i8 7 7] OLD TESTAMENT STUDY IN 1876 397 



mainly these : The proper names of the Mosaic period 

 confirm the Pentateuchal tradition, that before Moses 

 God was worshipped as El Shaddai, in which name (in 

 terpreted as mighty God) the author recognises the con 

 ception of the deity suited to a nomad tribe, which has 

 little temptation to identify the godhead with the pheno 

 mena of nature, and, demanding of its deity guidance in 

 wanderings and protection against foes, requires a religion 

 that gives faith in a personal and revealing god. In 

 discussing the next period of Israel s religion, which is 

 marked by the work of Moses and the name Jahve, Dr. 

 Nestle rightly rejects the interpretations which find in 

 Jahve the notion of him who is, and leans to Lagarde s 

 view, though half inclined to prefer the interpretation 

 advanced by the present reviewer in this journal. 1 It is 

 then shown that, in the formation of proper names, El 

 and Jahve came to be used indifferently, and that the use 

 of names pointing to the worship of other gods is very 

 rare. The names compounded with Baal are referred to 

 the introduction, in the time of the judges, of Canaanite 

 ideas, and are viewed as evidence that the worship of 

 other gods besides Jahve was not impossible even in the 

 families of Saul and David. The final victory over this 

 imperfect state of religious development is traced to the 

 age of Elijah. It must, however, be questioned whether 

 our author has rightly explained the use of Baal in the 

 names to which he refers. That Baal or Lord was a title 

 applicable to Jahve, until the use was dropped to prevent 

 confusion with the heathen Baalim, is a far more probable 

 opinion, and finds in Hosea ii. a confirmation which 

 Dr. Nestle has hardly weighed aright. Had this opinion 

 been adopted, the arguments which our author directs 

 against those who practically obliterate the work of Moses 

 from the history of revealed religion would have gained 

 weight, and it would have been still more apparent that 

 the polytheism, which, according to Kuenen, was held to 



1 British and Foreign Evangelical Review, January 1876. 



