The term God can be used through more than one context. When Moses is told in the burning bush scene to spread His word and bring the Israelites out of Egypt, he is left with God saying, “I am who I am… I am who sent you.” In this passage of Exodus 3, God is a localized entity- a personal God. He does not require more of an explanation as designating Him with a name confers the meaning of the name. God thereby cannot be encapsulated in a singular term, therefore giving this ambiguous rebuff to Moses’ question. Here God is set apart from “Gods,” as a lone, omnipotent deity. As Foster says of His answer, “it dissolves the name into mystery, so that the familiarity and unfamiliarity of God, concealment and revelation, are indicated simultaneously” (128).
Here is a disjunction between how our relationship with God could be perceived. In God’s dismissal of giving a name He sets himself apart, separate from those who he created in his image. But he also maintains himself as “The Lord, the God of your fathers- the God of Abraham, the God of Issac and the God of Joseph.” He is the universal father to which all others blessings have been received. There is a certain intimacy in naming the elect and drawing His name at a parallel. God enters into a “coexistence with them; he puts himself within their reach” (134). Entering into this relationship moves God away from being untouchable to something attainable- there is a hope that each person can one day understand the scope of what God means. God is above us and at the same time a part of us. He has the ability for immense sorrow and immense joy, yet is an unyielding constant presence in each of us.