i assume u mean the first thing I said, about Elohim appearing and not just as a stand-in for YHWH.
i mean apart from the numerous works of source-criticism which posit an Elohist author and a Jehovist author, one of which uses elohim and one of which uses YHWH, what more do u want? even assuming that you don’t accept source-criticism, for religious reasons or whatever, a prime basis of their assertions is the use of different divine names. shall i cite you the hebrew text we have today, of which we have identical copies on scrolls a couple thousand years old? or the dead sea scrolls which aside from minor deviations possess the same qualities, and are WELL over 2000 years old?
they are even used next to each other sometimes. in Genesis 2 the original hebrew uses the name YHWH Elohim.
Richard Elliot Friedman, a current bible scholar , author of such works as “Who Wrote the Bible” and “The Hidden Book in the Bible”. you can, of course, read ANY higher criticism if you’d like to see people who, frankly, know more about it than either of us speaking frankly about passages which use Elohim as opposed to passages which use YHWH.
if you want the original work, which spawned the Documentary Hypothesis (the basically accepted theory that the Pentateuch was pulled together from four sources and redacted by a final Redactor),
Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (Berlin, 1882; Eng. trans., 1885; 5th German edition, 1899; first published in 1878 as Geschichte Israels).
by Wellhausen. It is now translated, but of course, the Doc-Hype has been greatly revised since the nineteenth century.
For a more traditional, jewish scholar, Umberto Cassuto (once a professor of bible in Italy, then the Hebrew University in Jerusalem) has now been translated from Hebrew and Italian into English. For a polemic against the documentary hypothesis, employing critical methodology, Hebrew grammar, and knowledge of other Near Eastern languages and documents, read “The Documentary Hypothesis”, translated by Josh Berman. It, too, like all bible scholarship, assumes a multiplicity of divine names in the original text.
wikipedia may also help you out. Feel free to look up the Dead Sea Scrolls to learn about 2200 year old texts found in Qumran in the last century.
“The significance of the scrolls relates in a large part to the field of textual criticism. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible were Masoretic texts dating to 9th century. The biblical manuscripts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls push that date back to the 2nd century BC. Before this discovery, the earliest extant manuscripts of the Old Testament were in Greek in manuscripts such as Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Although a few of the biblical manuscripts found at Qumran differ significantly from the Masoretic text, most do not. The scrolls thus provide new variants and the ability to be more confident of those readings where the Dead Sea manuscripts agree with the Masoretic Text or with the early Greek manuscripts.
Further, the sectarian texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls, most of which were previously unknown, offer new light on one form of Judaism practiced during the Second Temple period.”
If you want a book on them, I enjoyed Lawrence Schiffman’s “Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: their True Meaning for Judaism and Christianity”.