fods' for Deity, like Lat. Dii (the Assyr. 'the 8litars' = ' goddesses,' is like Heb. 'the Orions' = 'constellations,' Is 13'"); and the suggestion that the plur. was first used of the deities of some particular locality II is not without its dilliculties, as usually e,-u;h locality had only one deity. The idea that Elohim expressed the fulness of mights or powers contained in God II is too abstract, apart from the uncertainty whether the sing, meant ' might.' After all, perhaps, the plur. may be easi- est explained as a plur. of eminence, like 'ddoiiim, bi'Ctlim, ' lord,' tHrujihim (1 S 11)'^- '"), and possibly 7i/'i!J'\iim, 'ruler' (Is 3'^). The plur. a])pears also in Kthiopic 'amid/:, 'God' (unuseil sing, irutlch), and in the Amarna letters the plur. ilAni, ' God,' is used in addressing the Egyptian king.
(2) As is the ciu<e with El ami Elohim, the iMcaniu'' of £1 Shaddai is altogether uncertain. Sh'iildin is probably an epithet, as it qualifies El, just .'IS .Elyon, 'Most High,' does. The name is old ((in 4<J-'), and is said hy I' to have been the patriarchal name of God (Gn 17', Ex 6^). The fanciful derivation "is' ( = *5 %'f<) ' the sulficient ' was perhaps known to LXX (Ivanit, in this sense twice in Ku, thrice in Job, once in Ezk), and al.so the sense 'mighty,' 'almighty' (iirxfpit, ■wavTOKpiruf) in
• Noldeke. t IMllmann. S De L»gBnle.
I Kajacr- .Marti, AT Theologie, p. 28.
I W. H. Smith. H Dlllniann.
Job). If derived from np, the name would not mean 'the Almighty,' but 'the destroyer,' signi- fying presumablj' the stormgod, or po.ssiblj' the scorching sun-god ; if from Aram, tns ' lo pour,' it would have the similar sense of the rain-giver.* Such derivations have little to recommend them. Ecfually far from probability is the conjecture that the word should be read "ip 'my lord' (Arab. sai/yidi).\ In Heb. shedim means 'demons' (Ps lUU^'), and Dt 32" when naming them adds ' no god.' Such a topsyturvy of meaning is a triumph of etymology. Alore recently reference hius been made to the Assyr. sluidu, 'mountain,' from root 'to be high,' J with the suggestion that Uluidd'ii either means ' mountain ' (cf. zur, ' rock,' as title of God) or has the adjectival sense of 'most high.' The most that can be said is that the meaning ' almighty ' has a certain tradition in its favour.
(3) The name Jehovah is also probably an ancient name (Gn 4''"'), though at the Exodus it received a special meaning by being connected with the Heb. verb ' to be.' (a) '1 he pronunciation 'Jehovah ' has no pretence to be right. The word .ti.t acquired such a sacredness that, in reading, the name 'Hdunfii, 'lord,' was substituted for it;§ hence in M.SS and prints the vowels of 'ddindi were attached to the letters ni,T, and ' Jehovah ' (ijn;) is a condate form with the consonants of one word and the vowels of another. It is not older in date than the time of the Reformation (152U). (6) The contracted forms in which the name appears suggest that the original form of the word w as .iin; yahweh or yahve (a Greek transliteration is iaji'i). (c) The occurrence of this name or a similar one in Assyr. cannot be regarded as certain. Hommel believes he has discovered in western Shemitic a divine name t, at, otya {e.g. I-zebel, Jezebel), which he considers the original form of the name, the Heb. ni.T being a more modern expansion. The last part of his conjecture at any rate cannot be considered probable. (d) The word being pre- historic, its derivation must remain uncertain. It has been connected with Arab, hawn, ' to blow' or ' breathe,' J " being the god who is heard in the tempest — the storm-god ; or with the verb hawn, ' to fall ' (Job 37°), in the causative meaning 'the prostrator' — again the lightning-god ; or with Heb. luiyah (old form /uiwak), 'to be' in cau.sative ('make to be'), i.e. 'the creator,' or fuidller of his pro- mises ; and so on. (e) In Heb. writin<; of the historical period the name is connected with Heb. hayah, ' to be,' in the iniperf. Now with regard to this verh, first, it does not mean ' to be' cs.sentially or ontologically, but j)henomenaIly ; and secondjy, the iiiipf. has not the sense of a present ('am ') but of a fut. ('will be'). In Ex 3"'*-, when Moses de- murred to go to Egvpt, God assured him, saying, ■17V .TriK '3 [euyeu 'immii/c) 'I will bo with thee.' When he a-sked how he should name the God of their fathers to the people, he was told .i;-y V"* '''V {Kinnii 'asher hiiyku). Again he was bidden say, ' •■i;'7!< 'HUYHU hath sent me unto you'; and finally, ' m.T Yauweu, the God of your fathers, haa sent me unto you.' From all this it seems e\ ident that in the view of the writer "eAi/cA and yah>reh are the same: that God is 'ehyeh, 'I will be,' when speaking of Himself, and i/aliweh, 'he will be,' when spoken of by others. What He will be is left un- expressed— He will bo with them, helper, streng- thener, deliverer.!!
The name J" can hardly have been altogether