Commentaria in Exodum
Others, commonly and rightly and genuinely, derive this name from the root haya, that is, is, or was, so that Jeheva is the same as He who is, but in various senses. First, R. Solomon, Lipomanus and Vatablus explain it thus: He who is, namely constant, keeping faith, true in His promises, as if to say: I am now Jeheva, that is, I will now make to be what I promised, namely that I will lead you out of Egypt into Chanaan, whence follows: “And I made a covenant with them, to give them the land of Chanaan.” Secondly, Rupert and Burgensis explain it thus: He who is, namely terrible, glorious, and working miracles. Thirdly, Jerome Prado on Ezechiel chap. 1, p. 47, holds that the name Jeheva, that is, He who is, does not signify the essence of God: for this Abraham and the other Patriarchs knew; but God’s working outwardly, namely the deliverance of the Hebrews out of Egypt, as if to say: I am who am, that is, who shall be, namely the redeemer of Israel; I am He whom you shall now experience as the avenger of your liberty; for this is what follows in verse 6: “I am the Lord who will bring you out from the work-prison of the Egyptians.”
Fourthly, I say that this tetragrammaton name Jeheva genuinely signifies the essence of God, and the very abyss of the divine essence and immense sea; for this is what the name “He who is” signifies, as I said in chap. 3, which is the same as the tetragrammaton name. Jehova therefore, says Masius, is the same as He who exists from eternity, and is to Himself essence, and on whom the essence of all things depends. So Aristotle, book 1 On the Heaven, calls God aion, as if aei on, that is, always being and existing; because God is the sea of essence and the principle of all essence, who gives being to all. And Trismegistus: “The one God,” he says, “needs no name, for He is the nameless Being,” that is, being without a name. Villalpando notes on Ezech. chap. 28 that the name Jehova or Jeheva signifies the essence of God in Himself, or inwardly, as Adonai signifies the same in respect of His works outwardly: for this reason the Prophets are wont to join both these names, saying: “Thus saith the Lord God”; in Hebrew Adonai Jeheva. Jeheva, that is, God, namely the majesty of God in Himself; Adonai, that is, Lord and sustainer of all that He created.
You will ask whether the tetragrammaton name signifies the essence of God as it is in itself. Scotus and Gabriel, in 1 Sent., dist. 22, hold that men, especially learned and acute ones, can know God in Himself as He is, and consequently can impose on Him a name signifying Him as He is, and that such a name is the tetragrammaton, which accordingly is proper, essential and adequate to God.
But St. Thomas, I part, Quest. 13, better holds it impossible to man in this life to know and name God in Himself. The reason is: first, because in this life no one can know God intuitively; therefore no one can know Him in Himself as He is, fully and perfectly. Secondly, even if anyone knew God in Himself as He is, he would yet know this only in God Himself, by seeing and beholding Him: but the name which he would give Him would be outside God and the essence of God, who by no created sign can be discerned, named, signified and known as He is in Himself. It is true, however, that among all the names of God which we have, none is so proper and so substantial to Him as Being, or Jeheva, that is, He who is, as Damascene teaches, book 1 On the Faith, chap. 12, and St. Thomas I part, Quest. 13, and St. Dionysius, book On the Divine Names, chap. 1.
It is asked fourthly, what is the sense of this place: “I am the Lord that appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by the name of God Almighty, and my name Adonai I did not shew them?” First, Bede reads it interrogatively, did I not shew it to them? as if to say: I certainly showed them this my name; but this dissents from the common reading of all the Hebrew, Greek and Latin codices, which lack the mark of interrogation, and read this assertively, namely that God asserts that He had not shown them this His name.
Secondly, others explain it thus: “my name Adonai I did not shew them,” that is, Lord, as if to say: I did not show them my full and highest dominion over all things, by which I can turn and change all things at pleasure by miracles and prodigies into any other things I will; but this I shall now show through thee, O Moses, in the plagues which I shall bring upon Egypt. But these err: first, in the name Adonai, that is, Lord; for in Hebrew it is not Adonai but the tetragrammaton name Jeheva. Secondly, because God before Moses showed this His dominion sufficiently to the fathers in the deluge, in the overthrow of Sodom, in the dispersion of Babel.
Thirdly, R. Solomon, Vatablus and Lipomanus give this sense: To the fathers I did not make known my tetragrammaton name Jeheva, that is, I am who am, namely I am constant and true in my promises: because to the fathers I did not fulfil my promises of giving them Chanaan; but these I shall now fulfil to thee, O Moses, and thine: whence I shall show thee in deed that I am Jeheva, that is, that I am faithful in promises. But the tetragrammaton name does not signify faithfulness, but the very “being” of God.
Fourthly, Rupert and Burgensis explain: “I did not make known to the fathers the name Adonai,” namely how great is its power and virtue, how terrible, how glorious, how miraculous, and productive of plagues, as I shall now make known and show through thee, O Moses, by multiplying prodigies and plagues.
Fifthly, Oleaster: The tetragrammaton name, he says, Jeheva, is the same as grinder, as if to say: I did not show the fathers that I am Jeheva, that is, the grinder of Pharao and of the Egyptians; but this I shall now show thee, O Moses.
Sixthly, Lyranus, following St. Augustine, holds that Moses in rapture, Exodus 33, saw the essence of God, and that then was revealed and declared to him the tetragrammaton name: for this signifies the essence of God; but it is truer that Moses did not see the essence of God, as I shall say on chap. 33. Add: that vision was later than the revelation of the tetragrammaton name; for this was revealed to Moses here, and in chap. 3. But Moses, if he saw the essence of God, saw it not except in chap. 33.
Seventhly, I say, therefore, the plain and genuine sense of this place is this: I, God, was known and worshipped by the fathers as El Saddai, that is, God strong and liberal; but my proper name Jeheva I did not make known to them, but this first I reveal to thee, O Moses, and together with the name I communicate to thee a clearer knowledge of the thing signified, namely of my essence and divinity; and this I do to this end, that I may raise thee and the people afflicted by Pharao into hope of my help now about to be present; as one who now show myself to thee and the Hebrews so familiar, and to be addressed and known by my proper name, that you may know that you are now more my care and at my heart than before.
‸Hence it is plain, first, that the tetragrammaton name was revealed to Moses. It is plain, secondly, that Moses here received a clearer knowledge of the divinity than Abraham, Isaac and Jacob received. The sense therefore is as if He said: I, God, was known and called by the fathers Adonai, Elohim, El Saddai, that is, Lord, Governor, strong, liberal, almighty (which names signify some certain form and perfection, after the manner of a quality in God); but to thee, O Moses, I reveal my essential name, which signifies my very substance in itself, and my essence, which is the fountain and cause of all things, and an immense sea. That this is the sense is proved first, because this tetragrammaton name is the same as that in chap. 3: I am who am, as I have already shown. For God here speaks of this name, not as first given in this place, but of it as already known to Moses from the first apparition, chap. 3, verses 14 and 15. Therefore this name does not signify God as true, avenger or grinder, but as containing the whole fullness of being, or as the very subsisting being, immense, immutable, eternal and infinite.
It is proved secondly, because it is false that God did not appear to the fathers as grinder in the deluge and in Sodom; or as true: for God appeared true to Noe when He afterwards hindered the deluge, as He had promised Noe, Genesis chap. 9, verse 15. Likewise He appeared true in the protection of Abraham, Genesis 17, verses 1 and 10; in the birth of Sara, ibid., verses 16 and 21; in blessing Isaac, Genesis 26, verses 4 and 5.
It is proved thirdly, because otherwise the same thing would seem to be said, and so the latter part of the sentence would clash with the former, if you explain thus: I appeared to the fathers as strong, but not as grinding; I appeared to the fathers as liberal, but not as faithful and true: for if God is liberal, much more is He faithful and holding to His promise.