THE SILENCES OP SCRIPTURE. 



97 



Kingdom this circumstance calls for remark. The view of the 

 so-called " critics " that the verse has undergone mutilation is un- 

 tenable, for so obvious a discrepancy cannot have been overlooked. 

 The explanation, which is simple enough, is given by Hosea himself 

 {see Hos. viii, 4). The kings whose names are not recorded existed, 

 it is true ; but God took no cognisance of them. His dealings with 

 Ephraim at this period consisted in leaving them to their own 

 devices : " Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone." The omission 

 is therefore perfectly natural and perfectly appropriate. 



The Rev. Horace A. Jennins, L.Th., writes from Liverpool : — 

 I have been deeply impressed with the paper and have long noticed 

 the great gaps or " the silences." Natural curiosity and morbid 

 human sentiment would like a picture of the Flood itself, and other 

 facts. We are informed of its results. That result is the fulfilment 

 of the Divine threat — or, as in other cases, of Divine promises, etc. 



Thus we learn that God is looking on — observing all things — 

 and that there is no such thing as " time " with Him nor forgetful- 

 ness (cj?., Ex. ii, 24, "God remembered"). Our Lord's " silence " 

 after hearing of Lazarus' illness did not mean " indifference." 



Compare also Jesus Christ's statement of approaching humiliation 

 and death, Matt, xvi, 21. Peter had just declared his belief in 

 Christ's divinity, Matt, xvi, 16. Did Christ's declaration test Peter's 

 belief ? 



Communication from Mr. W. E. Leslie : — In addition to the 

 silences of omission in the Scripture narratives dealt with by the 

 lecturer, there are two further varieties of silence to which his general 

 explanation hardly appears applicable. 



In some passages the wording is ambiguous. Two schools of 

 interpretation might almost be said to depend upon whether the 

 " he " in Dan. ix, 27, should be connected with the Messiah or the 

 Prince that shall come. Again, no two expositors appear to agree 

 as to the mutual relations of the clauses in Eph. i. 



A second class of passages require for their interpretation a 

 knowledge, once possessed by the contemporaries of the sacred 

 writers, but which, in the providence of God, has been lost. The 

 nature of the Urim and Thummim is an example. 



The interpretation of some of the parables and the more obscure 

 Pauline arguments might almost be said to form another variety. 



H 2 



