EzAad:
Chaim, What I answered you is ABC of Christian Catechism. Christians are baptised in the Name (not Names) of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Ghost : that One Name is worthy of worship. And His Name is: I am; or I am there for you, or I am who I am: the probable meaning of the four letters. This cannot be new to you? (I don't know what kind of Christianity you met, but I'm afraid it is the American dominant evangelical/pentecostal/chiliastic kind of Christianity).

Medini:
BTW, the Name YKVK does NOT mean I am who I am that is Ekyeh asher Ekyeh, which actually means I will be who/what I will be an statement of absolute freedom not being bound even to any defined self or nature that is at odds with the way you are reading this.

EzAad:
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
Man speaks words and he breathes, as an image of God. God also spoke His Word and Breathed. What God did was before or beyond all times. His Word is generated by the Father out of Love; His Word is free, but bound by Love. Because God, who is Love,can only Speak=generate Love.

Medini:
What I mean is that these acts of speaking or breathing can either be entirely free to G-d (unlike man where breathing, for example, is involuntary) or they can be inherent. If entirely free, then they are acts that exist from non-existence, whether eternally or in time, and they cannot be G-d unless you have a G-d who exists from non-existence, an existential limitation hardly applicable to the Truly Infinite. But if inherent, if not entirely voluntary, then they are acts that G-d MUST do from His very nature, an essential limitation also hardly applicable to the Truly Infinite. Thus, either neither of these acts are G-d in any sense, thereby negating the Trinity, or your G-d is existentially or essentially limited to the degree that your G-d cannot be Truly Infinite, and in that dependence simply cannot be legitimately said to be G-d at all.

EzAad:
I agree with that:
"The Tao that can be expressed is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be defined is not the unchanging name."

first lines of the Tao Te Ching or The Daodejing, Laozi (?), 300 BCE (?)

Medini:
Not the source I had in mind check out Petichat Eliyahu in the Tikkunei Zohar:
You have no known name, but fill all names.