From ChatGPT on 12/19/2025, as a follow-up to here; that was a follow-up to here; that was a follow-up to here that was a follow-up to the initial prompt here.
How do critical bible scholars view the idea of YHWH coming from the south and Moses being told at the burning bush YHWH’s name?
Overview
Critical biblical scholars generally see no contradiction between (1) traditions that locate YHWH’s origin or early cult in the south (Edom/Midian/Seir) and (2) the burning bush scene where Moses is told YHWH’s name (Exodus 3). Instead, they understand these as different layers and functions within Israel’s traditions: one preserves geographic/cultic memory, the other theological authorization and nationalization.
How scholars understand “YHWH coming from the south”
Critical scholars argue that several early poetic texts remember YHWH as originating or appearing from the south—Sinai/Seir/Teman/Paran—rather than from Canaan or Egypt.
Frank Moore Cross describes these passages as “archaic poetic traditions” that predate Israel’s later cult centers and preserve a memory of YHWH as a southern warrior deity (Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, Harvard University Press, 1973).
Mark S. Smith agrees, concluding that YHWH “originated outside Israel, probably in Edom or Midian,” and was later adopted as Israel’s national god (Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God, Eerdmans, 2002).
For critical scholars, these texts are not metaphorical inventions but remnants of early religious memory embedded in poetry, which tends to preserve older traditions more conservatively than narrative prose.
How scholars read the burning bush name revelation (Exodus 3)
In Exodus 3:13–15, Moses asks for God’s name and is told YHWH. Critical scholars generally do not read this as the moment YHWH first existed or was first known anywhere.
Instead, they understand the scene as a revelatory authorization:
- Moses is being commissioned
- Israel is being given a covenant identity
- YHWH is being formally named as Israel’s god
Martin Noth argued that the name revelation functions to legitimate Moses’ mission, not to narrate the origin of the deity (Martin Noth, A History of Pentateuchal Traditions, Prentice-Hall, 1972).
Joel S. Baden emphasizes that Exodus 3 explains what the name means for Israel, not where or when it first arose (The Composition of the Pentateuch, Yale University Press, 2012).
Why scholars do not see a contradiction
Critical scholars distinguish between knowing a deity and formalizing that deity’s role.
In this framework:
- YHWH may have been worshiped in the south (Midian/Edom) before Israel
- Moses encounters YHWH in Midian (Exodus 3:1)
- The burning bush scene marks YHWH’s self-disclosure as Israel’s covenant God
Mark S. Smith notes that ancient religions often assumed deities were already known in some regions, while new groups later received specific revelations or names tied to covenant or political identity (The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, Oxford University Press, 2001).
Thus, Exodus 3 is not about discovering a new god, but about defining the god’s relationship to Israel.
The role of Midian in harmonizing both ideas
Critical scholars point out that Exodus itself quietly supports the southern-origin view.
Exodus 3:1 (ASV) places Moses in Midian when he encounters YHWH, and Exodus 18 portrays Jethro, priest of Midian, already knowing and honoring YHWH by name.
Frank Moore Cross argues that Jethro represents an older southern YHWH tradition that Israel later adopts and reframes (Cross, 1973).
Konrad Schmid notes that this allows the text to preserve multiple memories: YHWH known in the south, yet newly revealed to Israel (Genesis and the Moses Story, Eisenbrauns, 2010).
How Exodus 6 fits the picture
Exodus 6:2–3 (ASV) states that YHWH was not known to the patriarchs by that name. Critical scholars generally interpret this as a theological claim by a later priestly writer, not a historical assertion about universal ignorance of the name.
Joel Baden explains that different Pentateuchal sources make competing claims about when and to whom the name was known, reflecting theological emphasis rather than historical reportage (Baden, 2012).
This reinforces the idea that name revelation is about authority and covenant, not first discovery.
Scholarly bottom line
Critical biblical scholars generally conclude:
- YHWH’s southern origin traditions preserve early cultic memory (Cross; Smith).
- The burning bush scene is a moment of commissioning and covenant definition, not deity creation (Noth; Baden).
- Moses encounters a god already worshiped in Midian, but Israel receives YHWH as its national deity at that moment.
- The Bible preserves multiple layers—poetic memory, narrative theology, and later priestly interpretation—without fully harmonizing them.
In short, for critical scholarship, YHWH comes from the south, and YHWH’s name is given to Israel at the bush—not as a contradiction, but as a reflection of how ancient religions transmitted identity, authority, and memory across time.
