in the original, which are both rendered Lord in English. When Lord is printed in capitals it indicates that the original is Yehovah, a name applied only to the Most High; when in smaller characters, that it is Adonai, an appellation often bestowed upon creatures.

By whom was the Pentateuch, or the five books of the Law written? Luke 16. 29.

By how much are they more ancient than any other writings extant?

Ans. About seven hundred years.

From what source did Moses derive his information?

Ans. A great portion of his history is occupied in elating the transactions of which he was an eyewitness, and in which he acted a conspicuous part. As to the other parts, though he might have received the knowledge of many facts, by tradition, from Adam and the Antediluvians, yet it is probable that the main body of the book of Genesis was communicated to him by immediate revelation from God.

What evidence have we from the word itself that the whole of the sacred Scriptures were written under the influence of inspiration? 2 Tim. 3. 16; 2 Pet. 1. 20.

As the best of men are liable to error, it was requisite in order that we might have a revelation of absolute certainty, and a rule of faith and conduct perfectly infallible, that the writers of it should be inspired men.

Is it to be supposed that this inspiration extended to the very words of the writers? Ans. We may confidently say that the sacred writers were so far under Divine guidance in this particular that they were always led to express themselves with infallible truth, in every respect, and also, that their words were always such as were best adapted to con

vey the mind of the Holy Spirit, who is to be accounted the real author of the Scriptures.

What are the principal sources of evidence resorted to, to prove the Scriptures to be a Divine revelation?

Ans. The previous necessity of such a revelation, and the intrinsic fitness of the present to answer the purpose-the antiquity of the Bible-the wonderful harmony of the writers with each other-the prophecies-the purity of the doctrines taught-and the practical effects produced upon individuals and communities wherever this Divine book has been cordially received and obeyed.

GENESIS.

INTRODUCTORY.

How did the Jews name the books of the Old Testament?

Ans. Either from their authors, or from the principal subject treated in them, or from the first Hebrew word with which they begin: thus the book of Genesis is in Hebrew called Bereshith, that is, in the beginning, from its initial word.

Whence is the title Genesis derived?

Ans. This is the appellation given to this book in the Septuagint version, signifying Generation' or 'Production,' because it commences with the history of the generation or production of all things.

By whom was this Book written and when? Mark 12. 26.

Ans. It is not possible to ascertain with certainty the period of its composition. The most probable opinion is, that it was written during the sojourning of the Israelites in the wilderness.

How long a period does the history embrace? Ans. About 2369 years.

What is the general scope of the book? Ans. To give, 1. An authentic though brief history of the world from the commencement of time. 2. To relate the origin, progress, and varied condition of the Church during the same period.

Give a summary of its principal contents. Ans. The history of the creation; the fall of man; the account of Adam and his descendants to Noah; the general wickedness and corruption of the human

race; the deluge; the subsequent peopling of the earth; the call of Abraham, together with his history and that of the first patriarchs to the death of Joseph.

In what other parts of Scripture is this book plainly alluded to as belonging to the sacred Canon? 2 Pet. 3. 3; 1 Tim. 2. 14, &c.

In what words does Moses introduce the history of the creation?

v. 1.

In the beginning;' i. e. in the beginning of time, which receives its date from the work of creation here recorded. Thus the Evangelist, Mark, 13. 19 For in those days shall be affliction such as was no from the beginning of the creation which God created, until now.'

What is the original word for 'God,' and by what peculiarity is it distinguished?

Ans.- Elohim,' plural of Eloah,' a very remarkable word, occurring for the most part in the plural form, and yet usually connected, as here, with a verb singular. The true grounds of this grammatical anomaly it is not easy to determine. The earlier Christian commentators very generally supposed it to be founded on the doctrine of the Trinity, and that it afforded a convincing argument in proof of a plurality of persons possessing a unity of essence in the Godhead. This view of the subject they considered as confirmed by the parallel expressions, Gen. 1. 26, 'Let us make man.' Gen. 3. 22, The man is become as one of us.' Is. 6. 8, Who will go for us,' &c. In favor of this opinion it may be said, that provided the doctrine of the three-fold distinction be clearly demonstrated from other sources, the phraseology in question is such as might, in that case, have been expected; whereas on any other supposition it

presents a solecism in language not a little difficult of explanation; especially as the plural seems to be a more original and genuine form of the word than the singular. For while the plural occurs in the Heb. Bible about two thousand five hundred times, the singular is met with only fifty-seven times, and that for the most part in the poetical books or passages which have a style peculiar to themselves, and where considerations of metre may have led to an innovation upon the established form of the word. The plausibility of this theory is heightened, moreover, if it be admitted, as perhaps the nature of the case demands, that the framing the names and titles of the Deity in the primitive language was a matter of too much importance to be left to men, but must have emanated from God himself; for if so, why should he have given himself a plural designation unless from its being founded upon some species of plurality in the very constitution of the Divine nature? But whatever may be the intrinsic weight of the arguments above recited, a great and growing number of modern critics have failed to be convinced by them. Believing that the proof of the Trinity of persons must rest upon another basis, they are disposed from a nicer inspection of the idiomatic genius of the Hebrew tongue to resolve the anomalies connected with Elohim' into a peculiarity of usage common to that and to most eastern languages in respect to words importing rank, pre-eminence, authority, majesty. This is technically termed the pluralis excellentiae, from its denating a plenitude of personal greatness or official supremacy, and is appropriated to the titles of kings and princes, both because they are accustomed to speak of themselves in the plural number, and because the veneration of sovereignty, particularly among the orientals, led them to task the powers of language to find suitable epithets. The following citations more, over will evince, it is said, that in regard to words expressive of dominion or authority in any form, a