113 
the same as Adonai, Lord —one of the Hebrew words for God. The truth 
is that the Egyptian monuments do confirm the sojourn of the Israelites in 
Egypt, but I think Mr. Savile is in error in being so confident of particular 
synchronisms. The monuments of Egypt are full of illustrations which 
would give everything we want without any attempt at synchronism at all. 
I have attempted synchronisms because Mr. Savile has done so ; but I do 
not think that it is the right way of dealing with this question. The proper 
method would be to give these points as illustrations of the harmony of 
other evidence with the Old Testament, and there to leave it. (Cheers.) 
Rev. C. Graham.— I think we have reason to feel greatly obliged to 
Mr. Savile for introducing this subject to us. It is profoundly interesting, 
and one which must throw a great deal of light upon Holy Scripture, 
as the observations of Mr. Titcomb have sufficiently proved. Mr. Titcomb 
began his remarks on the destructive, and then entered upon the construc- 
tive principle, and for a few moments I will endeavour to follow him in the 
first of these two branches. I do not at all agree with Mr. Savile’s criti- 
cisms. In the 13th section, he says : — 
“Before endeavouring to show how this is the case, it may.be right to 
notice an objection which is frequently brought against this opinion. As we 
read in the 46th chapter of Genesis, that in the time of Joseph 4 every shep- 
herd ’ was considered 4 an abomination unto the Egyptians,’ it has been 
naturally' argued that a native Pharaoh would not have promoted Joseph, 
who was of a shepherd race, to be second ruler in his kingdom, and therefore 
that Joseph could not have been viceroy during the rule of the shepherds in 
Egypt. But it is doubtful whether our English version conveys the exact 
sense of the original ; as it is clear that Joseph, before introducing his 
brethren to Pharaoh, prompted them to avow that they were in reality shep- 
herds, 4 from our youth even until now, both we and our fathers,’ in order 
that Pharaoh might give them 4 the best of the land (viz. Goshen) to dwell 
in which the king at once consented to do. Now all this can only be 
explained upon the principle that the Shepherd dynasty at that time was 
reigning in Egypt.” 
A little further down Mr. Savile gives us the Hebrew word, which he renders 
44 idol” or 44 consecrated object of worship ” — toyabah. But that word radically 
and primarily means just what our translators have rendered it — an 44 abo- 
mination.” Its tropical meaning no doubt is an idol, and it is often used 
tropically for an idol, but its primary meaning is just what we have in our 
version. Gesenius gives us that same word from the 43rd chapter as an 
example of the rendering 44 abomination.” Now, if we alter the translation 
in the 46th chapter, we are obliged to alter it in the 43rd also, where the 
Egyptians would not consent to eat at the same table with Joseph’s brethren, 
because to eat bread with the Hebrews was an abomination to the Egyptians. 
Gesenius introduces both passages ; in both the word is the same, but in the 
second it is inconstruct, and the Septuagint renders it 44 abomination” in both 
places. I have taken the trouble to consult some of our best commentators 
and translators on the subject, and they are all agreed that the simple 
meaning of the word, in these instances, is 44 abomination.” Then Mr. Savile 
