The following is from:
Duane A. Garrett, Rethinking Genesis: The Sources and
Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch (Ross-shire: Christian Focus
Publications, 2000), 18-19
Exodus 6:2c-3 appears to be a straightforward assertion that the patriarchs
did not know the name Yahweh. Most translations are similar to the
following: ‘I am Yahweh. I appeared to Abraham, and to Isaac, and to Jacob as
God Almighty, but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them.’
|
Figure
1.1
The
Structure of Exodus 6:2c-3
A אֲנִ֥י יְהוָֽה B וָאֵרָ֗א אֶל־אַבְרָהָ֛ם אֶל־יִצְחָ֥ק וְאֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֖ב בְּאֵ֣ל שַׁדָּ֑י
A’ וּשְׁמִ֣י יְהוָ֔ה B’ לֹ֥א נוֹדַ֖עְתִּי לָהֶֽם A I am Yahweh. B And I made myself known to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as
El Shaddai. A’ And my name is Yahweh; B’ Did I not make myself known to them? |
But the Hebrew text, as Francis I. Andersen points out, contains a
case of noncontiguous parallelism that translators have not recognized: אֲנִ֥י יְהוָֽה
. . . וּשְׁמִ֣י יְהוָ֔ה (‘I am Yahweh . . . and my name is Yahweh’). The לֹ֥א (‘not’)
is therefore assertive in a rhetorical question rather than a simple negative,
and it should not be connected to what precedes it. [22] In fact, the whole
text is set in poetical, parallel structure beyond what Andersen notes (see
fig. 1.1).
The text does not assert that the patriarchs had never heard of
Yahweh or only knew of El Shaddai, although it does say that God showed them
the meaning of his name El Shaddai. El Shaddai is preceded by the ב essentiae,
[23] which implies that God filled the name with specifical significance for
them when he made a covenant with them and promised the land of Canaan as their
inheritance (v. 4). Now he is going to fill the name Yahweh with significance (‘And
my name is Yahweh’) in the even greater deliverance of the exodus (v. 5). Even
so, the text stresses the continuity between the revelation to the patriarchs and
the revelation of the exodus rather than any discontinuity (‘Did I not make
myself known to them?’). Andersen’s comments are to the point: ‘There is no
hint in Exodus that Yahweh was a new name revealed first to Moses. On the
contrary, the success of his mission depended on the use of the familiar name
for validation by the Israelites.’ [24]
Notes for the Above
[22] Francis I. Andersen, The Sentences in Biblical Hebrew (The
Hague: Mouton, 1974), 102.
[23] See J. A. Motyer, The Revelation of the Divine Name (London:
Tyndale, 1959), 11ff.
[24] Sentence, 102. The traditional translation (represented
by the NIV, NEB, RSV, etc.) is impossible on other grounds as well. First, this
translation must assume that ב in בְּאֵ֣ל שַׁדָּ֑י does double duty and also
governs וּשְׁמִ֣י יְהוָ֔ה. But this is impossible, for the two phrases are in separate
clauses even in the traditional translation. Second, the N (niphal) stem
of ידע cannot take a direct object (וּשְׁמִ֣י יְהוָ֔ה) because it is reflexive.
Third, it is unusual for a subordinate phrase in Hebrew to precede לֹ֥א, because
לֹ֥א is normally the first word in a sentence in which it occurs. See C. L.
Seow, A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew (Nashville: Abington, 1987), 94.
Disrupted word order is possible, but, in light of the structure of the text as
described, there is no reason to think this is the case here.
One should compare the above with the JST for Exodus 6:3. The following come from Old Testament Manuscript 2, p. 66:
and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob[,]<.>
I am the Lord God Almighty, the Lord Jehovah. And was not my name known unto
them? yea, and I have also established my covenant with them, to give
which I made with them, to give them the land of canaan; the land of there
pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers.
