Why the names of God in the Torah are important

This essay explores the two names of God in the Torah, Elohim and YHWH, which represent different relationships between God and humanity. Elohim is the universal God who created the world, and is distant and transcendent, while YHWH is the immanent, personal God concerned with individual moral progress and Israel's destiny. This essay challenges the documentary hypothesis, which attributes the different names of God to distinct literary sources, supporting instead the idea that the names reflect varying attributes of God. Umberto Cassuto's rejection of the documentary hypothesis is highlighted, emphasizing his belief in divine authorship and the different ways God interacts with humanity. Ultimately, the two names express both the universal and personal aspects of God's relationship with the world, offering ancient people a revolutionary understanding of a singular, multifaceted deity.

My riveting book that explains our current world

"The Struggle for Utopia - A History of Jewish, Christian and Islamic Messianism" by Arnold Slyper. Wonderful reviews. Available on Amazon, at US bookstores, and at Pomeranz Bookseller in Jerusalem (with courier service available). " Brilliant and thought-provoking."

Introduction

There are two creation stories, each significantly different from the other. There are also two distinct stories intertwined within the Noah account, although together they comprise a single narrative. Within these two stories are repetitions and minor contradictions. Two covenants are made with Abraham — the Covenant between the Pieces and the Covenant of Circumcision. Abraham and his wife are separately told that they will have a child in their old age. Moses receives the tablets of the Ten Commandments on two occasions.

These repetitions and apparent doublets were noted by Christian biblical scholars, who proposed a documentary hypothesis to explain these and other apparent contradictions and duplications. At the heart of this hypothesis is the notion that the Torah is an amalgam of different literary sources, each with its own particular style and agenda.

A noticeable feature of these twosomes is that they are associated with a different name of God — either YHWH or Elohim. This is not apparent in English as both names are translated by the same word God, but is very obvious in the Hebrew. These two names reflect two different types of relationships between God and humanity and constitute a fundamental aspect of the Torah.

That God should have different, and even contradictory aspects may seem strange to us moderns, since we are used to thinking about God in nothing but unitary terms. Nevertheless, different names for the same person depending on the nature of a relationship is not remote to us. Most people would address the president of a country as “Mr. President” in public. However, the children of the president may 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. Names such as “Dad” and “Mr. President” reflect different types of relationships with the same person.

The “name” (or shem in Hebrew) of God is an important concept in the Torah. Soon after arriving in Canaan, Abraham pitched his tent between Beth El and Ai and proclaimed the name of God — “. . . . he built there an altar to YHWH and he called out the name (shem) of God” (Genesis 12:8).

Invoking or calling out God’s name means more than simply pronouncing a word. God has no physical form, and therefore His physical nature cannot be described. What can be described are His existence and His attributes, particularly those that enable human beings to develop a relationship with Him. The Torah expresses different dimensions of the relationship between God and humanity through three principal Divine names: YHWH, Elohim — including related forms such as Eloah or El — and, less frequently, El Shaddai.

The different divine names were certainly noticed by the sages of midrashim and Talmud, but they did not develop them into a systematic theory. Nor did it become a major theme in the writings of the medieval Jewish commentators. Nevertheless, the authoritative biblical commentator Rashi, basing himself on midrashic sources, discusses this topic in his commentary on the first sentence of the Torah. Rashi elucidates the phrase “boro Elohim” (Elohim created) and why it was specifically Elohim Who did the creating and not YHWH:

Elohim created — it does not say YHWH created because at first it arose in thought [i.e., God considered so to speak] to create it with the attribute of strict judgment. 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 judgment. This is [the meaning of] that which is written “On the day of YHWH’s making of earth and heavens. . . . (Genesis 2:4) [with the name YHWH preceding and joined to the name Elohim].1

There is much in the Torah that would support this interpretation — that YHWH represents a merciful God and Elohim a God of judgement. It was, after all, YHWH Who explained His aspect of mercy after the sin of the golden calf:

YHWH descended in a cloud and stood with him [Moses] there, and He proclaimed the name of YHWH. YHWH passed before him and proclaimed: “YHWH, YHWH, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in kindness and truth. Extending kindness for two thousand [generations], forgiving iniquity, and willful sin and error and Who absolves — but does not absolve completely” (Exodus 34:5-6).

Commenting on these verses, the Talmud explains:

And the Lord passed by before him and proclaimed." Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Were it not written in the verse, it would be impossible to say this. This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, wrapped Himself in a prayer shawl like a prayer leader and showed Moses the order of the prayer. He said to him: Whenever the Jewish people sin, let them act before Me in accordance with this order, and I will forgive them.2

This explanation that the name Elohim represents God’s attribute of strict judgment while YHWH signifies His attribute of mercy fits nicely into the two creation stories and the twice-given Ten Commandments. Nevertheless, it has considerable limitations beyond this. Throughout the 40-year desert experience, for example, there were many instances in which God displayed strict justice, yet invariably the name YHWH is used. One might therefore modify Rashi’s formulation by saying that Elohim reflects uncompromising justice, whereas YHWH represents the possibility of compassion and responsiveness.

One of the most important Jewish scholars to examine the divine names from a modern academic perspective was Umberto Cassuto. His conclusions are summarized in his monograph “The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch” and can be represented as follows:3

Elohim describes a transcendent God who is distant from mankind. Nevertheless, although existing high in the heavens, Elohim is very much concerned with the general providence of the human race. The name YHWH, on the other hand, expresses the closeness or immanence of a God Who is intimately involved in relationships with man and Who provides both individual and national providence.

A single Deity being both immanent and transcendent would have been a radically new concept in the ancient world. In our own times, we have less difficulty in oscillating between these two perceptions of God because of our familiarity with the Bible. However, people in the ancient world would have had trouble conceptualizing the notion that the same God who created the universe was also interested in developing relationships with man. Pagan gods were associated with specific forces or functions within nature, such as fertility and storms, but they rarely communicated with humans, other than perhaps with a king, and such communication was generally understood within a very different religious framework and was not conceived as the ongoing personal relationship with an individual that the Torah attributes to YHWH.5

The Torah does not attempt to harmonize these two contrasting aspects of God, but expresses them through the two names YHWH and Elohim. Thus, the names of God are not an incidental aspect of the Torah but rather an integral part of its structure. I go further than this in postulating that much of the early parts of the Torah are very much concerned with the relationship between man and the two aspects of God YHWH and Elohim.

The tension between these two dimensions of God was appreciated by Maimonides when he discusses the Torah’s injunctions to fear and love God in his Mishneh Torah, a book that summarizes much of Jewish written and oral law. The following paragraph was not written specifically about the names of God, but illustrates this point:

What is the path [to attain] love and fear of Him? When a person contemplates His wondrous and great deeds and creations and appreciates His infinite wisdom that surpasses all comparison, he will immediately love, praise and glorify [Him] yearning with tremendous desire to know [God’s] great name. . . When he [continues] to reflect on these matters, he will immediately recoil in awe and fear, appreciating how he is a tiny, lowly and dark creature, standing with his flimsy, limited, wisdom before He who is of perfect knowledge.6

It is noteworthy that when discussing the love of God, the Torah uses only the name YHWH, and not Elohim, since the Creator of the universe is too distant for such a relationship.7 Fear of God, on the other hand, can relate to both YHWH and Elohim, since both names are associated with the moral order.8 There are two aspects to fear of God — one is fear of punishment and the other is awe of being in His presence.

The approach of this essay differs from that of R’ Joseph B. Soloveitchik described in his influential essay “The Lonely Man of Faith,” and his idea that the two creation stories describe two different aspects of mankind.7 I will discuss his ideas further in my essay “Are there one or two creation stories?”

An approach that does bear similarities to mine is that of R’ Mordechai Breuer (1921-2007). R’ Breuer emphasized the value of p’shat, or the literal meaning of the text, and the widespread adoption of p’shat in the Zionist yeshiva world may well be attributed to his efforts. This is particularly the case for Yeshivat Har Etzion and Herzog College. R’ Breuer’s main contribution to biblical studies is his system of shitat hebehinot, often referred to as "the approach of perspectives.”8

R’ Breuer argued that the Torah is a divine work, but written with multiple, sometimes conflicting perspectives. Each perspective represents a true and valid divine viewpoint. His starting point is analyses of the documentary hypothesis. However, rather than seeing the Torah as a compilation of various authors with differing agendas, he saw these different passages as reflecting a multilayered truth and a deliberate component of divine revelation.

By contrast, my focus is solely on the names of God, without reference to the documentary hypothesis.

Let us now focus on the two names of God:

The name Elohim

The name Elohim is a name devised by man. It is related to the Hebrew word el, generally understood to refer to God or a divine power.9 The ending of the word Elohim with the letters “im” signifies that this name is in the plural. This can be understood as reflecting the multiple powers operating within nature, created and controlled by God. However, the verb attached to Elohim is usually in the singular, although there are a few exceptions.10

Elohim is also used in the Bible as a general term for “the Deity.” It is also used as a general term for judges, since they function as representatives of Elohim in administering justice.11 This name is also found in idiomatic expressions such as Elohe Yisroel, meaning God of Israel, and may be declined with personal suffixes, such as Elohekha (your God) and Elohav (his God). El was also the name of a supreme Canaanite god.

Elohim is the creator God in the first chapter of Genesis, and the universe He created has order, design and purpose. The Creator of the universe is a distant and transcendent God. As might be anticipated, He is decisive, since the laws of nature are immutable. In contrast to YHWH, He does not appear to change direction.

Despite existing beyond the universe, Elohim is not remote from the universe He created, and He is much concerned with the general providence of His universe and the general providence of mankind. This differs markedly from the Aristotelian concept of God as the Prime Mover, who created the world, gave it a push, and then left it to its own devices. Within later Jewish thought one finds the idea that the universe would even cease to exist without God’s continual input.

Elohim is the God of all humanity, in that the universe was created for all mankind and not for one nation or the adherents of one religion. The universal aspect of Elohim is evident in a number of places in the Pentateuch. Hence, Noah blesses his son Shem in the name of YHWH, but his son Japheth by the name Elohim (Genesis 9:26-27). Shem is the progenitor of the Semites, while Japheth is the progenitor of the Greek nations.

An important of the early chapters of Genesis is that man should procreate and populate the earth, and it is illuminating to follow the consistency of this idea and its relation to the name of God Elohim. In the first creation account, when Elohim is relating to the progenitors of all mankind, we read:

Elohim blessed them [the first male and female] and Elohim said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea, the bird of the sky and every living thing that moves on the earth (ibid 1:28).

That mankind should procreate and populate the earth is not obvious. Even nowadays there are couples who limit their procreation because of their fear of nuclear annihilation, the problems associated with climate change, or the possibility of world starvation. If not for our trust in technology and diplomacy to overcome these problems, humankind could well come to the conclusion that procreation is a losing proposition. Such fears were very prevalent in the ancient world, since, as will be explained in the essay on Noah, the population of the ancient world had a very pessimistic attitude regarding the future of the world they lived in.

It is appropriate, therefore, that in the Noah story, following the destruction of the world, Elohim again emphasizes the desirability of humanity filling the earth, and we find almost identical wording regarding procreation as in the first creation account:

And Elohim blessed Noah and his sons, and He said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth (ibid 9:1).

To obviate all future concerns, Elohim proceeds to make a covenant with Noah and his future generations that there shall “never again become a flood to destroy all flesh” (Genesis 9:15). A covenant is a formal way of making a promise to another party. The sign of this covenant will be a rainbow, created by Elohim and linking together heaven and earth.

The name YHWH

Unlike Elohim, YHWH is presented in the Torah not as a name devised by humanity but as a name revealed by God to Moses at the burning bush (Exodus 3:13-15). In contrast to Elohim, YHWH is an immanent God Who relates to man and woman on an individual level, and Who is therefore the God of individual providence.

To maintain this relationship, man must practice moral behavior. Therefore, YHWH chose the seed of Shem to bring morality and the attributes of His name into this world. YHWH also revealed Himself to Moses at the burning bush as the personal God of the Jewish forefathers and the God Who will soon become the national God of the Israelite people.

The meaning of this name YHWH was first made known to Moses as a function of the verb “to be:”

And He said: “For I shall be (eheyeh) with you — and this is the sign for you that I have sent you. When you take the people out of Egypt, you shall worship Elohim on this mountain” (Exodus 3:12).

But Moses has a question for God:

Moses said to Elohim: “Behold, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them: ‘The God of your forefathers has sent me to you, and they say to me what is His name? What shall I say to them?’ Elohim answered Moses: “I Shall Be What I Shall Be (eheyeh asher eheyeh).”’ And He said: “So shall you say to the Children of Israel: ‘I Shall Be (eheyeh) has sent me to you.’” Elohim said further to Moses: “‘So shall you say to the Children of Israel; YHWH the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My remembrance from generation to generation” (Exodus 3:13-15).

One straightforward interpretation of the name YHWH is that it relates directly to the previous statement, in which God promises, through the verb eheyeh, “I shall be with . . .” Moses in his mission and provide him with individual providence.

Other explanations of this name have also been proposed that have significant philosophical implications and these are discussed in reference 11.12

In the last sentence of this passage, YHWH also mentions that He will provide the Israelites with national providence and this will persist forever:

This is My name forever, and this is My remembrance from generation to generation (Exodus 3:15).

Thus, the Torah presents YHWH as the enduring national God of Israel.

The name YHWH first appears in the Torah in the first sentence of the second creation story, although in combination with the name Elohim:

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

This double appellation for God is unusual in Hebrew. Its oddity is not as noticeable in English since the two names are usually translated as “the Lord God.” In Hebrew, however, the phrase is striking because it literally combines the two divine names. This precise combination occurs in only one other place in the Torah.13 All explanations as to why these two names are found together entail adding extra words to the sentence, such as “YHWH [who is the same God as] Elohim [used in the previous chapter]” or “YHWH [who is] the Deity.”14

However, a question can be asked regarding these explanations. If the phrase “YHWH Elohim” is no more than an introduction to YHWH in terms of the name Elohim mentioned in the first chapter, or expresses no more than that YHWH is the Deity, why is this combination of names continued through chapters 2 and 3? Would not the opening sentence have sufficed?

I propose another suggestion. God relates to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden on two different levels. On one level, they are two individuals who, until their expulsion from the Garden of Eden, have a personal relationship with YHWH. On another, they represent the entire human race. This will be particularly relevant when it comes to their punishment or fate, since this is also of concern to Elohim. However, once they are ejected from the Garden of Eden, God relates to Adam and Eve and their descendants via either His attribute of YHWH or Elohim depending on the circumstances.

In contrast to Elohim, YHWH relates to mankind in a very personal way, even to the point of changing direction. This is very evident from two consecutive sections in the story of Noah. The first is a YHWH passage, while the passage immediately following is an Elohim passage:

And YHWH saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And YHWH regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And YHWH said: “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, to creeping things, and the birds of the air; for I regret having made them.” And Noah found grace in the eyes of YHWH (Genesis 6:6-8).

The difference in Elohim’s reaction in the passage that immediately follows is very evident, although both passages relate to the same situation:

These are the generations of Noah; Noah was a righteous man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked (hithalech) with Elohim. And Noah fathered three sons, Shem, Ham and Japhet. And the earth had become corrupt before Elohim, and the earth was filled with corruption. And Elohim looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. And Elohim said to Noah: “The end of all flesh has come before me; for the earth is filled with corruption through them; and, behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth. Make yourself an ark of gopher wood (Genesis 6:9-14).

The relationship between humanity and YHWH, as portrayed here, is reciprocal. Were YHWH to be entirely non-responsive to human choices and prayers, the world would become effectively deterministic. Requests to YHWH in prayer would be pointless since the outcome would already be determined. God would also never have the opportunity to demonstrate His attribute of righteousness and thereby be a model for human behavior.

Nevertheless, this does lead to the question — God knows the future. How then could He not know that mankind would take the wrong path in the generation of Noah?

Rashi answers this question as it relates to the Noah account with an analogy based on a midrash in which a gentile 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.15

Nevertheless, R’ Yehoshua’s reply does not quite answer the question as to why the text is written in a way that implies that God does not know the future.

There is another possible answer. I suggest that God does not have complete knowledge of the future. Human beings possess free will and YHWH cannot know with certainty which choice a person will make, otherwise there is no such thing as free will. He may know what a person is likely to decide based on that person’s character and previous choices. He knows in what direction mankind is tending. He can also engineer the future. I am suggesting, however, that the biblical portrayal of YHWH is most naturally understood as implying that He does not possess complete foreknowledge of future human choices. This approach is not generally accepted by Jewish sages, but has been raised by a few Jewish philosophers.16 In my view, this is the explanation most fully compatible with the way the text portrays YHWH’s interaction with human beings.

The names of God and the development of a tribal nation

Concomitantly with the Israelites descending to Egypt, a change takes place in their relationship with YHWH. Jacob was well aware of the protection provided to him by YHWH, but knowledge of YHWH seems to have been lost, or at least sublimated, by his family. Joseph speaks often about God, but it is invariably about Elohim. It may well be that his conception of God was primarily that of a Deity directing the fate of the Israelite people among the nations, rather than as a God providing him with direct personal providence.

Nevertheless, the text makes it clear that YHWH was active behind the scenes. When Potiphar’s wife attempts to seduce Joseph and Joseph’s rejection of her advances lands him in prison, the Torah tells us:

And it was after these things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and she said: “Lie with me.” But he refused: He said to his master’s wife “ . . . How then can I perpetrate this great evil; I will have sinned against Elohim?”. . . . Then Joseph’s master took him and placed him in the prison. . . . The prison warden did not scrutinize anything that was in his custody, because YHWH was with him [Joseph]; and whatever he would do YHWH would make successful (ibid 39:7-23).

The Israelites in Egypt also seemed to have had no knowledge of YHWH, in that when they cry out to God because of their oppression, their prayers are directed to Elohim:

And it happened during those many days that the king of Egypt died, and the Children of Israel groaned because of the work and they cried out. Their cry because of the work went up to Elohim. And Elohim heard their moaning and Elohim remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. And Elohim saw the Children of Israel and Elohim knew (Exodus 2:23-25).

The first occurrence of the name YHWH in Exodus’s narrative is at the burning bush, where YHWH reveals Himself to Moses:

An angel of YHWH appeared to him [Moses] in flames of fire from within the bush . . . (Exodus 3:2).

From this point on, the focus of the Torah will change to an almost exclusive involvement of YHWH with the fate of the Israelite people.

In conclusion, there are two directions within Judaism — a particularistic or tribal dimension and also a universal mission in which the Jewish people serve as “priests” to humanity. These two dimensions are reflected in the two principal divine names, YHWH and Elohim. The story of Noah is the first place in the Torah where these two concepts become intertwined within a single narrative. They subsequently become more clearly differentiated in the stories of Abraham. This is because Abraham was both the forefather of the Jewish people and the spiritual mentor to the world at large. The name of God YHWH was lost or not recognized among the descendants of Jacob, but is revealed again to the Israelites in Egypt through the agency of Moses.

One fundamental question nevertheless remains. What is the significance of the two creation stories and of the two narratives embedded within the Noah account? How can the Torah contain two versions of what appear to be the same events? This question will be addressed in subsequent chapters.

References

Rashi to Genesis 1:1. He bases his comment on Genesis Rabbah 12:15: “At the beginning of creation, God intended to create the world with the attribute of judgment (middat ha-din). But seeing that the world could not endure it, He preceded it with the attribute of mercy (middat ha-rachamim), and partnered it with judgment.” Other sources are Genesis Rabbah 14:1, Exodus Rabbah 30:13 and Pesikta Rabbati 40.
TB Rosh Hashona 17b
Lecture 2, The Divine Names in The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch by Umberto Cassuto, p18, Shalem Press, Jerusalem and New York, 2006. Also, The Names of God in The Koren Siddur with Introduction, Translation and Commentary by Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks. p xiv, Koren Publishers Jerusalem, 2009.
Lecture 3, More about the Divine Names in The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch by Umberto Cassuto, p32, Shalem Press, Jerusalem and New York 2006.
In the Noah story, God speaks freely to Noah. However, in the very similar Gilgamesh myth, the god Ea can only communicate with Upnapishtim about building an ark by speaking to the brick wall of his reed hut. See “Gilgamesh Tablet XI” in Myths from Mesopotamia. Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others by Stephanie Dalley, 110. Oxford University Press, Revised edition 2000.
Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Yesodei ha-Torah 2:2.
http://www.traditiononline.org/news/converted/Volume%207/No.%202/The%20Lonely%20Man.pdf.
Mordechai Breuer. The Aspects Theory of Rav Mordechai Breuer. [In Hebrew]. Edited by Yosef Ofer. Alon Shvut. Tevunot, 2012. Also, Introduction. Breuer’s Shitat HaBehinot (Aspects Theory) in “In the Beginnings. Discovering the Two Worldviews Hidden within Genesis 1-11, p12, Gefen, Jerusalem.2023 and Rabbi Mordechai Breuer in “Great Biblical Commentators. Biographies, Methodologies and Contributions” by Avigail Rock. Maggid Books, 2023, p417.
Kuzari IV:1. This explanation also partially follows that of Nachmanides, as documented in his interpretation to Genesis. 1:1. Also, The Names of God in The Koren Siddur with Introduction, Translation and Commentary by Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks. p xiv, Koren Publishers Jerusalem, 2009.
An example is Genesis 20:13 where the verb for “caused” is in the plural. “And so it was, when Elohim caused me [i.e., Abraham] to wander from my father’s house, I said to her. .” Rashi comments on this phrase and points out other examples in the Bible where the accompanying verb is in the plural. He feels that it has no particular significance. However, a plural verb may also be used for emphasis as the majestic form of God. An example is Genesis 1:20 when God says “Let us make man.” A midrashic explanation is that God consulted with the administering angels.
Examples are "then his master shall bring him to God [Elohim], and shall bring him to the door or the doorpost, and his master shall bore through his ear with the awl, and he shall serve him forever" (Exodus 21:6) and: "If the thief is not found, then the householder shall come near to God [Elohim] that he had not laid his hand on his neighbor's property. For every item of liability, whether an ox, a donkey, a sheep, or a garment, or for any lost item about which he says: 'This is it,' the case of both parties shall come before God [Elohim]. Whomever God [Elohim] condemns shall pay double to his neighbor" (Exodus 22:7-9).
Consistent with the explanation given is that of Rashi who interprets “ehyeh asher ehyeh” as: "I will be with them in this suffering, as I will be with them in future oppressions." Ibn Ezra also interprets “ehyeh” as a statement of God's eternal nature and reliability and reflecting His ongoing presence. Thus, God saying: "I will be with you" is both a promise and reassurance. He also notes that the future tense in Hebrew can imply the aspect of certainty and not just time. Sforno reads it as “I will be, as I will be” — meaning God will reveal Himself in ways appropriate to the needs of the people and according to their level. Each generation may experience God differently, but God is constant in His essence. By contrast, Maimonides, in his Guide for the Perplexed (Part I, Ch. 63), sees “ehyeh” as a metaphysical declaration of existence. The phrase means “the One who necessarily exists.” God is pure being and is independent of all else. Nachmanides connects “ehyeh” to God's attribute of eternity and changelessness and expressing God’s being across all time. It hence reflects the Tetragrammaton (YHWH), which also derives from the same root of to be.
An example is Exodus 9:30. Elohim in this instance may well be translated as the Deity.
See Rashi to Genesis 2:5. Rashi explains the name Elohim as being the ruler and judge over everything.
Rashi’s commentary to Genesis 6.6 based on Bereishis Rabbah 27:4.
Most Jewish philosophers disagree with me and feel that God has complete foreknowledge of people’s freewill choices before they are made. Nevertheless, there are orthodox philosophers, namely the Ralbag (Gersonides) and the Shlah, who limit God’s foreknowledge. For a thorough review of this topic see “The Problem of Foreknowledge” in Illuminating Jewish Thought. Exploration of Freewill, the Afterlife, and the Messianic Era by Rabbi Natanel Wiederblank, p67-176. Maggid Books, 2018.