216 REV. J. IVERACH MUNRO, M.A.^ ON THE WITNESS OF 



with them put them all in one book, but that of those among 

 whom they found themselves. There is no truer dictum of 

 criticism than that the prophet addressed himself primarily to 

 those among whom he lived, and spoke therefore the contem- 

 porary language. I waive here the argument from style as 

 not strictly in the sphere of philology, but the consummate 

 ease with which every resource of the Hebrew of Isaiah's time 

 is everywhere brought to bear on the subject in hand, is 

 unique. 



Discussion. 



The Chairman : — We have frequently had the Higher Criticism 

 and its supposed results brought to the bar of theology, philosophy, 

 archaeology, and history ; and now we have had it brought to the 

 bar of philology. The paper to which we have listened would 

 probably be over the heads of many of us, for we should require 

 more than a smattering of Hebrew to follow all its abstruse reason- 

 ing. One could only wish the writer had been present to answer 

 a few questions which might be put to him. 



The reference to the two words Jehovah and Elohim was of 

 course particularly interesting. It will be well to remember that 

 Jehovah is a proper name, but Elohim a common noun. We find 

 this latter word not only used for the Divine Being but for other 

 beings also. It is the more interesting to observe this because 

 from these two words the Higher Criticism started on its 

 career. 



The word Elohim is used as many as 2500 times in the Old 

 Testament Scriptures, sometimes with the article but more 

 frequently without. In Genesis it occurs 216 times and only 19 

 with the article; in Exodus 138 times, and only 29 with the 

 article ; in Leviticus 53 times, and never with the article ; in 

 Deuteronomy 371 times, and only 5 times with the article — in 4 of 

 which it is simply used for emphasis ; in Joshua 73 times, and only 

 3 times with the article ; in Judges 73 times, and only 15 with the 

 article. 



Now those who believe that inspired writers were under the 

 guidance of the Spirit of God in regard to the words which they 

 chose, cannot but think that there must have been some intention 



