The evidence of the textual, philosophical, and theological analysis presented in this paper is that there is a divine name in the words of Exodus 3:14, that this name is the Personal name of God, that it is the Hebrew word Ehyeh, and that Ehyeh should be translated into English as I AM.  The meaning of I AM as presented in this paper can be most readily apprehended from the Diagram depicting the creative activity of God, is most concisely explained in the Summary of the Explanation, and is most concisely expanded upon in the exegetical passage immediately preceding this Conclusion.

It goes without saying that the extended Explanation of the meaning of the name Ehyeh as presented above would not have been readily understood by the great majority of enslaved Israelites in Egypt, and so it is very unlikely that Moses presented any such explanation to them.  However, it is entirely possible that he presented such an extended explanation to the Elders of Israel, just as Exodus Ch.3 suggests.  As for the majority of the Israelites, he could certainly have drawn them a diagram, and a diagram can make a point very effectively, and it can do so in a way that almost anyone can understand.

The interpretation presented in this paper clearly supports those of times past that have perceived in the words of Exodus 3:14 a reference to the absolute and eternal being of God.  Conversely it clearly contradicts the temporal, dismissive, evasive and nonsensical meanings that have been attributed to these words, all of which can now be safely dismissed.  However unpalatable it may be to those who have no taste for theological or philosophical speculation, and however much they may protest that such speculation is alien the Torah, I believe it is now clear that if we are to understand the true meaning of the words of Exodus 3:14 then it is to the absolute and eternal we must turn.  Moreover, I have no doubt that Moses did not spend his entire time thinking about his sheep while alone in the hills for days and perhaps weeks at a time over a period of several decades, and I seriously doubt that God would grant revelations to the mentally idle or to those who would prefer to have others do their thinking for them.  After all, what would be the point?  Revelations would surely be granted only to those who were searching unceasingly for an ever-deeper understanding of God, and who would make good use of whatever understanding they were granted.  I therefore have no doubt that Moses was not only a thinker, but an extremely able one, and I believe uniquely able.

Furthermore, if the meaning of Ehyeh is as I have explained it to be, then I would go so far as to propose that Exodus 3:14 can stand alone as confirmation of the unsurpassable depth and authority of the prophecy of Moses, and so of the unsurpassable validity of the Jewish understanding of God.  Indeed I would go one step further and propose that it is specifically the declaration of Exodus 3:14a – Ehyeh asher Ehyeh – that sets the seal on the unsurpassable prophetic authority of Moses, because it is the depth of meaning in these words that is unsurpassable to my understanding, and they are undoubtedly unique in the human historical record.  I am certain that however long I had spent thinking my way towards God, I would never have reached the depth at which these remarkable and beautiful words are to be found had they not been written down on the page in front of me, and in a book of some consequence.  It is the unique acquisition by Moses of this unparalleled depth of understanding that I cannot account for in any other way than as the greatest ever instance of Divine revelation to humanity.

Conversely, and in my opinion very fittingly, the Divine name Ehyeh - the Personal name of the God of Judaism – can stand alone as the definitive response to, and decisive refutation of, the Christian idea of a triune god. I say this because if the meaning of this name is as I have explained it to be, then the Christian understanding of God is invalid.  This is so because the Explanation of the meaning of the name has as its most fundamental premise the Jewish understanding of God as One in His Person, and it is derived in its entirety from the Jewish understanding of God as in every conceivable sense The Perfect One.  It is therefore incompatible with the Christian understanding of God, which contends that God is in three persons, and is moreover a specific negation of that understanding.

Thus at once does Ehyeh declare against all religious claims to superiority over Judaism, and against all religious claims to have superseded Judaism, and specifically against the Christian idea of a god comprised of three divine persons, and so against the entire edifice of Christian thought and belief.

As regards the rabbinic identification of Ehyeh asher Ehyeh as a divine name, this is evidently incorrect.  It is not incorrect because of what I have written.  It is incorrect because of what is written in Exodus 3:13-15, and so is there for everyone to read and confirm for themselves.  It is extraordinary that such an error has stood unchallenged for so long, but such is the power of tradition.  I am aware that the meaning of these words have not been understood since long before the writing of the Talmud, but that does not excuse the perpetuation of what is obviously an incorrect reading of the biblical text by those who cannot but have recognised it as such.  I believe the misidentification of Ehyeh asher Ehyeh as a Divine name, and the attendant misunderstanding of the meaning and significance of the Divine name Ehyeh, is an example of tradition becoming an obstacle to faith, and especially to the potential for faith of countless spiritually hungry but resolutely rational people, Jews and non-Jews alike.  Even aside from this, however, this traditional misunderstanding cannot but be immensely harmful simply because it relates to what are surely the most important words in existence.  I therefore strongly disagree with the rabbis on this point, and would respectfully suggest that they should either demonstrate the sense of their contention if they can or acknowledge the error if they cannot.  I understand how difficult it may be for many Jews to acknowledge the presence in the Talmud of an incorrect reading of the biblical text, but I believe the words of Exodus 3:14 are far too important to allow the uncritical and unquestioning acceptance of tradition to forever obscure their meaning.

As regards the relationship between the names Ehyeh and YHWH, I would suggest that YHWH should not be regarded as the third person masculine singular equivalent of Ehyeh, because to understand it as such does not make good linguistic sense.  This is for the very simple reason that the Personal name of God is ‘I AM’, not ‘He is’.  I would suggest instead that YHWH should be regarded as the untranslatable proper name of God, and that it should be understood to bear the same meaning as Ehyeh, as was suggested by Ibn Ezra (see Exodus 3:14 in Medieval Thought).  If understood in this way, the use of the name YHWH would have the effect of bringing powerfully to mind the full meaning of the name Ehyeh without such mindfulness requiring the utterance of the most holy of Divine names and the most holy word in existence; Ehyeh.

Finally as to whether the name Ehyeh should ever be uttered, that is of course something everyone must decide for themselves.  I would only point out that Moses was commanded to tell the Israelites that they are always to refer to God and address Him by His proper name YHWH, and by implication that they are never to use His Personal name Ehyeh.  The Bible therefore supports what many may feel intuitively, which is that the utterance of the name Ehyeh should at least be highly restricted.  However the Bible does not command us to forget about the name Ehyeh or to cease from contemplating its meaning.  Had that been what was intended then it would not have been written into perpetuity in the Book of Exodus.  Moreover, I believe the meaning of Ehyeh as a divine name is of immense importance to every person of faith and to theological and philosophical enquiry in general.  I am therefore certain that its meaning should be understood, and contemplated, and discussed, and remembered, whether or not the name is uttered at all.  As for myself, and outwith the sphere of the most meaningful enquiry, the name Ehyeh in any language will be ineffable, but I will speak of it respectfully as the Personal name of God.