🌘EXODUS 6:3🌒

[DavidHenson]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Sounds like a valid answer.

There is at least one religion which claims the name had not been known till that occurance in Exodus. I had found on my own that the name was used a lot prior to that. The scripture that stood out in that regards is the last verse of chapter 4 in Genesis where it reads: "At that time people began to call on the name of the Lord."

Hmmm. Hebrew scholars say it wasn't just calling on, but profaning the name. The Jerusalem Targum: "That was the generation in whose days they began to err, and to make themselves idols, and surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord."

They started using the name inappropriately.

[DavidHenson]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

How should I have posed that question?

I wouldn't presume to tell you that. You just appear to be going down an avenue of inquiry which is, in my opinion, a waste of time. Just my advice, which, I suppose, you should naturally take with a grain of salt, as they say.

So, carry on and if I can be of any help I can only offer my opinion. I've already asked a few questions you might give some thought to and that's all I can do.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by DavidHenson

Hmmm. Hebrew scholars say it wasn't just calling on, but profaning the name. The Jerusalem Targum: "That was the generation in whose days they began to err, and to make themselves idols, and surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord."

They started using the name inappropriately.

If you read the text of Exodus 6, it does not imply any thing like that was happening. Besides, why would God free an enslaved people who were making idols, and "surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord"?

From what I read, it was basically the opposite.

As for the Jerusalem Targum, not everybody holds that text as being 'gospel'.

[DavidHenson]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

If you read the text of Exodus 6, it does not imply any thing like that was happening.

True, but there was a considerable amount of time between what was happening at Genesis 4:26 and Exodus 6:3.

Originally Posted by BigJohn

As for the Jerusalem Targum, not everybody holds that text as being 'gospel'.

I sure don't, but it's of a cultural rather than Biblical relevance. Just something to think about and it does make sense to me. The Palistinian Targum concurs, by the way.

[DavidHenson]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

a name in many ways tells who you are or how you will behave. Withholding a name simply means you aren't going to give information on what is coming from you next...

Absolutely. And this is an extremely important point for two reasons. First, the name was even more important then than it is now and second, the name Jehovah means "He causes to become." Sort of the same pronouncement in that name as his statement at Exodus 3:14.

Simply put, he was what he would prove to be to a greater extend than before. To them. (Exodus 6:3)

[BigJohn]

If you look at the various commentaries of Exodus 6:3 mentioned at https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/6-3.htm, none of the commentators are in agreement with one another nor agree with your conclusion.

In the past, I have looked at the Masoretic Text suspecting more was revealed in that name at that time, only to find out that the name was not pronounced exactly like Yahweh as it was used in Exodus 6:3 which is יְהוָ֔ה but was pronounced with numerous variations and none of them apparently were pronounced as Yahweh. The different ways in which the name was pronounced has been, for the most part, been lost. Compare this with Genesis 2:4 where the name is written as יְהוָ֥ה and is pronouced differently then the version mentioned at Exodus 6:3.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 6 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

The consensus among scholars is that the story in the Book of Exodus is best understood as a myth, and does not accurately describe historical events.

That is my understanding as well though even a myth can be used for teaching purposes.

I just listened to a good YouTube video assessing whether Moses was a real person or not and conceding that there is some support for the position that there may have been a historical Exodus ..... BUT that such an Exodus would have been on a much much smaller scale than the reported 603,000 Jewish males who left Egypt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptYz-Vu0dxY

[BigJohn]

.................... "the reported 603,000 Jewish males who left Egypt" did not include wives, girlfriends and children which, when they are included, was a huge number.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 6 EXCERPT:



That is my understanding as well though even a myth can be used for teaching purposes.

]

The way things work…….when discovered that something is not historically true a significant number will discredit in entirety.

[BigJohn]

Maybe....... a person might just want to explain to a person why such scriptures are in the Bible. For example, why is Genesis, Exodus, etc. in the Bible.

And when they have objections, they might want to explain the 'objections' instead of turning away from the person.