Divine Names
Names?
How Names Help Us Understand God
1. All our knowledge of God is from and through God, grounded in his revelation, that is, in objective reason.
2. In order to convey the knowledge of him to his creatures, God has to come down to the level of his creatures and accommodate himself to their powers of comprehension.
3. The possibility of this condescension cannot be denied since it is given with creation, that is, with the existence of finite being.
4. Our knowledge of God is always only analogical in character, that is, shaped by analogy to what can be discerned of God in his creatures, having as its object not God himself in his knowable essence, but God in his revelation, his relation to us, in the things that pertain to his nature, in his habitual disposition to his creatures
5. Finally, our knowledge of God is nevertheless true, pure, and trustworthy because it has for its foundation God’s self-consciousness, its archetype, and his self-revelation in the cosmos.
The Names of God
Three Main Names:
The essential name: יהוה, “Lord,” that is, the one who, as he is from himself, is thus most perfect, who is faithful, not knowing how to be deceived or to deceive, who is steadfast and omnipotent, the one who is able both to make promises and to provide what has been promised
The personal name: אלהים, “God,” subsisting in three persons, each of which is God, and thus steadfast and faithful by the testimony of three witnesses, such that the Israelites do not have anything at all for which to question the trustworthiness of the commission.
The covenantal name: “the God of your fathers,” and thus also your God, that is, due to the covenant of grace, by which he has devoted himself in all he is both to them and to you—“I will be a God to you and to your seed.”
The names of God are designations of his excellences, mighty deeds, praises (ἀρεται, 1 Pet. 2:9), a word usage that ties in with Isaiah 42:8, 12; 43:21; and 63:7, where the Hebrew תְּהִלָּה (praise, honor) is rendered in the LXX as ἀρετη (cf. Hab. 3:3; Zech. 6:13). The church’s calling is to proclaim God’s “virtues,” that is, to honor him for the glory (δοξα) manifested in all his works. Scripture knows nothing of God’s being aside from his attributes.
I AM
The church fathers thought it referred to God’s aseity. God is the One who is, an eternal immutable being, over against the factual nonbeing (οὐκ ὀν) of idols and the nonabsolute being (μη ὀν) of creatures.
What Does “I AM” denote?
he alone has all essence, while all other things have only some small part of essence, and consequently they rather do not exist than do exist, and they also exist only for a moment or a flow of moments, in which past things are no more, future things are not yet, and what remains is nothing but a moment, whereas God, or the eternity of God, is the possession, at once whole and perfect, of boundless life
With respect to the efficacy of signifying, it denotes: (1) God’s self-existence, by which he subsists through himself in such a way that he exists for all things as the cause of their existing and subsisting. (2) His preeminence, because although by every other name is designated some mode of being, this name Jehovah, ὁ ὦν, “he who is,” determines no mode of being, and thus it signifies that God preeminently is. (3) His aseity, by which he alone is independent and uncaused, in such a way that for all creatures he is the source of being and existing. As Bernard of Clairvaux says, “God is what he is, that is, the being of himself and of all other things: he exists for himself, he exists for all things, and through this, in a certain way he alone exists” (On Consideration, to Eugenius, bk. 5). (4) His immutability, by which he always is, and properly speaking never was and never will be, or, he is the one who is what he was, who will be what he is, always the same and like to himself, not only with respect to his existence and essence, but also with respect to his will, Word, and promises (cf. Ps. 102:26; Heb. 1:12). Hence (5) his eternity, because that alone is which is eternal. For in time, past things are no more, future things are not yet, and present things are transient and cease in a moment, as it were. Therefore God alone, since he is eternal and thus beyond succession, properly speaking, is. Finally, (6) his truthfulness and faithfulness in his promises, since also in these it is more certain than certain that he will be who he is, such that on this foundation the things promised that will be, in their own way are, indeed so truly that for this reason our faith is deservedly called “the substance of things hoped for, and the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).
God is “simple,” that is, sublimely free from all composition, and that therefore one cannot make any real [i.e., ontological] distinction between his being and his attributes
But in God all his attributes are identical with his being. God is light through and through; he is all mind, all wisdom, all logos, all spirit, and so forth
Whatever God is, he is that completely and simultaneously. “God has no properties but is pure essence. God’s properties are really the same as his essence: they neither differ from his essence nor do they differ materially from each other.”
God is the same as His essence or nature. To understand this, it must be noted that in things composed of matter and form, the nature or essence must differ from the suppositum, because the essence or nature connotes only what is included in the definition of the species; as, humanity connotes all that is included in the definition of man, for it is by this that man is man, and it is this that humanity signifies, that, namely, whereby man is man. Now individual matter, with all the individualizing accidents, is not included in the definition of the species. For this particular flesh, these bones, this blackness or whiteness, etc., are not included in the definition of a man. Therefore this flesh, these bones, and the accidental qualities distinguishing this particular matter, are not included in humanity; and yet they are included in the thing which is a man. Hence the thing which is a man has something more in it than has humanity. Consequently humanity and a man are not wholly identical; but humanity is taken to mean the formal part of a man, because the principles whereby a thing is defined are regarded as the formal constituent in regard to the individualizing matter. On the other hand, in things not composed of matter and form, in which individualization is not due to individual matter—that is to say, to this matter—the very forms being individualized of themselves,—it is necessary the forms themselves should be subsisting supposita. Therefore suppositum and nature in them are identified. Since God then is not composed of matter and form, He must be His own Godhead, His own Life, and whatever else is thus predicated of Him.
The Deity is simple and uncompound. But that which is composed of many and different elements is compound. If, then, we should speak of the qualities of being uncreate and without beginning and incorporeal and immortal and everlasting and good and creative and so forth as essential differences in the case of God, that which is composed of so many qualities will not be simple but must be compound. But this is impious in the extreme. Each then of the affirmations about God should be thought of as signifying not what He is in essence, but either something that it is impossible to make plain, or some relation to some of those things which are contrasts or some of those things that follow the nature, or an energy.
It appears then that the most proper of all the names given to God is “He that is,”
God is not only His own essence, as shown in the preceding article, but also His own existence
First, whatever a thing has besides its essence must be caused either by the constituent principles of that essence (like a property that necessarily accompanies the species—as the faculty of laughing is proper to a man—and is caused by the constituent principles of the species), or by some exterior agent,—as heat is caused in water by fire.
Secondly, existence is that which makes every form or nature actual; for goodness and humanity are spoken of as actual, only because they are spoken of as existing
Thirdly, because, just as that which has fire, but is not itself fire, is on fire by participation; so that which has existence but is not existence, is a being by participation. But God is His own essence, as shown above (A. 3); if, therefore, He is not His own existence He will be not essential, but participated being. He will not therefore be the first being—which is absurd. Therefore God is His own existence, and not merely His own essence
God
θέειν, to run, because He courses through all things, or from αἴθειν, to burn: For God is a fire consuming all evils: or from θεᾶσθαι, because He is all-seeing: for nothing can escape Him, and over all He keepeth watch.
Formerly, the Greek word for God (θεος) was believed to derive from τιθεναι, θεειν, θεασθαι, but nowadays some philologists relate it to Zeus, Dios, Jupiter, Deus, Diana, Juno, Dio, Dieu. In that case it is identical with the Sanskrit deva (clear sky), derived from the stem div, to shine, glitter. Others again strongly oppose all etymological connection between the Greek and the Latin word and link the word θεος with the stem θες in θεσσασθαι, to desire, to call upon. In many languages the words “heaven” and “God” are used interchangeably. The oldest Greek deity, Uranus, was almost certainly identical with the Sanskrit Varuna. The Tartar and Turkish word Taengri and the Chinese word Thian mean both heaven and God; and also in Scripture the words “heaven” and “God” are used interchangeably, for instance, in the expression “kingdom of heaven” or “kingdom of God.” Another Greek name, δαιμων (derived from the verb δαιω), means God as the determiner of our lot
El
The simplest name used for God in Scripture and by the Semites generally is El (אֵל). There is disagreement about its derivation. Lagarde relates the word to the root, ʾly (אלי) and the preposition, ʾel (אל, to) and thinks the word describes God as the One who is the ultimate object of human desire. Though some scholars have taken over this derivation, according to others it is just as improbable as the notion that, ʾel is connected with, ʾēlâ (אֵלָה), the sacred tree. According to most philologists the word derives from the stem, ʾûl (אוּל), and means either the most prominent or primary Lord (Nöldeke) or the One who is strong and mighty (Gesenius). The name, ʾElōah (אֱלֹהַּ; pl. ʾElōhîm, אֱלֹהִים) is from the same root, ʾûl (אוּל), or from, ʾlh (אלה, to dread) and hence points to God as the Strong One or as the object of dread.
Elohim
intensive plural that serves to express fullness of power (Delitzsch)
Elyon
The name ʿElyôn (עֶלְיוֹן; LXX: ὑψιστος) refers to God as the One who is exalted high above everything.
El Shaddai
the first name by which God appears in his special revelation is Šadday (שַׁדַּי) or, ʾEl Šadday (אֵל שַׁדַּי). As such, God reveals himself to Abraham when he makes him a father of many peoples and seals his covenant with him by the rite of circumcision (Gen. 17:1). Accordingly, in the period of the patriarchs this name occurs repeatedly (Gen. 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; 49:25; Exod. 6:3; Num. 24:4). It is further found in Job, in a number of psalms, and a few times in the prophets. The New Testament equivalent is the Lord Almighty (παντοκρατωρ, 2 Cor. 6:18; Rev. 4:8; etc.). The origin of this name has not yet been established with certainty. Nöldeke derived it from Šad (שַׁד), “Lord,” and punctuated it as שֵׁדַי, but according to Genesis 43:14; 49:25; and Ezekiel 10:5, the name is undoubtedly an adjective. Formerly it was derived from שׁ (from אשׁר) and דַי (sufficient) and translated as “the All-Sufficient One,” or from שׁדד, meaning “to be strong, to destroy”; or also from שׁדה or אשׁד, “to pour out,” so designating God as “he who bountifully supplies all things.”