The Old Testament and Name Theology: An Appraisal

The biblical and extrabiblical data above may lead to the conclusion that the concept known as “Name Theology” as defined by von Rad is not found in the Old Testament. The notion that a so-called Deuteronomist corrected an earlier anthropomorphic theology and substituted the “Name” as a hypostatic representation of the divine presence is unsubstantiated. McConville is surely correct to note that while “name-theology … undoubtedly has a peculiar role to play in Old Testament theology” as a legitimate theological study regarding the various uses of the Name of God in the Old Testament, “[name-theology] should be seen as complementary to other ways of speaking about the presence of God, rather than as representing a different conception of that presence” (McConville, “God’s ‘Name’ and God’s ‘Glory,’ ” 152). It is evident, therefore, that there is no contradiction or anachronism that exists between God’s glory-presence and His name. Kaiser explains, “The point seems to be that God is transcendent in that His permanent abode is in heaven; yet He is immanent in that He dwells on the Earth (Exod 25:8; 29:45; Lev 26:11; Num 16:3) in His glory, angel, name and now in a ‘place’ that He will yet elect (Deut 12:5). There is no evidence that Deuteronomy or Moses rejected in any way this so-called dialectical conception of the divine abode” (Kaiser, Toward an Old Testament Theology, 133). Youngblood further asserts, “The name and being of God are often used in parallelism with each other (Pss 18:49; 68:4; 74:18; 86:12; 92:1; Isa 25:1; Mal 3:16), stressing their essential identity” (Youngblood, “Name in Bible Times, Significance of,” 750). This reality is corroborated by God’s direct proclamation of His name to His people. Smith comments that, “When God took the initiative to reveal Himself, He started by uttering His name, ‘I am Yahweh’ (Gen 35:11; Exod 6:2; 20:1; 34:5–6).… Yahweh’s name was a surrogate for Himself, representing all His holy presence” (Smith, Old Testament Theology, 117).

It is proper, therefore, to conclude: “At most, Deuteronomy taught that Yahweh would select a site in Canaan after He had helped Israel to ‘inherit’ the land and to find ‘rest’ (Deut 12:10–11) in much the same way as He had done in the past. He would ‘make His name dwell’ in the place of His election. This promise is joined the Immanuel and Shekinah-glory theology of the patriarchal and Mosaic eras. And just as God had elected one man out of all humanity, viz., Abraham, and one tribe out of the twelve sons of Jacob, viz., Judah, so now He would choose one place in one of the tribes in which His name would dwell. There He would take up His dwelling (Deut 12:5), and there Israel would come to worship Him” (Kaiser, Toward an Old Testament Theology, 132–33).