xcept what derives
stability from Him.
He may have desired to know, for himself, whether there was any truth in
the dreamy and fascinating pantheism which inspired so much of the
Egyptian superstition.
In that case, the answer met his question by declaring that God existed,
not as the sum of things or soul of the universe, but in Himself, the
only independent Being.
Or he may simply have desired some name to express more of the mystery
of deity, remembering how a change of name had accompanied new
discoveries of human character and achievement, as of Abraham and
Israel; and expecting a new name likewise when God would make to His
people new revelations of Himself.
So natural an expectation was fulfilled not only then, but afterwards.
When Moses prayed "Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory," the answer was "I
will make all My goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name
of the Lord." The proclamation was again Jehovah, but not this alone. It
was "The Lord, the Lord, a God full of compassion and gracious, slow to
anger, and plenteous in mercy and truth" (xxxiii. 18, 19, xxxiv. 6,
R.V.) Thus the life of Moses, like the agelong progress of the Church,
advanced towards an ever-deepening knowledge that God is not only the
Independent but the Good. All sets toward the final knowledge that His
highest name is Love.
Meanwhile, in the development of events, the exact period was come for
epithets, which were shared with gods many and lords many, to be
supplemented by the formal announcement and authoritative adoption of
His proper name Jehovah. The infant nation was to learn to think of Him,
not only as endowed with attributes of terror and power, by which
enemies would be crushed, but as possessing a certain well-defined
personality, upon which the trust of man could repose. Soon their
experience would enable them to receive the formal announcement that He
was merciful and gracious. But first they were required to trust His
promise amid all discouragements; and to this end, stability was the
attribute first to be insisted upon.
It is true that the derivation of the word Jehovah is still a problem
for critical acumen. It has been sought in more than one language, and
various shades of meaning have been assigned to it, some untenable in
the abstract, others hardly, or not at all, to be reconciled with the
Scriptural narrative.
Nay, the corruption of the very sound is so notorious, that it is only
worth mentio
|