Though God reveals Himself to earlier Patriarchs like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it is His revelation through Moses that primarily marks the beginning of Judaism. Thus, Moses, feeling confused and inadequate at the Burning Bush, asks God how he should identify the god who sends him back to Egypt. God's response in Exodus 3:14 offers the closest thing to a Self-definition in Scripture: "...If they ask me, "What is His name?" what shall I say to them?" God said to Moses, "I will be whatever I will be (or "I am who I am.")," which is shortened to the name "Yahweh."
Both translations are legitimate. But "I will be whatever I will be" fits nicely with God's statement in Exodus 33:19: "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious." Three implications of God's Self-definition merit comment:
(1) God's answer is evasive, just as He is in His response to Jacob's request for His name in Genesis 32:29 and Manoah's request for the name of God's angelic manifestation in Judges 13:17-18. Why is God so evasive? Why does God offer a circumlocution phrase instead of the name that Moses requested? In the Ancient Near East, the names of a god was often thought to express that god's essence. In effect, God is saying to Moses, "Don't put me in a box. I'm far too incomprehensible and complex to be reduced to a name." So when we confess that God is Love, we need to understand that God's love cannot be reduced to or adequately explained by mutual human love. To remind us of the dangers of attributing human virtues and thoughts to God, God warns: "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9)."
This teaching has profound experiential implications. To effectively seek God's "face," I must know what I don't know and treat my encounter with God as an encounter with a mystery. Thus, each divine encounter holds the prospect of getting to know God in a fresh way. In some of my most powerful encounters with God during prolonged prayer sessions, I was struck by the fact that, though I knew I was loved profoundly, I felt great fear at encountering so powerful God as a great Unknown. There is good reasons why Proverbs 1:7 tells us, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
The inadequacy of our language about God prompts a curious refusal in Paul's epistles to admit that we can clearly know God. Rather, Paul prefers to think in terms of God coming to know us. Notice how Paul corrects himself in Galatians 4:9: "Now that you have come to know God, or rather be known by God... (Galatians 4:9)." Notice also that in 1 Corinthians 8:3 he similarly refuses to claim that if we love God, we can know God: "Anyone who loves [God] is known by Him." God is of course omniscient. So the concept of God coming to know us refers to relational knowledge that derives from an intimate connection, not from impersonal factual knowledge.
(2) The phrase "I will be whatever I will be" implies that God's love and nature is best perceived on the basis of His gracious actions in behalf of His people. Theological language used to define His character must ideally be based on the meaning of the Exodus, the establishment of God's covenant with Israel, and His provisions for survival during the wilderness wanderings and then in the Promised Land. In short, theological language must be primarily based on His acts, not on human words about Him.
(3) At the Burning Bush, God also implies: "I will be whatever I will be to you, but I reserve the right to be whatever I will be to other peoples of other cultures and faiths." In other words, God is set to offer Israel special revelation, but God reserves the right to offer general revelation, however imperfect, through the myths, rituals, and beliefs of pagan religion. This point is most dramatically expressed in God's warning to Israel in Amos 9:7:
"Are you not like the Ethiopians (= the Cushites) to me, O people of Israel? Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, but also the Philistines from Caphtor (= Crete) and the Arameans from Kir (= modern Iraq)?"
God makes at least 3 points here: (a) He loves the Ethiopian, Philistine, and Aramean pagans just as much as He loves Israel. (b) Israel is not the only people who have benefited from a divine exodus. Through special guidance, God has also arranged for the exodus of these 3 other pagan peoples. (c) Because of Israel's neglect of social justice for the poor, God has rejected their worship and rituals (5:23-25). 9:7 reminds Israel that their status as God's chosen people is not unconditional; indeed, God has other peoples to whom He reveals Himself. Paul picks up this focus on God's general revelation in Romans
"
Both translations are legitimate. But "I will be whatever I will be" fits nicely with God's statement in Exodus 33:19: "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious." Three implications of God's Self-definition merit comment:
(1) God's answer is evasive, just as He is in His response to Jacob's request for His name in Genesis 32:29 and Manoah's request for the name of God's angelic manifestation in Judges 13:17-18. Why is God so evasive? Why does God offer a circumlocution phrase instead of the name that Moses requested? In the Ancient Near East, the names of a god was often thought to express that god's essence. In effect, God is saying to Moses, "Don't put me in a box. I'm far too incomprehensible and complex to be reduced to a name." So when we confess that God is Love, we need to understand that God's love cannot be reduced to or adequately explained by mutual human love. To remind us of the dangers of attributing human virtues and thoughts to God, God warns: "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9)."
This teaching has profound experiential implications. To effectively seek God's "face," I must know what I don't know and treat my encounter with God as an encounter with a mystery. Thus, each divine encounter holds the prospect of getting to know God in a fresh way. In some of my most powerful encounters with God during prolonged prayer sessions, I was struck by the fact that, though I knew I was loved profoundly, I felt great fear at encountering so powerful God as a great Unknown. There is good reasons why Proverbs 1:7 tells us, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
The inadequacy of our language about God prompts a curious refusal in Paul's epistles to admit that we can clearly know God. Rather, Paul prefers to think in terms of God coming to know us. Notice how Paul corrects himself in Galatians 4:9: "Now that you have come to know God, or rather be known by God... (Galatians 4:9)." Notice also that in 1 Corinthians 8:3 he similarly refuses to claim that if we love God, we can know God: "Anyone who loves [God] is known by Him." God is of course omniscient. So the concept of God coming to know us refers to relational knowledge that derives from an intimate connection, not from impersonal factual knowledge.
(2) The phrase "I will be whatever I will be" implies that God's love and nature is best perceived on the basis of His gracious actions in behalf of His people. Theological language used to define His character must ideally be based on the meaning of the Exodus, the establishment of God's covenant with Israel, and His provisions for survival during the wilderness wanderings and then in the Promised Land. In short, theological language must be primarily based on His acts, not on human words about Him.
(3) At the Burning Bush, God also implies: "I will be whatever I will be to you, but I reserve the right to be whatever I will be to other peoples of other cultures and faiths." In other words, God is set to offer Israel special revelation, but God reserves the right to offer general revelation, however imperfect, through the myths, rituals, and beliefs of pagan religion. This point is most dramatically expressed in God's warning to Israel in Amos 9:7:
"Are you not like the Ethiopians (= the Cushites) to me, O people of Israel? Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, but also the Philistines from Caphtor (= Crete) and the Arameans from Kir (= modern Iraq)?"
God makes at least 3 points here: (a) He loves the Ethiopian, Philistine, and Aramean pagans just as much as He loves Israel. (b) Israel is not the only people who have benefited from a divine exodus. Through special guidance, God has also arranged for the exodus of these 3 other pagan peoples. (c) Because of Israel's neglect of social justice for the poor, God has rejected their worship and rituals (5:23-25). 9:7 reminds Israel that their status as God's chosen people is not unconditional; indeed, God has other peoples to whom He reveals Himself. Paul picks up this focus on God's general revelation in Romans
"
