Part 6: Biblical Theism, The Names of Deity

By Lewis Sperry Chafer

[Author’s Note: This somewhat abbreviated treatment of the names of Deity, which serves to conclude the series of discussions on Theism, will be supplemented in later articles respecting the Trinity—especially the titles of the Son and of the Spirit. Beginning with the January-March issue of BIBLIOTHECA SACRA and continuing to upwards of eight successive articles, there will be presented a consideration of the general field of Trinitarianism.]

Introduction

As no argument is presented in the Old Testament to prove the existence of God, so in like manner, there is no argument advanced to demonstrate that God may be known. Men of those times knew God because of His presence with them. That truth does not imply His bodily appearance. In fact there is little that borders on a physical conception, nor, on the other hand, is there much doctrine that establishes the fact of the divine essence. The Old Testament’s delineation of God is almost wholly ethical. With reference to the way in which God is revealed, Dr. A. B. Davidson in his Theology of the Old Testament states:

“The peculiarity of the Old Testament conception rather comes out when the question is raised, how God is known. Here we touch a fundamental idea of the Old Testament—the idea of Revelation. If men know God, it is because He has made Himself known to them. This knowledge is due to what He does, not to what men themselves achieve. As God is the source of all life, and as the knowledge of Him is the highest life, this knowledge cannot be reached by any mere effort of man. If man knows anything of God, he has received it from God, who communicates Himself in love and grace. The idea of man reaching to a knowledge or fellowship of God through his own efforts is wholly foreign to the Old Testament. God speaks, He appears; man listens and beholds. God brings Himself nigh to men; He enters into a covenant or personal relation with them; He lays commands on them. They receive Him when He approaches; they accept His will and obey His behests. Moses and the prophets are nowhere represented as thoughtful minds reflecting on the Unseen, and forming conclusions regarding it, or ascending to elevated conceptions of Godhead. The Unseen manifests itself before them, and they know it... But, however much the Old Testament reposes on the ground that all knowledge of God comes from His revealing Himself, and that there is such a true and real revelation, it is far from implying that this revelation of God is a full display of Him as He really is. An exhaustive communication of God cannot be made, because the creature cannot take it in. Neither, perhaps, can God communicate Himself as He is. Hence Moses saw only a form, saw only His back parts. His face could not be beheld. Thus to the patriarchs He appeared in the human form. So in the tabernacle His presence was manifested in the smoke that hung over the Ark. So, too, in Eden He was known to be present in the cherubim, who were the divine chariot on which He rode. All these things signified His presence, while at the same time intimating that in Himself He could not be seen” (pp. 34,35).

Bible names of persons have a meaning, which meaning usually conveys some impression as to the intrinsic character of the one who bore the name. This truth is accentuated by the fact that, when a person acquired some new significance, the name was changed accordingly—Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, Solomon to Jedidiah. God Himself calls Moses and Cyrus by name. The disclosure of character through a name is true of Deity to an absolute degree.

God has not only inspired the pages whereon His names appear, but He has announced or revealed His names specifically to men and with special reference to the meaning of these names. In the beginning Adam gave names to all things God had created, but the names of God are self-revealed. Thus the student enters at this point on no field of idle speculation. Far-reaching revelation is involved, and truth concerning God which is disclosed in no other way and by no other means. A large place, therefore, should be given to this source of truth. All theistic investigation is with the purpose in view that the reality which God is may become known by man, and attention given to the divine names and their meaning will be most advantageous. Dr. W. Lindsay Alexander writes: “In proceeding to consider the Bible revelations concerning God, the first thing that demands our attention is the Names by which God there designates Himself. As the Bible professes to make known to us, not God as He is in Himself, but His Name or outward manifestation of Himself to His intelligent creatures, so it attaches special importance to the words by which this manifestation is indicated to us. All the names by which the Bible designates God are significant; and thus each of them stands as the symbol of some truth concerning Him which He would have us to receive. All this renders it of importance to us that we should rightly apprehend the import of the Divine Names in Scripture.”[1]

Noticeable, indeed, is the occurrence that the names of Deity fall into groupings of three. Some of these instances being (1) the three primary names of Deity in the Old Testament—Jehovah, Elohim, and Adonai; (2) three major compounds with Jehovah—Jehovah Elohim, Adonai Jehovah, Jehovah Sabaoth; (3) three compounds with El—El Shaddai, El Elyon, and El Olam; (4) three general classes of divine names—the one proper and peculiar name Jehovah, appellatives such as Elohim and Adonai, and attributive or epithetical such as Almighty and God of Hosts; (5) the full title of Deity in the New Testament—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; (6) the full title of the Second Person—Lord Jesus Christ; and (7) the trinitarian distinction—The First Person, The Second Person, and The Third Person.

1. The Primary Names of Deity in the Old Testament

The primary Old Testament titles do not present an individualized revelation of three Persons; but rather three characterizing realities within the Godhead. In addition to various other meanings, the name Jehovah exhibits the innermost depths of the Divine Being; the name Elohim, being plural in its form, intimates the fact of three Persons, and the name Adonai proclaims divine authority. As indicated above, the name Jehovah—printed in the A.V. by LORD and GOD with all letters capitalized—is divinely reserved for its ineffable service as the unpolluted and unshared name of Deity. Elohim and Adonai are less distinctive since these titles are sometimes ascribed to creatures. In the A.V., Elohim is printed God, and Adonai is printed Lord, with only the initial letter in each instance capitalized. No complete philological study of the various names of Deity will be pursued in this thesis; that exercise belonging properly to the field of original languages.

a. Jehovah

Notwithstanding all the research that scholars have given to the name Jehovah, but little is known beyond that which is preserved in the Sacred Text. Its original pronunciation has been lost, and that is due largely to the unwillingness of the Jews during many centuries to pronounce the name. Whether their attitude in this be styled superstition or reverence makes no difference with regard to the loss itself. The name Jehovah is more fully defined in the Scriptures as to its meaning than all other titles of Deity together. In the Psalms the original is sometimes contracted to Jah, which is the concluding syllable of hallelujah (cf. Ps 68:4). Some perplexity has arisen from the fact that this name appears many times in the Scriptures (notably Gen 15:2) before it is declared in Exodus 6:3, “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.” This seems to be a contradiction. There are two explanations current: (a) that the name was used freely from Adam to Moses, as the Scriptures record, but that its meaning was not at any time disclosed; (b) that it appears in the text as a prochronism or a prolepsis, by which terms it is intimated that, as Moses wrote the Genesis account, he used the term to designate Deity, but the people of those many generations before did not use the name. This latter explanation fails at all points where it is recorded that men actually spoke to or of Deity as Jehovah (cf. Gen 15:2); while the former solution, though not free from its problems, seems to be the more reasonable. However the title is used, it is obvious that Scripture sheds no light, other than by inference, upon the meaning of the name until it is specifically disclosed to Moses. Even Moses himself seems to stand in need of instruction concerning this title when it is explained to him (cf. Exod 3:14). The new revelation is of Jehovah as the self-existent One—“I AM THAT I AM”—, and the word Hayah or Yahwe, from which the word Jehovah is evidently formed, conveys also the idea of a continuous coming to be, that is, by an ever-increasing revelation. Thus by this cognomen it is revealed that Jehovah is ”The self-existent One who reveals Himself.” Regarding this phase of this subject, Dr. Gustav Friedrich Oehler writes: “The name signifies, He who is, according to Ex. iii.14; more particularly, He who is what He is. But as it is not the idea of a continuous existence which lies in the verb...., but that of existence in motion, of becoming and occurring..., so also the form of the name as derived from the imperfect leads us to understand in it the existence of God, not as an existence at rest, but as one always becoming, always making itself known in a process of becoming. Hence it is wrong to find in the name the abstract notion of ὄντως ὄν. God is rather Jahve in as far as He has entered into an historical relation to mankind, and in particular to the chosen people of Israel, and shows Himself continually in this historical relation as He who is, and who is what He is. While heathenism rests almost exclusively on the past revelations of its divinities, this name testifies, on the other hand, that the relation of God to the world is in a state of continual living activity; it testifies, especially in reference to the people who address their God by this name, that they have in their God a future.”[2]

The designation Jehovah appears in the Sacred Text after the creation of man and is generally used where relationships between God and man are involved, and especially in man’s redemption. It is in respect to Israel’s redemption from Egypt that the true meaning of the term is elucidated. All divine attributes which share in redemption are betokened—holiness, justice, and love for the sinner. It is with their Redeemer that Israel has to do, and therefore His covenants with them are largely under the Jehovah name (cf. Exod 20:2; Jer 31:31–34). It was Jehovah Himself who imparted to Moses the meaning of this title: “And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation” (Exod 34:5–7); “And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy” (Exod 33:19); “In Judah is God known: his name is great in Israel” (Ps 76:1). The name, as revealed to Moses, is, first of all, the unveiling of the truth of the eternity of Deity. Such a disclosure is to be expected and should be heeded. Jehovah lives as no other being lives. He is not caused, but is rather the cause of all that is. He is unchangeable, infinite, and eternal. To these lofty conceptions the Scriptures constantly direct the thoughts of men. He changes not (Mal 3:6); He as King must reign forever (Ps 10:16; 99:1; 146:10); He is the Author and Creator of all things and the universal Ruler (Amos 5:8; Ps 68:4; Jer 32:27). No instructed Jew who was present missed the fact that Christ asserted of Himself that He is the “I am,” the Jehovah, of the Old Testament. The record declares: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by” (John 8:56–59).

As before noted, confusion occurs regarding the name Jehovah from the fact that for many centuries—the very centuries in which a large part of the Old Testament was written—the Jewish people out of sheer reverence refused even to pronounce this name, and when the name was written pointings belonging to other titles of Deity were added to the Jehovah name by which the reader was directed in the substitution of another designation. Thus the writing of the name Jehovah in the text is complex. The avoidance of the actual pronouncement of this name may be judged as mere superstition; but plainly it was an attempt at reverence however much misguided, and doubtless this practice, with all its confusing results, did serve to create a deep impression on all as to the ineffable character of God.

b. Elohim

This, the appellation most frequently used in the Old Testament, appears sometimes as El, or Elah. The designation El is traced through Babylonian, Phoenician, Aramaic, Arabic, as well as Hebrew writings. To some degree, it belongs to the whole Semitic world. Elohim is the plural and Eloah the singular; the latter appearing only in sacred poetry. The derivation of this name is naturally something of a problem. Some trace it to a root which means The Strong One, and others to a root which denotes fear, and from this it is claimed the essential idea of reverence springs (Gen 31:42, 53). A. B. Jackson declares that “some names are capable of being derived, with equal accuracy, from two, or even three different roots, as e.g., when the root is one with a feeble radical, or doubles the second radical, the inflection of such verbs being to some extent similar.”[3] No doubt all that these two root ideas originate as to the meaning of Elohim is true. He is the Strong One who is faithful to all His covenants and to be reverenced and feared because of what He is. An ascription of praise and revealing as to the meaning of the name, not unlike that of Jehovah in Exodus 34:5–7, is given in Psalm 86:15, where it is written, “But thou, O Lord, art a God full of compassion, and gracious, longsuffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth.”

Until more recent times, theologians believed that the plural form of Elohim with its varying combinations with either singular or plural pronouns, adjectives, and verbs, indicated the trinity of Being in one Essence. Oehler gives to Dietrich the credit (1864) for the first denial of the idea that the plural form suggests the trinity of Persons; though Dr. Watson refers to Buxtorf (1564–1629) as “opposed” to the general belief of the church, and Buxtorf implies that he follows certain Jews in thus opposing himself. He does admit, however, that it is as difficult to read ad extra powers into this plural form as it is to read ad intra plurality of persons.[4] Dietrich’s thought, like that of Buxtorf, is that the plural form is not numerical but quantitative and denotes unlimited greatness. Dietrich styled it an “intensive plural of infinite fullness.” Others assert that it is a “plural of majesty.” Dietrich has the support in the present day of all who comprise the modern school of theology, while some theologians and most expositors cling to the original belief. The arguments advanced for this violent departure from the belief of so long standing have been examined and are found to prove nothing beyond a human opinion. Over against this, there are important considerations to be noted: (a) The Bible opens with the assertion that Elohim is the Creator and the plural form is recognized by plural pronouns thus: “And God said, Let us make man in our image” (Gen 1:26), again, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (1:27). The plural pronoun in the one case and the singular in the other is legitimate in that Elohim may serve to indicate the plural of Persons, or the one Essence. In other portions, the Word of God distinctly assigns the work of creation to each of the three Persons separately (Gen 1:1, 2; Col 1:16). It is therefore both reasonable and consistent that the plural of divine Persons should be indicated in the Genesis account of creation. Of great significance is Psalm 100:3 on this point, since it also assigns creation to Elohim: “Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.” (b) Again, the fact of the trinity of Persons in the Godhead is one of the cardinal teachings of the Bible and touches the very center of the divine Being; and the fact that it is the purpose of the divine names to disclose this Being affords the strongest supposition that the doctrine of the Trinity is included in the revelation which the names portend. Assuredly nothing new or disorderly is introduced if one of the divine names is found to disclose the plural form of Being in the Godhead. It could hardly be otherwise. (c) Though the doctrine of the Trinity is not as conspicuous in the Old Testament as it is in the New, it is there, and, if there at all, it will naturally inhere in the names by which God specifically reveals Himself to men. The larger consideration of the doctrine of the Trinity as found in the Old Testament is yet to be treated in a later article. No sufficient argument having been advanced to the contrary, this thesis proceeds on the basis of the ancient and worthy belief that the trinity of Persons is implied in the plural name Elohim.

Deuteronomy 6:4 is a passage of great importance in the present discussion, “Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah.” Perhaps the key word to the meaning of this passage is echad, here translated one. This word, often found in the Old Testament text, is nevertheless somewhat specific in its meaning. While it is used many times with particular emphasis on the distinct solidarity of the thing represented, it is the word universally used when a thing is in view which is compounded out of unified parts, as, evening and morning, one day; they two shall be one flesh. It is not possible to prove that echad as used in the passage in question represents unification of parts, which in this case would indicate the plural in the Godhead is one Essence. If it is not thus, the passage asserts that Jehovah our Elohim is One in the sense that there is no other. This is an important teaching of the Old Testament. If the word one is used here in its unifying sense, the passage records that Jehovah—always singular—our Elohim—plural—is nevertheless One—plural in One—Jahovah—singular. With such an interpretation, this passage appears of tremendous importance in the general field of the trinitarian teaching of the Old Testament. In any case, the word One in this text is not yachad which denotes absolute indivisible unity.

Likewise, much importance inheres in the right interpretation of Genesis 3:5 where Satan’s words to Adam and Eve are recorded: “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” The phrase, “ye shall be as gods,” is, for want of consistency on the part of the translators, quite misleading. The use of the word ”gods” in the plural and without a capital letter suggests, to some minds a reference to the angels who are in certain instances, they believe, designated as ”sons of God” (cf. Gen 6:4; Job 1:6; 2:1). But the thought is not restricted to the angels (cf. Isa 43:6). Again, the word ”gods” might be thought to refer to heathen gods; but since there were no heathen at the time Satan appeared in Eden, nor had the notion of ”gods many” occurred to any one’s mind, such an interpretation is impossible. The original word which is translated gods is none other than Elohim. The plural would be justified if it were at all the practice of the translators elsewhere; which it is not. The omission of the initial capital letter is without excuse. Satan who had said, “I will be like the most High” (Isa 14:14), said to Adam and Eve, “Ye shall be as Elohim.” The word Elohim occurs twice in Genesis 3:5 and there is no more reason for translating it gods in one case than in the other.

To the same purpose, Psalm 138:1 is important as bearing on the plural form of Elohim. The text reads: ”...before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.” The LXX implies that angels are in view. The word is Elohim and its capital letter is again misleading. Elohim, it is suggested, may be taken in this Scripture to betoken or embody the place of His abode in the Holy of Holies, and before Elohim’s place of abode the Psalmist offers praise (cf. Ps 5:7).

Having pointed out that Elohim with the article is indicative of the one true God, Dr. W. Lindsay Alexander writes of the title without the article thus: “Elohim, however, without the article has the same force, and is so used in a multitude of passages. When used of God it is usually construed with verbs and adjectives in the singular. For this peculiar construction of a plural substantive with singular adjuncts various suggestions have been offered by way of accounting. All are agreed that it is a constructio ad sensum; but what is the sense thereby indicated, critics are not agreed. The older theologians held that the fact of the Trinity was thereby indicated, the plural substantive being expressive of the distinction in the Godhead, the singular adjunct intimating that nevertheless God is one. This now is almost universally rejected; but I am not sure that it deserves to be so. It is undoubtedly a law of Hebrew syntax that an object in which plurality is combined into a unity is construed in the plural with verbs and adjectives in the singular.... This being an established usage of Hebrew speech, it does not appear to me at all improbable that it was because the ancient Hebrews knew somewhat at least of the distinction in the Godhead that they construed not only Elohim, but other designations of the Deity in the plural with verbs and adjectives in the singular.”[5]

Similarly, Dr. Richard Watson remarks, after having discussed various passages in which the plural of Deity is implied: “These instances need not be multiplied: they are the common forms of speech in the sacred Scriptures, which no criticism has been able to resolve into mere idioms, and which only the doctrine of a plurality of persons in the unity of the Godhead can satisfactorily explain. If they were mere idioms, they could not have been misunderstood by those to whom the Hebrew tongue was native, to imply plurality.... The argument for the trinity drawn from the plural appellations given to God in the Hebrew Scriptures, was opposed by the younger Buxtorf [1599-1664]; who yet admits that this argument should not altogether be rejected among Christians, ‘for upon the same principle on which not a few of the Jews refer this emphatical application of the plural number to a plurality of powers or of influences, or of operations, that is, ad extra; why may we not refer it, ad intra, to a plurality of persons and to personal works? Yea, who certainly knows what that was which the ancient Jews understood by this plurality of powers and faculties?’”[6]

This line of discussion might be pursued indefinitely; but since it anticipates the truth yet to be contemplated under Trinitarianism, further evidence will be reserved for that thesis.

c. Adon, Adonai

This name of Deity appears in the Old Testament with great frequency and expresses sovereign dominion and possession. On this name Dr. C. I. Scofield writes,

”(1) The primary meaning of Adon, Adonai, is Master, and it is applied in the Old Testament Scriptures both to Deity and to man. The latter instances are distinguished in the English version by the omission of the capital. As applied to man, the word is used of two relationships: master and husband (Gen 24:9, 10, 12, ‘master,’ may illustrate the former; Gen 18:12, ‘lord,’ the latter). Both these relationships exist between Christ and the believer (John 13:13, ‘master’; 2 Cor 11:2, 3, ‘husband’).

”(2) Two principles inhere in the relation of master and servant: (a) the Master’s right to implicit obedience (John 13:13; Matt 23:10; Luke 6:46); (b) the servant’s right to direction in service (Isa 6:8–11). Clear distinction in the use of the divine names is illustrated in Exod 4:10–12. Moses feels his weakness and incompetency, and ‘Moses said unto the LORD [Jehovah], O my Lord [Adonai], I am not eloquent,’ etc. Since service is in question, Moses (appropriately) addresses Jehovah as Lord. But now power is in question, and it is not the Lord (Adonai) but Jehovah (LORD) who answers (referring to creation power)-’and Jehovah said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth?... Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth.’ The same distinction appears in Josh 7:8-1l.”[7]

2. Compounds

The supreme name, Jehovah, is compounded with Elohim, as Jehovah Elohim, translated in the A.V. as LORD God (cf. Gen 2:4); with Adonai, as Adonai Jehovah, translated in the A.V. as Lord GOD; and with Sabaoth, as Jehovah Sabaoth, translated in the A.V. as LORD of Hosts.

The primary name Elohim is compounded with Shaddai, as El Shaddai, translated in the A.V. as Almighty God (Gen 17:1); with Elyon, as El Elyon, translated in the A.V. as Most High, or most high God (Gen 14:18); and with Olam, as El Olam, translated in the A.V. as everlasting God (Gen 21:33).

Again, Jehovah is compounded with seven appellatives. (a) Jehovah-jireh, “The LORD will provide” (Gen 22:14); (b) Jehovah-rapha, “The LORD that healeth” (Exod 15:26); (c) Jehovah-nissi, “The LORD our banner” (Exod 17:8–15); (d) Jehovah-shalom, “The LORD our peace” (Judges 6:23, 24); (e) Jehovah-roi, “The LORD my shepherd” (Ps 23:1); (f) Jehovah-tsidkenu, “The LORD our righteousness” (Jer 23:6); and (g) Jehovah-shammah, “The LORD is there” (Ezek 48:35).

3. Old Testament Epithets

God is mentioned metaphorically in the Old Testament as King, Lawgiver, Judge, Rock, Fortress, Tower, Deliverer, Shepherd, Husband, Husbandman, and Father.

4. New Testament Names of Deity

As these terms and their relationships are yet to be considered under the Trinitarian discussion, only a brief outline is introduced here.

The full and final name for Deity is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This may be made more explicit, as, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The titles of the First Person are largely restricted to combinations associated with the word Father. He is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Mercies, He is addressed as Abba, Father, Heavenly Father, Father of Spirits, Holy Father, Righteous Father, Father of Lights, and Father of Glory.

There are in all about three hundred titles or designations in the Bible which refer to the Second Person. However, His full and final name is Lord Jesus Christ; Lord being the title of Deity, Jesus being the title of humanity, and Christ being the title of office as Prophet, Priest, and King, or the Messiah of the Old Testament. It is evident that the selection of the names and the order of their arrangement in any given text is with divine purpose and manifests divine wisdom in every instance.

There are no names of the Holy Spirit revealed. He is known by descriptive titles as The Spirit of God, The Spirit of Christ. There are upwards of twenty such designations.

Conclusion.

At the end of this examination into the essentials of Theism, and before entering upon the engaging investigation into the triune mode of the divine existence, a brief backward look may not be without profit. Having demonstrated the fact of the authoritative and trustworthy nature of the Scriptures and having established the ground of belief in the existence of God to the satisfaction of reason, an effort has been made to set forth from Revelation the character and infinity of God as represented in His attributes; His sovereignty as manifested in His decree; and His glory as disclosed in His names. Though of necessity some questions remain unsolved, the overwhelming reality of God’s Person, character, and ways have been exhibited and defended. He thus stands forth before the devout and attentive mind as the One who is Supreme over all His creation and its sole object of adoration and glory. Imperfections must always attend such an effort as this. The finite mind cannot fully portray the infinite either by imagination or by word. It should now be clear that God is All in All. Without such belief in the reality which He is, all that seems certain becomes uncertain and incomprehensible. The idea that God exists is not a mere hypothesis; it is the only basis upon which human reason and understanding can build their frail structure. How without remedy all such edifices are demolished when the essential truth concerning God is questioned! In the light of the whole disclosure which Theism affords, a personal faith is demanded in rational beings and should be established by theistic study. Such a faith is a treasure needing to be guarded and defended against hostile attacks, and every effort should be made to advance in the knowledge of Him.

“Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

Dallas, Texas

Notes

1. System of Biblical Theology, Vol. I, p. 25.
2. Oehler’s Old Testament Theology, by Day, p. 95.
3. Dictionary of Proper Names, p. viii.
4. See Watson’s Institutes, Vol. I, p. 468, to be quoted in full later.
5. System of Biblical Theology, Vol. I, pp. 34,35.
6. Theological Institutes, Vol. I, p. 468.
7. Scofield Reference Bible, p. 24.