KENAZ
There
are
tall,
graceful
columns,
and
massive
walls,
together
with
other
impressive
remains
of
buildings
from
Greeco-Roman
times.
The
modern
village,
lower
down
the
slope,
is
now
occupied
by
Druzes.
Baedeker
(Pal.',
207),
stating
no
reason,
Moore
(Judges,
222),
for
reasons
that
do
not
appear
adequate,
and
others
reject
the
identification.
To
speak
of
Qana-wat
as
'in
the
remote
north-east'
(Moore),
conveys
a
wrong
impression.
It
is
only
some
60
miles
N.E.
of
Jerash,
which
in
turn
is
near
the
S.
boundary
of
Gilead.
No
other
identification
seems
possible.
W.
Ewing.
KENAZ.
—
See
Kenizzites.
KENITES.
—
A
nomadic
tribe,
closely
connected
with
the
Amalekites
(wh.
see),
and
probably
indeed
a
branch
of
them,
but
having
friendly
relations
with
Israel,
and
ultimately,
it
seems,
at
least
in
the
main,
absorbed
in
Judah.
Hobab,
Moses'
father-in-law
(Jg
1"
4"
RVm),
who
had
been
invited
by
Moses
—
and
had
doubtless
accepted
the
invitation
—
to
be
a
guide
to
Israel
in
the
wilderness
(Nu
lO^'-s"),
was
a
Kenite;
and
his
descendants
came
up
from
Jericho
with
the
tribe
of
Judah
into
the
S.
part
of
their
territory
(Arad
is
about
17
miles
S.
of
Hebron),
though
afterwards,
true
to
their
Bedouin
instincts,
they
roamed
beyond
the
border
an'd
rejoined
their
kinsmen,
the
Amalekites,
in
the
N.
of
the
Sinaitic
Peninsula
(Jg
1'*;
read
in
this
verse,
with
MSS
of
LXX,
'the
Amalekite'
for
'the
people'
—
three
letters
have
dropped
out
in
the
Heb.).
When
Saul,
many
years
later,
attacked
the
Amalekites,
he
bade
the
Kenites
separate
themselves
from
them,
on
the
ground
that
they
had
shown
kindness
to
Israel
at
the
time
of
the
Exodus
(1
S
15«,
—
alluding
doubtless
to
Hobab's
guidance,
Nu
IO^-^b).
In
Jg
4"
Heber
the
Kenite
is
mentioned
as
having
separated
himself
from
the
main
body
of
the
tribe,
and
wandered
northwards
as
far
as
the
neighbourhood
of
Kedesh
(near
the
Waters
of
Merom).
From
1
S
27'"
30^'
we
learn
that
in
the
time
of
David
there
was
a
district
in
the
S.
of
Judah
inhabited
by
Kenites;
it
is
possible
also
that
Einah,
in
the
Negeb
of
Judah
(Jos
15*2),
and
Eain
in
the
hill-
country
(v.*-),
were
Kenite
settlements.
The
Recha-bites,
with
whom
the
nomadic
life
had
become
a
religious
institution
(Jer
35),
were
Kenites
(1
Ch
2").
In
On
15"
the
Kenites
are
mentioned
among
the
ten
nations
whose
land
was
to
be
taken
possession
of
by
Israel;
the
reference
is
doubtless
to
the
absorption
of
the
Kenites
in
Judah.
In
Nu
242i'-
Balaam,
with
a
play
on
the
resemblance
of
the
name
to
the
Heb.
kin,
'nest,'
declares
that
though
their
'nest'
is
among
the
rocky
crags
(namely,
in
the
S.
of
Judah),
they
would
in
the
end
be
carried
away
captive
by
the
Assyrians
('
Eain
'
in
V.22
is
the
proper
name
of
the
tribe
of
which
'
Kenite
'
is
the
gentilic
adj.;
cf.
Jg
4"
RVm.
Observe
here
that
the
oracle
on
the
Kenites
follows
closely
upon
that
on
the
Amalekites).
The
word
kain
means
in
Heb.
a
'spear'
(2
S
21"),
and
in
Arab,
an
'iron-smith';
in
Aram,
also
the
word
corresponding
to
'Kenite'
denotes
a
'metal-worker';
it
has
hence
been
conjectured
(Sayce)
that
the
'
Kenites
'
were
a
nomad
tribe
of
smiths.
There
is,
however,
no
support
for
this
conjecture
beyond
the
resemblance
in
the
words.
S.
B.
Dhivbb.
KENIZZITES.
—
A
clan
named
from
an
eponymous
ancestor,
Eenaz.
According
to
J
(Jos
15",
Jg
1"),
Caleb
and
Othniel
were
descended
from
him.
(The
inference,
sometimes
made,
that
Kenaz
was
a
brother
of
Caleb,
arose
from
a
misunderstanding
of
these
passages.)
R
in
Jos
14i'-
"
definitely
calls
Caleb
a
Kenizzite,
as
P
does
in
Nu
32''.
R
also
(On
15>9-»)
counts
the
Kenizzites
among
the
pre-IsraeUtish
inhabit-ants
of
Palestine.
P
in
Gn
36*^
enrols
Kenaz
among
the
'dukes'
of
Edom,
while
a
Priestly
supplementer
counts
him
both
as
a
'duke'
and
as
a
grandson
of
Esau
(Gn
36"-
").
The
Chronicler
names
Kenaz
as
a
grandson
of
Esau
(1
Ch
l^*),
and
also
as
a
descendant
of
KEREN-HAPPUCH
Judah
(1
Ch
4"-is).
The
probable
meaning
of
all
these
passages
is
that
the
Kenizzites
overspread
a
part
of
Edom
and
southern
Judah
before
the
IsraeUtish
conquest
and
continued
to
abide
there,
a
part
of
them
being
absorbed
by
the
Edomites,
and
a
part
by
the
tribe
of
Judah.
This
latter
portion
embraced
the
clans
of
Caleb
and
Othniel.
George
A.
Barton.
EEKOSIS.
—
This
word
means
'emptying,'
and
as
a
substantive
it
does
not
occur
in
the
NT.
But
the
corre-sponding
verb
'
he
emptied
himself
'
is
found
in
Ph
2'.
This
passage
is
very
important
as
a
definite
statement
that
the
Incarnation
implies
limitations,
and
at
the
same
time
that
these
limitations
were
undertaken
as
a
voluntary
act
of
love.
2
Co
8»
is
a
similar
statement.
The
questions
involved
are
not,
however,
to
be
solved
by
the
interpretation
of
isolated
texts,
but,
so
far
as
they
can
be
solved,
by
our
knowledge
of
the
Incarnate
Life
as
a
whole.
The
question
which
has
been
most
dis-cussed
in
recent
years
relates
to
the
human
conscious-ness
and
knowledge
of
Christ,
and
asks
how
it
is
possible
for
the
limitations
of
human
knowledge
to
coexist
with
Divine
omniscience.
The
word
kenosls,
and
the
ideas
which
it
suggests,
were
not
emphasized
by
early
theologians,
and
the
word
was
used
as
little
more
than
a
synonym
for
the
Incarna-tion,
regarded
as
a
Divine
act
of
voluntary
condescension.
The
speculations
which
occupied
the
Church
during
the
first
five
centuries
were
caused
by
questions
as
to
the
nature
and
Person
of
Christ,
which
arose
inevitably
when
it
had
been
realized
that
He
was
both
human
and
Divine;
but
while
they
established
the
reality
of
His
human
consciousness,
they
did
not
deal,
except
inci-dentally,
with
the
conditions
under
which
it
was
exer-cised.
"The
passages
which
speak
of
our
Lord's
human
knowledge
were
discussed
exegeticaUy,
and
the
general
tendency
of
most
early
and
almost
all
mediaeval
theology
was
to
explain
them
in
a
more
or
less
docetic
sense.
From
the
16th
cent,
onwards
there
has
been
a
greater
tendency
to
revert
to
the
facts
of
the
Gospel
narrative,
consequently
a
greater
insistence
on
the
truth
of
our
Lord's
manhood,
and
more
discussion
as
to
the
extent
to
which
the
Son,
in
becoming
incarnate,
ceased
to
exercise
Divine
power,
especially
in
the
sphere
of
human
knowledge.
The
question
is
obviously
one
that
should
be
treated
with
great
reserve,
and
rather
by
an
examination
of
the
whole
picture
of
the
human
Ufe
of
Christ
presented
to
us
in
the
NT
than
by
a
priori
reason-ing.
The
language
of
the
NT
appears
to
warrant
the
conclusion
that
the
Incarnation
was
not
a
mere
addition
of
a
manhood
to
the
Godhead,
but
that
'
the
Son
of
God,
in
assuming
human
nature,
really
lived
in
it
under
properly
human
conditions,
and
ceased
from
the
exercise
of
those
Divine
functions,
including
the
Divine
omni-science,
which
would
have
been
incompatible
with
a
truly
human
experience.'
It
has
even
been
held
that
the
Son
in
becoming
incarnate
ceased
to
live
the
life
of
the
Godhead
altogether,
or
to
exercise
His
cosmic
functions.
But
for
this
there
is
no
support
in
the
NT,
and
Col
1"
and
He
1'
more
than
suggest
the
contrary.
J.
H.
Maude.
EEBAS
(1
Es
S»)
=Ezr
2"
and
Neh
7"
Keros.
EEBCHIEFS
(from
the
Fr.
couvrechef,
a
covering
for
the
head)
are
mentioned
only
in
Ezk
IS's-
»,
a
some-what
obscure
passage
having
reference
to
certain
forms
of
divination
or
sorcery,
which
required
the
head
to
be
covered.
They
evidently
varied
in
length
with
the
height
of
the
wearer
(v."),
and
perhaps
resembled
the
long
veils
worn
by
the
female
captives
from
Lachish
represented
on
an
Assyr.
sculpture,
see
Dress,
§
6
(6).
A.
R.
S.
Kennedy.
EERE
or
QERE.—
See
Text
of
OT.
KEREN-HAPPUCH
(Ut.
'horn
of
antimony').—
The
youngest
daughter
born
to
Job
in
his
second
estate
of
prosperity
(Job
42").
The
name
is
indicative
of
