🌘EXODUS 6:3🌒

[BigJohn]

One of the most controversial scriptures found in the Bible is Exodus 6:3. In the King James Bible it reads:

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

It is the latter part of this scripture that is controversial. The name was known or ...... was it? Or was the writer trying to express some 'other' point?

Is there any explanations of why this sentence was written this way?

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

One of the most controversial scriptures found in the Bible is Exodus 6:3. In the King James Bible it reads:

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

It is the latter part of this scripture that is controversial. The name was known or ...... was it? Or was the writer trying to express some 'other' point?

Is there any explanations of why this sentence was written this way?

Jehovah is a translation is it not?

Do you have an issue with, "God Almighty"?

[BigJohn]

Morpheus,
Did you read the question?

The part I find controversial is "but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them".

Over the years, I have looked at that scripture and could not make any 'sense out of it".

How can that scripture be true when God's name, Jehovah, had been used, numerous places in the Bible, before we get to the Exodus account?

[zastrakoza]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

The part I find controversial is "but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them".
Over the years, I have looked at that scripture and could not make any 'sense out of it".
How can that scripture be true when God's name, Jehovah, had been used, numerous places in the Bible, before we get to the Exodus account?

Could it be that to consider the name only a name would be a mistake? All names have meanings. Perhaps the statement is that the people of Israel still didn't know (recognize) the essence or truth of his being.

Originally Posted by BigJohn

How can that scripture be true when God's name, Jehovah, had been used, numerous places in the Bible, before we get to the Exodus account?

I would guess somebody could figure that out by researching the date the various scrolls were written in, what languages they were written in, and who are thought to be the writers, and then research the various words and translations of those words that have led to what we have today. Seems like a lot of work though.

A lot of different people wrote the various books and even sentences in the bible as some sentences have changed over time and they all had different views and motivations and what not. Actually that writer is speaking as if he or she is god by writing in first person but some writer mentioning how different books in the bible called god by different names could be trying to say a lot of different things, like all knew the same god by different names, some didn't know the true god or had false gods, the writer could be pointing out different factions within early Christianity and putting a positive or negative spin on one group or another. With enough research one could probably figure out the motivations and intended purpose of the passage.

Exodus had been traditionally thought to have been written by Moses himself, but modern scholars see its initial composition as a product of the Babylonian exile (6th century BCE), based on earlier written and oral traditions, with final revisions or changes in the Persian post-exilic period (5th century BCE)

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.

Different translations sure make that passage different:

Exodus 6

Youngs Literal Translation
2 (pointedly to Moses) I am the Eternal. 3 I revealed Myself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God-All-Powerful; but I did not reveal My name, the Eternal One, to them.

So there the point seems to be they knew "god" as power (or deeds/actions) (external) and "god" was in fact always existing or an eternal force. (within and without)

Known = perceived or understood.
They knew of the name but did not fully understand or perceive it.

Here in this Chapter there is repetition of Lord/Jahova and repeated 5 times.

My studies indicate this is God declaring "Heavenly Grace" will be activated
and the Israelite's Will be Freed from Egypt/Bondage since He remembers His Covenant with Israel.

My short study was done from The Companion Bible.By E.W.Bullinger

P.S.: My opinion or thought is what was not understood or known may
be in the Covenant The Lord made, otherwise they would not be in bondage in the first place.
As hinted to in verse 5.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

One of the most controversial scriptures found in the Bible is Exodus 6:3. In the King James Bible it reads:

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

It is the latter part of this scripture that is controversial. The name was known or ...... was it? Or was the writer trying to express some 'other' point?

Is there any explanations of why this sentence was written this way?

You can read a commentary following this link:

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/6-3.htm

The apparent meaning of the present passage cannot therefore be its true meaning. No writer would so contradict himself. Perhaps the true sense is, "I was known to them as a Being of might and power, not as mere absolute (and so eternal and immutable) existence."

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

One of the most controversial scriptures found in the Bible is Exodus 6:3. In the King James Bible it reads:

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

It is the latter part of this scripture that is controversial. The name was known or ...... was it? Or was the writer trying to express some 'other' point?

Is there any explanations of why this sentence was written this way?

BigJohn,

It is interesting that you bring this to our attention. Personally I think that perhaps this was a prelude to addressing or thinking of God in a more personal way. Both Yahweh and Jehovah are cryptic in nature....expressing the thought or feeling that it was presumptuous to indicate familiarty with God by addressing him by name or presuming to know the name of God.

It must be noticed that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are often referred to in memory as all 3 at once. This elevation of the 3 names in the history of the Bible was perhaps a prelude to the acceptance of the idea of the trinity....Abraham reminding of the father....Isaac reminding of the Son and Isaac reminding of the Holy Spirit.

The time was coming when God could be discerned on a much more personal level as demonstrated by Jesus the Christ. It should be remembered that Jesus demonstrated this familiarty with God with speaking of him as the 'father'. And He urged us in the Lord's Prayer to address God as our father.

[RabbiO]

Originally Posted by Morpheus

Jehovah is a translation is it not?

Actually it is not. It is a mistaken transliteration caused by a mistaken pronunciation of the tetragrammaton.

The Masoretes put the vowel points for Adonai into the word to remind readers to substitute Adonai in any reading of the tetragrammaton. Those vowel points read simply as vowels within the name give the mistaken pronunciation of Yehovah which transliterated becomes Jehovah.