The Names of God in the Torah

An important focus of this book/website are the names of God, since they frame the early stories in Genesis.

These two names are first revealed in the two creation stories.

​

In the first creation account in chapter 1 of Genesis, the name of God is Elokim. The God of the second creation story is a combination of the two names YKVK Elokim. The two names for God Elokim and YKVK are found throughout the Torah and reflect two different forms of relationship between man and God.

 

Two different names for God may sound strange, since we are so used to thinking about the oneness of God. Nevertheless, different names for the same person depending on the nature of a relationship is not remote to us. For example, the children of the president of the United States probably refer to their father as “Dad,” while his wife may use his first name. It would be strange for her to refer to him as “Mr. President” in a family setting other than in jest. Similarly, it would be inappropriate for anyone other than family or a close friend to call the President by his first name to his face. 

 

The first modern scholar to examine the names of God in an academic way was Umberto Cassuto (1883-1951), and he summarized his conclusions in a monograph entitled “The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch.”1 

 

The names of God were a very relevant topic for Cassuto. He had been the Chief Rabbi of Florence for four years, and then took a position as professor of Hebrew and literature at the University of Florence and then the chair of Hebrew language at the University of Rome. He was forced from this position by antisemitic racial laws, and accepted an offer to fill the chair of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Mandatory Palestine. His department was strongly vested in biblical criticism. In contrast to other members of his department, Cassuto was a leading critic of the Documentary Hypothesis. 

 

Underlying this hypothesis is the notion that the Torah is an amalgam of different literary sources. Some of these sources characteristically use different names for God.

It is worth reviewing the Documentary Hypothesis, since reference will be made to it in some of the chapters to follow, and many these chapters constitute a direct challenge to this hypothesis.

 

The writing of Julius Wellhausen in the late nineteenth century is central to the development of this hypothesis. In his influential book "Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel" (1878), he synthesized earlier scholarship and proposed the existence of four main sources for the Torah that were composed in different periods. He termed them J, E, D and P. These sources were combined (redacted) by later editors or redactors into the Torah we possess today.

 

These sources are as follows:

 

1. J Source (Yahwist). This source uses primarily the name "Yahweh" or YKVK for the name of God and is characterized by vivid, anthropomorphic descriptions of God. The second creation account is considered to be a J source. It is proposed that the J source was written in the southern Kingdom of Judah in about 950 BCE.

 

2.    E Source (Elohist). The E source is prominent in narratives that emphasize the name of God "Elokim" such as in Genesis chapters 20 to 22 where Abraham interacts with God using this name. The story of the covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15) and the promise of descendants is often attributed to the Elohist source. Sections that feature Moses' encounters with God at the burning bush and the revelation of the divine name (Yahweh) in Exodus 3 are often considered Elohist passages, even though the Torah uses the name of God YKVK. The E source emphasizes divine majesty and the theme of prophecy.

 

3.   P Source (Priestly): The P source focuses on ritual, genealogy, and priestly matters, and reflects a concern for order and ceremony. The P source is evident in the creation account of Genesis 1, which presents a structured and orderly depiction of God's creation over six days. This account emphasizes the transcendent and majestic nature of God. The P source is also prominent in the detailed instructions for the construction of the Tabernacle (Exodus 25-31) and the description of its rituals and furnishings (Exodus 35-40). These passages focus on the importance of proper worship and the roles of priests. The entire book of Leviticus is heavily influenced by the Priestly source with its detailed laws and regulations concerning sacrifices, rituals, purity, and the responsibilities of the priests, as are sections of Numbers, particularly those dealing with census data, genealogies, and rituals related to the priesthood (such as the consecration of the Levites and laws governing the priesthood). Scholars have identified elements of the P source throughout the Torah where there are detailed legal or ritualistic instructions, lists of genealogies and narratives that emphasize the importance of proper worship and adherence to religious laws. The priestly source was written in about the sixth century BCE or later.

 

4.   D Source (Deuteronomist). This source centers around the book of Deuteronomy, and emphasizes religious reform and law codes. It is thought to have been composed in the seventh century BCE, during the reign of King Josiah of Judah when a copy of this book was discovered in the Temple.

 

Most orthodox Jews are unable to accept the Documentary Hypothesis since it removes divine authority from the Bible and replaces it with at the most divine inspiration. Recent work demonstrating linguistic similarities in alleged different sources, plus a narrative that progresses step by step rather than being disjointed also make this hypothesis questionable.

 

Cassuto rejected the Documentary Hypothesis and held by the Divine authorship of the Torah. He also suggested that the different names of God in the Torah could be explained by different types of relationships to God, and not as a consequence of different literary sources, and this is the approach adopted in these pages.

 

For example, the first chapter of Genesis uses exclusively the name Elokim. (I have substituted a k for an h in Elokim so that this holy name for God is not misused). Elokim describes a distant, transcendent God who created the universe. He is decisive and functions in a very systematic way. Nevertheless, Elokim is not remote from the universe He created and is very much concerned with the general providence of His universe and mankind. He is therefore very different from the Aristotelian concept of God as the Prime Mover who created the universe, gave it a shove and then left it to its own devices. Within later Jewish ideas is the notion that the universe would even cease to exist without His continuing input.

 

Elokim is also thought of as the universal God of all humanity, since our universe was not created for the sake of any religion or group but for all mankind. The universal aspect of Elokim is evident in a number of places in the Pentateuch. For example, Noah blesses his son Shem in the name of YKVK, but his son Japheth by the name Elokim (Genesis 9:26-27). Shem is the progenitor of the Semites, while Japheth is the forefather of the Greek nations.

​

The name Elokim has the meaning of “a force within nature.”2 It is in the plural in the Bible because God created and controls multiple powers within nature. Nevertheless, the verb attached to the name of God Elokim is usually in the singular, although there are a few exceptions.3 In some instances, Elokim is used in the Bible as a general term for “the Deity.” It is also used as a general name for judges, since they are considered to be representatives of Elokim.4 In the Semitic language “El” was a general term for deity. El was also the name of the supreme Canaanite god.

 

The second commonly found name for God in the Torah is YKVK (I have also substituted a k for the two h’s in this name for the same reason as in Elokim). In contrast to Elokim, YKVK is an immanent God who is close to man and relates to him on an individual level. He is therefore a God of individual providence. Hence, YKVK is addressed in the second person, while Elokim is addressed in the third person. YKVK is very much concerned with the moral progress of humanity. He is also recognized as the personal God of the Jewish forefathers and in time will become the tribal God of the Jewish people.

 

The God associated with sacrifices in the Bible is always YKVK since sacrifices are a way of drawing close to God. Hence, Noah built an altar to YKVK in Genesis 8:20, even though it was Elokim who instructed him to leave the ark several sentences earlier (ibid 8:15).

 

The single exception to this in the Torah is instructive:

 

Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, took an olah-offering and peace-offering for Elokim, and Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to eat bread with the father-in-law of Moses before Elokim (Exodus 18:12). 

 

There is a midrashic opinion that Jethro converted to Judaism. If so, his offering should have been to YKVK. However, another way of looking at this passage is that he did not convert and his approach to God was as a universal, transcendent God. This idea was so foreign to his son-in-law Moses, a prophet of YKVK, that he did not attend this first recorded ecumenical event in history. Moses’ name is not mentioned as being among the guests —" only Aaron and all the elders of Israel.”

 

The name of God YKVK first appears in the Torah in the first sentence of the second creation story, although in combination with Elokim:

 

These are the generations (i.e., products) of the heaven and the earth when they were created, on the day that YKVK Elokim (God God) made earth and heaven (Genesis 2:4).

 

This double appellation for God sounds somewhat odd in Hebrew. It is not noticeable in English since the two words are usually translated as “the Lord God.” In Hebrew, however, it sounds just like it is written - God God. This combination occurs almost nowhere else in the Torah.4a All explanations as to why these two names are found together entail adding extra words such as “YKVK [who is the same God as] Elokim [used in the previous chapter]” or “YKVK [who is] the Deity.”

 

A question, though, can be asked regarding these interpretations. If the phrase “YKVK Elokim” is no more than an introduction to YKVK in terms of the name Elokim used in the first chapter why is this combination of names continued throughout chapters 2 and 3?  Would not the opening sentence suffice?

 

This leads to the explanation that Adam and Eve existed alone in the world in close proximity to the Divine. In this unique environment, their perception of the immanence and transcendence of God was fused as one. However, once they were ejected from the Garden of Eden, they no longer perceived these two attributes of God as a single manifestation of the Divine. From now on, God will deal with humanity either with His attribute of YKVK or that of Elokim, depending on the circumstances. Similarly, man oscillates in his awareness of these two attributes.

 

It is of interest that there are a number of times in the Pentateuch that YKVK (but not Elokim) changes His mind. Hence, we read in the Noah story:

​

And YKVK regretted that He had made man upon the earth, and he was pained in His heart. And YKVK said: “I will blot out man whom I created from upon the face of the earth, from man to cattle to creeping thing, to the fowl of the heavens, for I regret that I made them” (ibid 6:6-7).

 

If one can say this, the observation that God can change his mind provides a very human-like perspective to God, and goes together with his attribute of immanence. One might even say that there is little point in making a request to God if all His decisions are irrevocable.

 

Nevertheless, this does lead to the question. God knows the future. How could He not know that man would take the wrong path in this above passage?

 

Rashi answers this question in relation to this verse with an analogy from a midrash in which a non-Jew asks Rabbi Yehoshua this very question:

 

Do you not admit that the Holy One, Blessed is He foresees the future?” . . . Rabbi Yehoshua said to him. . .  “Even though it was revealed before Him that their destiny was to sin and to suffer destruction, He did not refrain from creating them because of the righteous who are destined to arise from among them.6  

 

Nevertheless, it is not clear that this completely answers the question as to why the text is written in a way that implies that God does not know the future. There might be another answer. Because of man’s free will, YKVK can never know precisely what the future will bring, although He can engineer the future and has a general idea of the direction of humanity. He also knows what a person is likely to decide based on that person’s character and previous choices. In other words, he has a general idea of the future, but does not know it for certain. This idea is not generally accepted by Jewish sages, but has been raised by a number of Jewish philsophers.7 To my mind, it fits closer with the biblical text. 

 

Another well-known, alternative explanation for the two names of God is that the name Elokim reflects God’s attribute of justice, while YKVK represents His attribute of mercy. Hence the classic biblical commentator Rashi writes in his commentary to the Torah:

 

“Elokim created” [in Genesis chapter I]: It does not say YKVK’s creating [in Genesis chapter II] because at first it rose in thought [i.e., God considered so to speak] to create it with the attribute of strict judgment [using the name Elokim]. But He saw that the world could not last [if He did]. He [therefore] gave precedence to the attribute of mercy and joined it to the attribute of strict justice [in Genesis II]. That is the meaning of that which is written: “on the day of YKVK Elokim’s making of the earth and heavens” [in ibid chapter II].8

 

However, there is a major problem with this explanation. While it fits nicely into the two creation stories it has limited application beyond this. Throughout the desert experience, for example, there were many instances in which God displayed his attribute of justice, yet invariably the name YKVK is used.