[2]. See essay on ‘Miracles’ in Christian Remembrancer (list of works recommended to theological honour-students in Oxford).
[3]. The self-humiliation of Christ is described (need I remark?) by St. Paul as a κένωσις (Phil. ii. 7). How far this κένωσις extended is a theological problem which in the sixteenth century, and again in our own, has exercised devout thinkers. For the modern form of the Kenotic view or doctrine the English reader will naturally go to Dorner’s History of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, vol. iii., in Clark’s Library. Dorner’s opposition to this view is a weighty but not, of course, a decisive fact. We must be loyal to the facts of Christ’s humanity reported in the Gospels. The question as to the extent of the κένωσις is an open one.
[4]. Jerome already saw this. He represents the Book of Job as composed mainly in hexameters with a dactylic and spondaic movement (Præf. in Job). Does he mean double trimeters?
[5]. Where is the ‘Uz’ spoken of in Job i. 1? The ‘land of Uzza’ seems to have been not far from the Orontes (Shalmaneser’s Obelisk; see Friedr. Delitzsch’s Paradies, p. 259). Tradition places the home of Job in the fertile volcanic region called the Haurân (see the very full excursus in Delitzsch’s Job). But the ‘land of Uz’ might be farther south, nearer to Edom, in connection with which it is mentioned, Lam. iv. 21, Gen. xxxvi. 28 (comp. ver. 21). This is supported by the curious note appended to the Book of Job in the Septuagint. It is true that Uz is called a son of Aram (Gen. x. 23), but ‘Uz’ may have had several branches, or the use of Aramaic may have extended far beyond the limits of Aram proper.
[6]. Of the three friends Eliphaz comes from the Edomitish district of Teman, so famous for its wisdom; Bildad from the land of Shuah (‘Suhu’ lay, according to the inscriptions, between the mouths of the Belich and the Khabur, confluents of the Euphrates); Zophar from Naamah, some unknown district east of the Jordan. How well these notes of place agree with the Aramaic colouring of the book!
[7]. Bishop Lowth (Prælect. xxxiii.) admires the dramatic tact with which the poet makes Job err at first merely by the exaggeration of his complaints, thus inviting censure, which in turn leads to bold misstatements on Job’s part.
[8]. For a late Egyptian incantation of this class see Ancessi, Job et le Rédempteur, pp. 240-1; for the dragon myth itself see Cheyne’s note in the Prophecies of Isaiah (on Isa. xxvii. 1) and in the Pulpit Comm. on Jeremiah (on Jer. li. 34).
[9]. See [Chap. VII]. (end of Section 2).
[10]. The translation follows Bickell’s text. The correction in line 2 of ver. 16 is from the Septuagint; the transposition in line 4 is suggested by 1 Kings xix. 12.
[11]. So xv. 15. M. Lenormant compares Gen. vi. 1-4 (an incomplete fragment). See above on the ‘sons of the Elohim’ of the prologue, and comp. Chap. X.