank Moore Cross championed the causative reading, connecting YHWH to the full liturgical formula "Yahweh-Asher-Yahweh" ("He creates what comes into existence") or "El who creates the [heavenly] hosts"
  • The Qal stem reading yields "He Is" or "He Will Be" — emphasizing self-existence and eternal presence
  • Exodus 3:14 ehyeh asher ehyeh can mean "I am who I am" OR "I will be what I will be" — the imperfect aspect is deliberately ambiguous
  • Classification: Lead to verify — both readings have implications for whether the name describes personal identity or ontological nature

Theological Significance for This Study

The etymology debate matters because: if YHWH means "He Is" (ontological self-existence), the name describes the divine nature and could theoretically be shared by all who possess that nature. If it means "He Causes to Be" (creative agency), it could function more as a personal-relational name. The Exodus 3:14 first-person form (ehyeh) vs. the third-person form (YHWH) distinction may itself suggest the name functions at the level of being/nature rather than personal identification.

2. Genesis 19:24 — "YHWH Rained from YHWH" (The Two-YHWH Problem)

Source: Zealous Ministries, "A YHWH in Heaven and a YHWH on Earth"

  • URL: https://zmin.org/yhwh-heaven-earth
  • Key Claims:
  • "The first 'YHWH' is the man identified as YHWH on the earth, and the second 'YHWH' is another person in heaven"
  • Hebrew grammar analysis: Abraham addresses one man with singular forms of Adonai (אֲדֹנָי), the designation reserved for YHWH
  • In Genesis 19:2, Lot uses the plural Adonai (אֲדֹנַי) when addressing the two angels, deliberately NOT identifying them as YHWH
  • This linguistic differentiation reinforces that only one figure among the three visitors bears the YHWH designation
  • The narrative traces YHWH appearing in human form, walking with Abraham, then departing — then rain comes "from YHWH out of heaven"
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — Genesis 18-19 narrative sequence, Hebrew pointing of Adonai forms

Source: Michael Heiser (cited in multiple results)

  • Key Claim: "The destruction of Sodom involved two figures called Yahweh, one localized on earth and one in heaven. The text's wording demands this distinction."
  • Classification: Lead to verify — Heiser's two-powers reading needs checking against the actual Hebrew text and Jewish interpretive traditions

Counter-arguments to investigate:

  • Some Jewish interpreters read the second YHWH as a respectful repetition rather than a distinct referent (stylistic redundancy)
  • The "divine agent" model: any authorized representative speaks as YHWH without being a distinct divine person
  • Targum traditions may paraphrase this verse to avoid the two-YHWH reading

3. Zechariah 2:8-11 — YHWH Sends YHWH

Source: StudyLight commentary compilation

  • URL: https://www.studylight.org/commentary/zechariah/2-8.html
  • Key Claims:
  • The speaker is identified as "the angel of the Covenant, called Jehovah here as is appropriate; but the identity of the angel being actually different from that of Jehovah himself is apparent in the second clause where the third person appears"
  • This is "an amazing revelation regarding the covenant Angel, equal with God, but nevertheless subordinate in the matter of his being 'sent'"
  • The figure functions as a "theophanic agent — divinely authorized messenger whose words convey God's will"
  • Patristic, medieval, and many Protestant exegeses read this as a Christophany
  • "The very close association between The Angel and YHWH combined with the clear distinctness of each points to this being a Christophany"
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — Zechariah 2:8-11 Hebrew text, the identity of the speaker, the "sent me" formula

Significance for This Study

This passage is critical because if YHWH sends someone who is also called YHWH, then either: (a) the name YHWH can be borne by more than one person within the divine identity, or (b) the agent-representation model explains the usage. The passage connects directly to trin-11's Angel of YHWH findings.

4. The Ego Eimi / Ani Hu Connection (John 8:58 and Isaiah's YHWH-Formula)

Source: Alpha and Omega Ministries, "Purpose and Meaning of Ego Eimi in the Gospel of John"

  • URL: https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/general-apologetics/purpose-and-meaning-of-ego-eimi-in-the-gospel-of-john/
  • Key Claims:
  • "The closest and most logical connection between John's usage of ego eimi and the Old Testament is found in the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew phrase ani hu in Isaiah, rather than a direct connection to Exodus 3:14"
  • "An immediate and unqualified jump from the ego eimi of John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14 is considered unwise by scholars"
  • The Septuagint translates ani hu as ego eimi in Isaiah 41:4, 43:10, and 46:4
  • The proper chain: ego eimi → ani hu (Isaiah) → and THEN the connection between Isaiah and Exodus 3:14
  • The connection to Exodus 3:14 is "undeniable" but must be traced through Isaiah's usage, not directly
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — check LXX of Isaiah 41:4, 43:10, 46:4; compare with Exodus 3:14 LXX rendering; examine John 8:58 Greek

Counter-Arguments

  • Unitarian position: "Nowhere in Scripture is 'I am' treated as a standalone divine name, and ani hu never functions as a name in the way the divine name YHWH does"
  • Some scholars argue ego eimi in John 8:58 is simply an affirmative response or a statement of pre-existence without divine-name connotations
  • The grammatical construction (prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi) may emphasize temporal pre-existence rather than divine identification
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the syntactic structure of John 8:58 needs careful analysis; the reaction of the audience (picking up stones) is contextually significant

Significance for This Study

If the ego eimi / ani hu formula is a divine self-identification formula in Isaiah (where YHWH says "I am He" to distinguish himself from false gods), and Jesus uses the same formula, this constitutes an implicit claim to share in the divine identity expressed by the name YHWH — without necessarily claiming to be the Father.

5. Daniel 7:13-14 — The Son of Man Receiving Divine Worship

Source: Austin W. Duncan, "Son of Man in Daniel 7: Jesus' Authority Explained"

  • URL: https://www.austinwduncan.com/exegetica/the-son-of-man-in-daniel-7/
  • Key Claims:
  • Bar enash (בַר אֱנָשׁ) literally means "son of man" = "human being" in Aramaic
  • The figure receives everlasting dominion that "shall not pass away" and a kingdom that "shall not be destroyed"
  • "The service rendered to Him by all nations implies worship, a prerogative reserved for deity in Scripture"
  • Early Jewish texts understood the Son of Man as "a transcendent, individual figure"
  • Some modern Jewish interpreters read "one like a son of man" and "the people of the holy ones of the Most High" (Dan 7:27) as collective references to Israel
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — Daniel 7:13-14 Aramaic text, pelach usage, comparison with 7:27

Source: Troy Salinger, "Why Daniel 7:14 Is Not A Proof-Text For The Deity Of Christ"

  • URL: https://letthetruthcomeoutblog.wordpress.com/2022/03/18/why-daniel-714-is-not-a-proof-text-for-the-deity-of-christ/
  • Counter-Arguments:
  • Most English Bible versions render Aramaic pelach (פלח) as "serve" rather than "worship" (NIV, AMP, EHV are exceptions)
  • Targumic evidence shows pelach used for service rendered to humans, not exclusively deities — cites Genesis 14:4; 15:14; 27:29 Targums
  • The limited Aramaic corpus means pelach's range cannot be definitively restricted to divine worship
  • LXX uses latreuo for pelach, but Deuteronomy 28:48 uses latreuo for "serve your enemies" — showing latreuo can denote subjection to humans
  • Theodotion's Greek translation uses douleuo (serve/be subject) for pelach in both Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, suggesting submission rather than cultic worship
  • Daniel 7:27 (the interpretive parallel) uses hupotage (submission/obedience) in LXX — lacking worship connotations
  • Multiple Bible versions (CEV, CJB, NRSV, RSV) interpret verse 27 as describing "the people of the Most High" receiving service
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the pelach semantic range needs careful checking; the Daniel 7:14 / 7:27 parallel is critical; Targumic usage of pelach is verifiable

Other Interpretive Positions

  • Angelic figure: Some identify the Son of Man as Michael the archangel representing heavenly hosts
  • Corporate symbol: "The people of the holy ones of the Most High" (7:27) may be the referent
  • Divine pre-existent figure: Many modern scholars "insist that Daniel's Son of Man figure is divine"
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the relationship between 7:13-14 and 7:27 is the interpretive crux

6. Psalm 110:1 — The Adon/Adonai Distinction

Source: Focus on the Kingdom, "Adonai and Adoni (Psalm 110:1)"

  • URL: https://focusonthekingdom.org/articles_/adonai.htm
  • Key Claims:
  • Adonai (with long vowel) exclusively denotes God across approximately 449-450 OT occurrences
  • Adoni (with short vowel) refers to human superiors across 195 occurrences — "adoni never designates deity"
  • Psalm 110:1 Hebrew reads: "YHWH says to my lord [la'adoni]" — using the human-superior form, NOT the divine form
  • Scholars cited: Brown, Driver, Briggs (BDB lexicon); Herbert Bateman; Wigram
  • Masoretic pointing creates this distinction: "the masoretic pointing distinguishes divine references (adonai) from human references (adoni)"
  • If Jesus were called Adonai, "this would introduce polytheism" — therefore Psalm 110:1 positions the Messiah as "supreme human being and agent" subordinate to YHWH
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — this is a strong Unitarian argument; need to check whether the Masoretic pointing is original or interpretive, and whether pre-Masoretic traditions support the distinction

Counter-Considerations

  • The Masoretic vowel pointing was added centuries after the original consonantal text — the consonants l'dny are identical for both readings
  • Jesus's argument in Matthew 22:41-46 uses this psalm to challenge the Pharisees: if the Messiah is merely David's son, why does David call him "my lord"? The force of the argument depends on "my lord" being an extraordinary designation
  • The LXX renders both occurrences with kyrios, though the first translates YHWH and the second translates adoni
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the consonantal text vs. Masoretic pointing issue is critical

7. Jeremiah 23:5-6 — The Branch Called "YHWH Our Righteousness"

Source: Multiple commentaries and Biblical Unitarian counter-argument

  • URL: https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/jeremiah-23-6
  • Trinitarian Reading:
  • The Messianic Branch (tsemach, צֶמַח) is explicitly given the name "YHWH Tsidkenu" (יְהוָה צִדְקֵנוּ) — "YHWH is our Righteousness"
  • This appears to apply the divine name directly to the Messiah

  • The word tsemach occurs approximately 45 times in the OT in noun and verb forms

  • Unitarian Counter-Arguments:

  • This is a theophoric name — "when someone or something is called Yahweh along with qualifiers such as 'is Peace' or 'our Righteousness,' that does not make a person or thing into Yahweh"
  • Critical parallel: Jerusalem receives the same title in Jeremiah 33:16, yet the city is not deity
  • Analogous examples: Abraham's mountain "YHWH-Yireh" (Gen 22:14), Moses' altar "YHWH-Nissi" (Exod 17:15), Gideon's altar "YHWH-Shalom" (Judg 6:24)
  • The name describes what God does through the Messiah, not what the Messiah ontologically is
  • Sources: Farley; Racovian Catechism
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — the Jeremiah 33:16 parallel is strong and must be addressed; the theophoric name argument needs careful evaluation against the full context of Jeremiah 23:5-6

8. Micah 5:2 — The Messiah's Pre-Existence

Source: Multiple scholarly discussions

  • Key Claims — Pre-Existence Reading:
  • Hebrew motzaotav (מוֹצָאֹתָיו) = "his goings forth" or "his origins"
  • Qedem (קֶדֶם) = "from of old/ancient times"
  • Olam (עוֹלָם) = "from days of eternity" or "everlasting"
  • Combined: "whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting" — suggesting the Messiah has origins reaching back to eternity

  • Some scholars: "the Messiah has a divine line of descent that takes him clear back to eternity"

  • Counter-Arguments — Historical Reading:

  • The words miqedem and mimei olam "do not mean 'eternal pre-existence' but refer to events in Israel's past, specifically the promise God made to David long ago"
  • Olam can mean "a long time ago" rather than "eternity" — the word has a semantic range from "ancient" to "eternal"
  • "The Hebrew y'mai olam does not suggest notions of pre-existence; rather, it points the reader back to a definitive point in history"
  • The "goings forth" may refer to the Davidic dynasty's ancient origins in Bethlehem, not personal pre-existence
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — the semantic range of olam and qedem needs careful checking; compare usage in other OT passages where these words clearly mean "eternal" vs. "ancient"

9. Philippians 2:9-11 — "The Name Above Every Name"

Source: Jesus Monotheism blog, citing Hurtado and Bauckham

  • URL: https://jesusmonotheism.com/blog/2016/02/22/the-name-above-all-names-phil-29/
  • Key Claims:
  • Three competing interpretations: (1) "Lord" (kyrios), (2) God's own name YHWH/Kyrios, (3) "Jesus"
  • Majority scholarly position: The name is YHWH/Kyrios — led by Larry Hurtado and Richard Bauckham
  • The passage alludes to Isaiah 45:23 (LXX), where YHWH declares "to me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess" — Paul applies this to Jesus
  • CrisipinFL proposes a composite: "Lord/LORD Jesus Christ" (kyrios Iesous Christos) as the full "name"
  • Problem noted: If Christ was already identified with YHWH-Kyrios in pre-existence (Phil 2:6), it is "problematic for scholars to claim he 'became' YHWH-Kyrios only at exaltation through receiving a new name"
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — the Isaiah 45:23 allusion is critical; the pre-existence vs. exaltation timing issue needs resolution

Source: Richard Bauckham, "Paul's Christology of Divine Identity"

  • URL: http://www.ntslibrary.com/Pauls%20Christology%20of%20Divine%20Identity.pdf (PDF inaccessible but framework known from other sources)
  • Key Framework:
  • For Second Temple Judaism, "who God is and not what divinity is" is the important question — divine identity rather than divine nature
  • Characteristics demarcating the "Divine Identity": (1) Creator and only uncreated One, (2) Sovereign Ruler over all, (3) Possessor of the divine name YHWH
  • "Exclusive devotion is now given to Jesus, but Jesus does not thereby replace or compete with God the Father, since he himself belongs to the unique divine identity"
  • "The identifying name YHWH makes a very serious identification of Jesus with YHWH... naming Jesus as well as God his Father in such a way that they are certainly not two gods"
  • This represents "inclusive monotheism" — the divine identity expands to include Jesus without becoming polytheism
  • Classification: Lead to verify — Bauckham's framework is highly relevant to the core study question; it directly argues the name expresses divine identity that can be shared

10. Mark 14:62 — Jesus Combining Ego Eimi + Daniel 7:13 + Psalm 110:1

Source: Bart Ehrman, "Does Jesus Call Himself God in His Trial Before the Sanhedrin?"

  • URL: https://ehrmanblog.org/does-jesus-call-himself-god-in-his-trial-before-the-sanhedrin-and-the-high-priest-caiaphas/
  • Key Claims:
  • Jesus's response combines three elements: ego eimi ("I am"), sitting at the right hand of Power (Psalm 110:1), and coming on the clouds of heaven (Daniel 7:13)
  • Ehrman distinguishes between what the Gospel texts claim vs. what the historical Jesus actually said
  • Ehrman argues the ego eimi may simply be an affirmative ("Yes, I am [the Christ]") rather than a divine-name formula
  • Ehrman notes Jesus speaks of the Son of Man in third person — "you will see the Son of Man" — possibly not self-identifying
  • "No Jewish sources document blasphemy charges for messianic claims alone" — the blasphemy charge needs a higher claim than mere messiahship
  • Historical concerns: no disciples witnessed the proceedings; Gospel authors wrote 40-60 years later; procedural irregularities
  • Classification: Lead to verify against Scripture — the text of Mark 14:62 itself, the blasphemy charge logic, and the combined allusion structure

Source: Adela Yarbro Collins, "The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14:64" (Sage Publications)

  • URL: https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/4804_JNT_sample_copy.pdf
  • Key Claims:
  • The understanding of blasphemy held by Sadducees and chief priests was broader than the narrow rabbinic definition (which required pronouncing the divine name itself)
  • Rabbinic tradition in tractate Sanhedrin debated plural thrones in Daniel 7, with one for God and one for Messiah — remarkably similar to Jesus's interpretation
  • The best explanation for the Sanhedrin's reaction: Jesus is making "some kind of divine claim" by combining the ego eimi formula with sitting at God's right hand and riding the clouds (a divine prerogative in the OT — see Psalm 68:4, 104:3; Isaiah 19:1)
  • Conservative scholars like William Lane Craig argue the Son of Man sayings clearly assert divinity; scholars following Bultmann's dissimilarity criterion find the future Son of Man sayings most likely authentic
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the blasphemy logic is crucial; cloud-riding as a YHWH-specific prerogative (Ps 68:4, 104:3, Isa 19:1) needs checking

Significance for This Study

Mark 14:62 is perhaps the most compressed divine-name claim in the Gospels. By combining ego eimi (the divine self-identification formula) + sitting at God's right hand (Psalm 110:1) + coming on clouds (Daniel 7:13, which echoes YHWH's cloud-theophany), Jesus constructs a claim to share in the divine identity of YHWH. The Sanhedrin's blasphemy verdict confirms they understood this as more than a messianic claim.

11. YHWH as Personal Name vs. Shared Divine Identity — The Core Framework Question

Source: Richard Bauckham, "Jesus and the God of Israel" (cited across multiple sources)

  • Key Framework:
  • Jewish monotheism was defined by divine identity, not divine nature or essence
  • The divine identity is characterized by: (1) sole creator of all things, (2) sovereign ruler of all things, (3) bearer of the unique divine name YHWH
  • Early Christians "included Jesus in the unique divine identity of the God of Israel" — the name YHWH belongs to a shared divine identity, not exclusively to one person
  • "Jesus does not thereby replace or compete with God the Father, since he himself belongs to the unique divine identity"
  • Classification: Lead to verify — this framework must be tested against the OT data

Source: Unitarian Position (various)

  • Key Counter-Framework:
  • YHWH is the personal name of the Father alone — "Unitarians say that YHWH is the name of the Father, and refers only to Him"
  • When OT passages apply YHWH language to the Messiah (Jer 23:6, Zech 2:8-11), these are agency/representation, not ontological identification
  • The divine agent model: an authorized representative speaks and acts as YHWH without being YHWH
  • An alternative view: YHWH was a titular name (like a title) rather than a personal name — equivalent to "the Supreme Being" or "the Eternal One"
  • Classification: Lead to verify — the agency model vs. identity model must be tested against the specific passages

Source: Trinities.org (Dale Tuggy and contributors)

  • URL: https://trinities.org/blog/identifying-jesus-as-yahweh-as-heresy/
  • Key Claims:
  • Some argue that "identifying Jesus as Yahweh" is itself problematic within classical trinitarian theology — the Son is not the Father, and if YHWH = the Father's personal name, then saying Jesus IS YHWH creates confusion
  • The trinitarian claim should be stated more carefully: not "Jesus = YHWH" (numerical identity) but "Jesus fully shares in YHWH's divine identity while remaining distinct in person"
  • The question of whether YHWH names a person or an identity/nature is the hinge point of the entire debate
  • Classification: Lead to verify — this precision about what the trinitarian claim actually is vs. what it is sometimes caricatured as

Summary of Research Leads for Scripture Verification

HIGH PRIORITY — Direct Name-Sharing Passages

  1. Genesis 19:24 — Two YHWH references in one verse; check Hebrew grammar and Targum readings
  2. Zechariah 2:8-11 — YHWH of hosts says "YHWH of hosts has sent me"; check Hebrew speaker identification
  3. Jeremiah 23:5-6 vs. 33:16 — The theophoric name argument; does the parallel with Jerusalem neutralize the argument?
  4. Philippians 2:9-11 + Isaiah 45:23 — The name above every name; verify the LXX allusion

HIGH PRIORITY — Divine Self-Identification Formulas

  1. John 8:58 + Isaiah 41:4, 43:10, 46:4 — The ego eimi / ani hu chain; verify LXX renderings
  2. Mark 14:62 — Triple allusion (ego eimi + Psalm 110:1 + Daniel 7:13); verify the blasphemy logic
  3. Exodus 3:14 — The ehyeh asher ehyeh formula; Hebrew morphological analysis

HIGH PRIORITY — Son of Man as Divine Figure

  1. Daniel 7:13-14 vs. 7:27 — The pelach semantic range; the 7:14/7:27 parallel
  2. Cloud-riding as YHWH prerogative — Psalm 68:4, 104:3; Isaiah 19:1; Daniel 7:13

MEDIUM PRIORITY — Supporting Passages

  1. Psalm 110:1 — Adonai vs. adoni distinction; Masoretic pointing vs. consonantal text
  2. Micah 5:2 — Olam/qedem semantic range for pre-existence
  3. Bauckham's divine identity framework — Test against OT data on what constitutes the divine identity

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS TO ADDRESS

  • The theophoric name argument (Jer 23:6 = Jer 33:16 = Gen 22:14)
  • The divine agency model (representative speaks as YHWH without being YHWH)
  • The adoni vs. Adonai distinction in Psalm 110:1 (195 occurrences of adoni are always non-deity)
  • The pelach semantic range in Daniel 7:14 (Targumic evidence for human service)
  • The olam = "ancient" rather than "eternal" reading of Micah 5:2
  • Ehrman's historical skepticism about Mark 14:62 as actual speech of Jesus