A similar characteristic of the style of Scripture is its fondness for employing substantives Sor adjec- tives. There are numerous examples of this, even leaving out of account the instances in which the phenomenon disappears in the EV. Thus we find ‘ jewels of silver,’ etc. (Gn 24, Ex 32 etc.) ; ‘men, etc., of truth’ (Ex 187, Pr 1219 99714), «Pew in number’ is lit. ‘men of number’ (Gn 34°, Dt 427,
hes this expression in all its senses, see art. SON OF MAN in vol, iv,
STYLE OF SCRIPTURE
STYLE OF SCRIPTURE 159
a ee
1Ch 16”, Job 16”, Ps 105%, Is 10, Jer 442, Ezk 12), Cf. ‘the king’s court’ (Am 71); ‘city of confusion’ (Is 24°); ‘an iron pen’ (Job 19%); _ ‘instruments of death’ (=‘deadly,’ Ps 7!) ; ‘ sor- rows of death’ (Ps 116%, cf. Rev 13! rAnyi) rod Gavdrov) ; ‘sacrifices, etc., of righteousness ’=just or right or righteous sacrifices, etc. (Dt 33”, Job 8°, Ps 41-5 933 5419 118}, ef, 1197. 62- 106. 160. 164, Pr 8” 12°8 16°1, Is 1°6 615 1°, Jer 50’, Am 61%); ‘habitation of justice’ (Jer 31%); ‘Branch of justice’ (33%) ; ‘garments of salvation’=garments which diffuse healing (Is 61°); ‘God, etc., of my salvation’ (1 Ch 16%, Ps 18-46 945 955 979 655 6820 799 854, Mic 7’, Hab 338); 1 ‘of strength’ is at times re- placed by ‘strong’ (Jg 9», Jer 481, Ezk 191-14 264, Ps 61° 717 89), or ‘mighty’ (Ps 68%), or ‘loud’ (2 Ch 307!) ; but we find, on the other hand, ‘God of my strength’ (Ps 48”), ‘the rock of my strength’ (627), ‘rod of thy strength’ (110, ef. 1328), ‘pride of your power’ (Lv 26"), ‘fury of his power’ (Dn 8*), ‘gall of bitterness’ (Ac 8”), rica Wuxh Swis=‘ every living soul’ (Rev 16°).
Another of the peculiarities which belong to the Semitic idiosynerasy of the Scripture narratives is the frequent introduction of genealogies. The interest was strong in the correct preservation of ancient tradition, and thus the genealogical con- nexions of families and tribes were noted. Hence we find many genealogical trees in the historical books of the Bible. A number of them form con- siderable lists, e.g. Gn 417% 5°% 1078 112% ; many others are shorter, ¢.g. Jos 78, Ru 41,15 1! 9g! 148-51 ete., 1 Ch 1%, Ezr 7° (‘ Ezra, the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, the son of Shallum, etc., this Ezra went up from Babylon’), Neh 11, Est 25, Job 327, Mt 11! ke gt,
A similar interest accounts for the arrangement of the Book of Genesis. It is an extremely note- worthy feature of its structure that the narrative regarding the main line of the human race, %.e. the citizens of the Kingdom of God, stands, like the trunk of a tree, in the centre of the whole. The branches of the race, which diverged from the main stem, are regularly dealt with at the outset briefly, but a detailed enumeration of the successive representatives of the main stem follows. Thus the final compiler, 7.e. the author proper of the first book of the Bible, advances from the outside inwards, or from the remote to the near in chapters 4 (the Cainites) and 5 (the Sethites, from whose line sprang Noah, who carried the human race over the period of the Flood and ensured its perpetua- tion thereafter) ; in 10!-?° (Japhethites and Hamites) and vy.2!-®2 (Semites); in 117° (the human race, which rises in revolt against God in building the Tower of Babel) and vy.!°* (the Semites, and, above all, the Hebrews); in 11°*** (the Terahites in general, cf. the supplementary list in 2270-24) and 12ff. (Abraham). In like manner the collateral branches of the descendants of Abraham are treated of in 25-8, but the main stem in v. ; and the descendants of Esau are given in ch. 36 before the commencement of the history of which Jacob is the central figure (37). The principal line is always set forth last, because it forms the starting- point for the earthly mediators and heirs of the future salvation. :
An interesting light is thrown upon the social conditions under which the Biblical writers lived, by the phenomenon we now proceed to describe. There are two sets of passages in which ‘thou alternates with ‘my lord,’ or ‘I’ with ‘thy servant’ (or ‘thy handmaid’). The first set finds
its earliest illustration in ‘Hear us, my_lord’ (Gn 238), and recurs, ¢.g., in ‘The LorpD said unto my lord, Sit thou,’ ete. p. 244).
(Ps 110! ete., ef. Stilistek,
Thus persons in a subordinate position
addressed their superiors as ‘ thou,’ but frequently interjected ‘my lord,’ in order to express their subjection. In the same way they took care that the ‘I’ with which they introduced themselves should often alternate with ‘thy servant.’ E.q. ‘If now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away from thy servant’ (instead of ‘from me,’ Gn 18%). Similarly, ‘thy servant’ and ‘unto me’ alternate (Gn 19), or ‘me’ and ‘thy servant’ (Ps 19-18), or ‘I? and ‘thy servant’ (Dn 916. 17a), Further, ‘1’ is resolved into ‘your servant’ in Gn 18° and 19°, where we read ‘Turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house.’ Again, ‘we’ alternates with ‘thy servants’ in ‘We are true men, thy servants are no spies’ (Gn 42") ; or ‘thy servants’ has its parallel in ‘ our’ (v.78); ef. ‘ Prove thy servants . . . and let them give ws pulse to eat,’ ete. (Dn 1” etc.), and the Aram. sentence ‘Tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation ’ (2? ete., ef. Stilistik, p. 252).