exlim/blb
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
blb/study/isbe/2300.html

114 lines
296 KiB
HTML
Raw Permalink Blame History

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
<script src="../../js/basepath.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/nav.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/MainHeader.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
isbe = [];
isbe[2301]='Convenient`kon-ven\'-yent: In the Revised Version (British and American) limited to translation of kairos, "suitable time," "season," and its compounds: "that which is seasonable" or "opportune" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,21);">Mr 6:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,25);">Ac 24:25</a>). the King James Version is replaced, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,8);">Pr 30:8</a> the Revised Version (British and American), by "needful" (Hebrew choq), "feed me with the food that is needful for me"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',40,4);">Jer 40:4</a>, by "right"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,4);">Eph 5:4</a>, by "befitting"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,28);">Ro 1:28</a>, by "fitting," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,12);">1Co 16:12</a>, by "opportunity."``1';
isbe[2302]='Convent`kon-vent\':Found in the King James Version margin of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,19);">Jer 49:19</a>: "Who will convent me in judgment?" and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,44);">Jer 50:44</a>: "Who will convent me to plead?" The Hebrew term which is rendered convent is ya\'adh, and it means to summon to a court, to call on to plead. Convent is obsolete, but it was formerly used, and meant to summon, or to call before a judge. Shakespeare used it several times. In King Henry VIII, Act V, he said, "The lords of the council hath commanded that the archbishop be convented to the council board."``1';
isbe[2303]='Conversant`kon-vur\'-sant (halakh, "to go on," "to walk"): This word is translated "conversant" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',8,35);">Jos 8:35</a> the King James Version (margin "walked"), and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,15);">1Sa 25:15</a> the King James Version meaning "going along with them;" the American Standard Revised Version "went."``1';
isbe[2304]='Conversation`kon-ver-sa\'-shun (anastrophe, homilia): This word is another illustration of the changes which time makes in a living language. The modern sense of the term is mutual talk, colloquy, but in the King James Version it never means that, but always behavior, conduct. This broader meaning, at a time not much later than the date of the King James Version, began to yield to the special, limited one of today, perhaps, as has been suggested, because speech forms so large a part of conduct. The New Testament words for "converse" in the modern sense are homileo (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,14,15);">Lu 24:14-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,11);">Ac 20:11</a>) and sunomileo (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,27);">Ac 10:27</a>).<P>(1) In the Old Testament the word used to indicate conduct is derekh, "way" the course one travels (the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',37,14);">Ps 37:14</a>; margin <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',50,23);">50:23</a>). It is the common Hebrew idea of conduct, possibly due, as Hatch thinks, to the fact that in Syria intercourse between village and village was so much on foot, with difficulty on stony tracks over the hills, and this is reflected in the metaphor.<P>(2) In the New Testament the idea of deportment is once rendered by tropos, "Let your conversation be without covetousness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,5);">Heb 13:5</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "be ye free from the love of money"; the Revised Version, margin "let your turn of mind be free"). But the usual Greek word is anastrophe, "a turning up and down," possibly due to the fact, as Hatch again avers, that life in the bustling streets of Athens and Rome gave rise to the conception of life as quick motion to and fro. "Ye have heard of my conversation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,13);">Ga 1:13</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "manner of life"). So also <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,22);">Eph 4:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,,\'1-\'">1Ti 4:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">Heb 13:7</a>; "Let him show out of a good conversation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',3,13);">Jas 3:13</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "by his good life"); "vexed with the filthy conversation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,7);">2Pe 2:7</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "lascivious life"); "holy conversation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,11);">2Pe 3:11</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "holy living"); "Our conversation is in heaven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,20);">Php 3:20</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CITIZENSHIP">citizenship</a>" (which see)). See also in the Apocrypha (Tobit 4:14; 2Macc 5:8).<P>The translations in the Revisions put a wholesome emphasis upon conduct, and eliminate the danger of much misunderstanding. See further Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek.``177';
isbe[2305]='Conversion`kon-vur\'-shun:<P>I. The Words "Conversion," "Convert," in Biblical Usage.<P>1. In the English Bible:<P>The noun "conversion" (epistrophe) occurs in only one passage in the Bible, "They passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,3);">Ac 15:3</a>). Derived forms of the verb "convert" are used in the Revised Version (British and American) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,19);">Jas 5:19</a>, "convert," "converteth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,20);">5:20</a>), "converted" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,13);">Ps 51:13</a>, margin "return"), "converts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,27);">Isa 1:27</a>, margin "they that return"). In other instances where the King James Version uses forms of the verb "convert" the Revised Version (British and American) employs "turn again" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',6,10);">Isa 6:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,32);">Lu 22:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,19);">Ac 3:19</a>), or "turn" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',60,5);">Isa 60:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,15);">Mt 13:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,3);">18:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,12);">Mr 4:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,40);">Joh 12:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,27);">Ac 28:27</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,7);">Ps 19:7</a> the reading of the King James Version, "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul," has been changed by the revisers into "restoring the soul." The words commonly used in the English Bible as equivalent with the Hebrew and Greek terms are "turn," "return," "turn back," "turn again" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',4,30);">De 4:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',55,7);">Isa 55:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',3,12);">Jer 3:12</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,5);">25:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',35,15);">35:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,\'21-23\');">Eze 18:21-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',33,11);">33:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,7);">Mal 3:7</a>). Thus "convert" is synonymous with "turn," and "conversion" with "turning."<P>2. In the Old Testament:<P>The principal Hebrew word is :shubh; other words are panah, haphakh, cabhabh, in Hiphil. They are used<P>(1) in the literal sense, for instance, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,7);">Ge 14:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,16);">De 17:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',56,9);">Ps 56:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,8);">Isa 38:8</a>.<P>(2) In the later prophetical writings the verb shubh refers, both in the Qal and Hiphil forms, to the return from the captivity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,27);">Isa 1:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',29,14);">Jer 29:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',30,3);">30:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,53);">Eze 16:53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,7);">Ze 2:7</a>).<P>(3) In the figurative, ethical or religious sense<P>(a) from God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',14,43);">Nu 14:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',15,11);">1Sa 15:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',9,6);">1Ki 9:6</a>);<P>(b) more frequently to turn back to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,3);">1Sa 7:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,33);">1Ki 8:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,22);">Isa 19:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,12);">Joe 2:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',4,6);">Am 4:6</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,11);">Ho 6:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,10);">7:10</a>).<P>3. In the New Testament:<P>The words used in the Septuagint and New Testament are strephein, and its compounds, apostr., anastr., epanastr., hupostr., and especially epistrephein. The latter word occurs 39 times in the New Testament. It is used<P>(1) in the literal sense in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,22);">Mt 9:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,13);">10:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,18);">24:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,40);">Ac 9:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,36);">15:36</a>, etc.;<P>(2) in the figurative sense, in transitive form. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,16);">Lu 1:16</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,19);">Jas 5:19</a>f). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,9);">Ga 4:9</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,21);">2Pe 2:21</a> it denotes to turn from the right way to the wrong. The opposite meaning, to turn from the wrong way to the right, we find in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,32);">Lu 22:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,35);">Ac 9:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,21);">11:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,15);">14:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,19);">15:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,18);">26:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,16);">2Co 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,9);">1Th 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,25);">1Pe 2:25</a>. In connection with metanoein, "repent," it is used in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,19);">Ac 3:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,20);">26:20</a>. The root word strephein is used in the figurative sense in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,3);">Mt 18:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,40);">Joh 12:40</a>. Septuagint and Textus Receptus of the New Testament have here epistrephein.<P>II. The Doctrine.<P>While the words "conversion" and "convert" do not occur frequently in our English Bible the teaching contained therein is fundamental in Christian doctrine. From the words themselves it is not possible to derive a clearly defined doctrine of conversion; the materials for the construction of the doctrine must be gathered from the tenor of Biblical teaching.<P>1. Vague Use of the Word:<P>There is a good deal of vagueness in the modern use of the term. By some writers it is used in "a very general way to stand for the whole series of manifestations just preceding, accompanying, and immediately following the apparent sudden changes of character involved" (E. D. Starbuck, The Psychology of Religion, 21). "\'To be converted,\' \'to be regenerated,\' \'to receive grace,\' \'to experience religion,\' \'to gain an assurance,\' are so many phrases which denote the process, gradual or sudden, by which a self, hitherto divided and consciously wrong, inferior and unhappy, becomes unified and consciously right, superior and happy in consequence of its hold upon religious realities. This at least is what conversion signifies in general terms" (William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience, 189). In this general, vague way the term is used not only by psychologists, but also by theological writers and in common religious parlance. A converted man is a Christian, a believer, a man who has religion, who has experienced regeneration.<P>2. Specific Meaning:<P>In its more restricted meaning the word denotes the action of man in the initial process of salvation as distinguished from the action of God. Justification and regeneration are purely Divine acts, repentance, faith, conversion are human acts although under the influence and by the power of the Divine agency. Thus, conversion denotes the human volition and act by which man in obedience to the Divine summons determines to change the course of his life and turns to God. Arrested by God\'s call man stops to think, turns about and heads the opposite way. This presupposes that the previous course was not directed toward God but away from Him. The instances of conversion related in the Bible show that the objective point toward which man\'s life was directed may be either the service of idols (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,9);">1Th 1:9</a>) or a life of religious indifference, a self-centered life where material things engross the attention and deaden the sense of things spiritual (rich young ruler, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,22);">Lu 18:22</a>), or a life of sensuality, of open sin and shame (prodigal son, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',15,13);">Lu 15:13</a>) or even a mistaken way of serving God (Saul, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,9);">Ac 26:9</a>). Accordingly in conversion either the religious or the ethical element may predominate. The moral man who turns from self to God or, as Saul did, from an erroneous notion concerning God\'s will to a clear conception of his relation to God is more conscious of the religious factor. Conversion brings him into vital, conscious fellowship with God through Jesus Christ. The immoral man who is awakened to a realization of the holiness of God, of the demands of His law, and of his own sin and guilt is more conscious of the outward change in his manner of life. The ethical change is the more outstanding fact in his experience, although it can never be separated from the religious experience of the changed relation to God.<P>3. Mode:<P>The mode of conversion Varies greatly according to the former course of life. It may be a sudden crisis in the moral and intellectual life. This is very frequently the case in the experience of heathen who turn from the worship of idols to faith in Jesus Christ. A sudden crisis is frequently witnessed in the case of persons who, having lived a life of flagrant sin, renounce their former life. Conversion to them means a complete revolution in their thoughts, feelings and outward manner of life. In other instances conversion appears to be the climax of prolonged conflict for supremacy of divergent motives; and, again, it may be the goal of a gradual growth, the consummation of a process of discerning ever more clearly and yielding ever more definitely and thus experiencing ever more vitally truths which have been implanted and nurtured by Christian training. This process results in the conscious acceptance of Jesus Christ as the personal Saviour and in the consecration of life to His service. Thus conversion may be an instantaneous act, or a process which is more or less prolonged. The latter is more frequently seen in the case of children and young people who have grown up in Christian families and have received the benefit of Christian training. No conversions of this kind are recorded in the New Testament. This may be explained by the fact that most of our New Testament writings are addressed to the first generation of Christians, to men and women who were raised in Jewish legalism or heathen idolatry, and who turned to Christ after they had passed the age of adolescence. The religious life of their children as distinguished in its mode and manifestations from that of the adults does not appear to have been a matter of discussion or a source of perplexity so as to call forth specific instruction.<P>4. Conversion and Psychology:<P>Conversion comprises the characteristics both of repentance and of faith. Repentance is conversion viewed from its starting-point, the turning from the former life; faith indicates the objective point of conversion, the turning to God.<P>Of late the psychology of conversion has been carefully studied and elaborately treated by psychologists. Much valuable material has been gathered. It is shown that certain periods of adolescent life are particularly susceptible to religious influences (compare G. Stanley Hall, Adolescence, II, chapter xiv; E. D. Starbuck, Psychology of Religion, etc.). Yet conversion cannot be explained as a natural process, conditioned by physiological changes in the adolescent, especially by approaching puberty. The laws of psychology are certainly God\'s laws as much as all other laws of Nature, and His Spirit works in harmony with His own laws. But in genuine conversion there is always at work in a direct and immediate manner the Spirit of God to which man, be he adolescent or adult, consciously responds. Any attempt to explain conversion by eliminating the direct working of the Divine Spirit falls short of the mark.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=REGENERATION">REGENERATION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=REPENTANCE">REPENTANCE</a>`129';
isbe[2306]='Convict; Conviction`kon-vikt\', kon-vik\'-shun (elegcho and compounds, "to prove guilty"): Usual translation of English Versions of the Bible, where the King James Version has "convince," as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,46);">Joh 8:46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,9);">Tit 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,9);">Jas 2:9</a>; once also replacing the King James Version "reprove" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,8);">Joh 16:8</a>), while the Revised Version (British and American) changes the King James Version "convince" into "reprove" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,24);">1Co 14:24</a>. It always implies the presentation of evidence. It is a decision presumed to be based upon a careful and discriminating consideration of all the proofs offered, and has a legal character, the verdict being rendered either in God\'s judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',3,19);">Ro 3:19</a>), or before men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,46);">Joh 8:46</a>) by an appeal to their consciences in which God\'s law is written (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',2,15);">Ro 2:15</a>). Since such conviction is addressed to the heart of the guilty, as well as concerning him externally, the word "reprove" is sometimes substituted. To "convict...in respect of righteousness, and of judgment" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,8);">Joh 16:8</a>), refers to the conviction of the inadequacy and perversity of the ordinary, natural standards of righteousness and judgment, and the approval of those found in Christ, by the agency of the Holy Spirit, as the great interpreter and applier of the work of Christ.``84';
isbe[2307]='Convince`kon-vins\' (elegcho): Another form etymologically of "convict," means to bring to a decision concerning the truth or the falsehood of a proposition (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',32,12);">Job 32:12</a>). As usually applied to what is of a more individual and private character, and having reference to what is either good or bad, or what is in itself without moral quality, it has given way in the Revised Version (British and American) to either "convict," "reprove" or "confute."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CONVICT">CONVICT</a>`1';
isbe[2308]='Convocation`kon-vo-ka\'-shun: A rendering for miqra\' chiefly in the frequent "Holy Convocation"; but the word is sometimes used alone, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',10,2);">Nu 10:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,13);">Isa 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',4,5);">4:5</a>. On a holy convocation no work could be done. The phrase differs from "solemn assembly," which in the Pentateuch is only applied to the concluding festivals at the end of Passover and Tabernacles, while "Holy Convocation" is used of the Sabbath and all the great holy days of the Mosaic legislation.``1';
isbe[2309]='Convulsing`kon-vuls\'-ing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,26);">Mr 1:26</a> margin (the King James Version torn)).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=UNCLEAN+SPIRIT">UNCLEAN SPIRIT</a>`1';
isbe[2310]='Cooking`kook\'-ing.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FOOD">FOOD</a>`1';
isbe[2311]='Cool`kool (ruach, "wind"; katapsucho, "to cool down"): "Cool of the day" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',3,8);">Ge 3:8</a>, margin "wind"), when the evening breeze has tempered the heat of the day, enabling Orientals to walk abroad. "Cool my tongue" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,24);">Lu 16:24</a>), a phrase reflecting the Jewish notion that Abraham had power to rescue his descendants from the fires of Hades.``1';
isbe[2312]='Coos`ko\'-os.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COS">COS</a>`1';
isbe[2313]='Coping`ko\'-ping.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[2314]='Copper`kop\'-er (nechosheth): The word is translated "copper" in only one passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,27);">Ezr 8:27</a> the King James Version). In the American Standard Revised Version of this passage, "brass" has been substituted. Neither describes the actual alloy according to present definitions so well as the word "bronze." Copper was one of the earliest metals to be known and utilized in alloy, but copper, as a single metal, was probably little used. The remains of spears, balances, arms, vases, mirrors, statues, cooking utensils, implements of all kinds, etc., from Bible times are principally of an alloy of copper hardened with tin known today as bronze (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BRASS">BRASS</a>). In such passages as <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,9);">De 8:9</a>, where reference is made to the native metal or ores, "copper" should be substituted for "brass" as in the American Standard Revised Version (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,18);">Job 40:18</a>). This is true also of coins as chalkos, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,9);">Mt 10:9</a>.<P>Our modern English word "copper" is derived from an old name pertaining to the island of Cyprus. Copper was known to the ancients as Cyprian brass, probably because that island was one of the chief sources for this metal. The Sinai peninsula and the mountains of Northern Syria also contributed to the ancient world\'s supply (see Tell el-Amarna Letters). No evidences of copper ore in any quantity are found in Palestine proper.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=METAL">METAL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MINE">MINE</a>`133';
isbe[2315]='Copper Smith`kop\'-er-smith (chalkeus): The word is found in New Testament once only, in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',4,14);">2Ti 4:14</a>: "Alexander the coppersmith did (margin "showed") me much evil." As the Bible word rendered "copper" (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,27);">Ezr 8:27</a> the King James Version) is translated "brass" by the Revised Version (British and American), so the word here rendered "coppersmith" should be rendered "brazier," or "worker in brass."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COPPER">COPPER</a>`1';
isbe[2316]='Coptic Versions`kop\'-tik vur\'-shunz:<P><b>I. LANGUAGE AND ALPHABET</b><P class="in15">1. Alphabet<P class="in15">2. Dialects.<P><b>II. VERSIONS</b><P><b>III. CHIEF EDITIONS</b><P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Language and Alphabet.<P>1. Alphabet:<P>The Coptic alphabet consists of the Greek uncial letters, plus seven characters taken from the Egyptian demotic to express sounds not represented in the Greek It can be traced back to the 4th century, as the oldest Coptic manuscripts belong to the end of the 4th or beginning of the 5th century. The language still prevailed in Egypt in the 9th century, but was no longer understood in Middle Egypt in the 12th. Its last speaker died in 1633.<P>2. Dialects:<P>There were at least five written dialects and subdialects of Coptic. Of these the most important from a literary point of view was the<P>(1) Buchairic, the dialect of Lower Egypt, often called Coptic par excellence, and also (wrongly) Memphitic. It is used as the ecclesiastical language in the services of the Coptic church. The other four dialects are somewhat more closely allied to one another than to Buchairic, which shows greater traces of Greek influence. These dialects are,<P>(2) the Sahidic (Sa\'idi, or dialect of upper Egypt), also called Thebaic;<P>(3) the Bashmuric<69>or rather Bushmuric<69>(for which Fayyumic has been suggested);<P>(4) the Middle Egyptian proper (known from manuscripts found in the monastery of Jeremias near the Theban Serapeum), differing but little from (3); and<P>(5) the Akhmimic (Akhmim = the ancient Chemmis). Akhmimic is more primitive and more closely related to ancient Egyptian than any other. Only a few fragments in it (of Exodus, Ecclesiastes, 2Maccabees, the Minor Prophets, and Catholic epistles) have yet been found. The last three dialects are often classed together as "Middle Egyptian" and (4) is then called "Lower Sahidic."<P>II. Versions.<P>In all 5 dialects more or less complete versions of the Bible once existed. They were the earliest made after the early Syriac At latest they began in the 3rd century, though some (e.g. Hyvernat) say as early as the 2nd. It is thought that the Sahidic version was the earliest, then the Middle Egyptian and finally the Buchairic. The latter represents an early and comparatively pure Greek text, free from what are generally termed western additions, while the Sahidic, on the other hand, contains most of the peculiar western readings. It sometimes supports Codex Sinaiticus, sometimes Codex Vaticanus (B), sometimes both, but generally it closely agrees with codex D (Bezae), especially in the Acts. A Coptic (Sahidic) MS, written considerably before 350 AD, and published by the British Museum in April,1912,contains Deuteronomy, Jonah, and Acts, and is older than any other Biblical manuscript (except a few fragments) yet known to exist. It proves that this Sahidic version was made about 200 AD. It in general supports the "Western" text of codex Bezae (D). Much of the New Testament especially still exists in Sahidic, though not Revelation. In Bubairic we have the Pentateuch, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the 12 Minor Prophets, and fragments of the historical books of the Old Testament, besides the whole New Testament, though the Book of Revelation is later than the rest. In the other dialects much less had been preserved, as far as is known. In Bushmuric we have fragments of Isaiah, Lamentations, Ep. Jeremiah, and a good many fragments of the New Testament. In more than one dialect we have apocryphal gospels (see Texts and Studies, IV, <span class="noTag">number 2</a>, 1896) and Gnostic papyri, etc. The Old Testament was translated from the Septuagint. The Psalms seem to have been translated about 303 AD.<P>III. Chief Editions.<P>The Buchairic Psalms were first published in 1659. Wilkins published the Buchairic New Testament at London in 1716, and the Pentateuch in 1731; Schwartze the Gospels in 1846-47; de Lagarde the Acts and Epistles in 1852. He also edited the Psalms (transliterated) in 1875, 151 in number, of which the last celebrates David\'s victory over Goliath. He added fragments of the Sahidic Psalter and of the Buchairic Proverbs Tattam published the Minor Prophets in 1836 and the Major in 1852 an edition of the Gospels in London in 1847, and of the rest of the New Testament in 1852 (SPCK), with a literal Arabic version. Horner\'s edition of the Buchairic New Testament (4 volumes,1898,etc., Clarendon Press) and of Sahidic Gospels (1910, 3 vols) is the standard edition Ford published part of the Sahidic New Testament in 1799. Various editions of parts of Old Testament and New Testament have since appeared: e.g. Ciasca published fragments of the Sahidic Old Testament (Sacrorum Bibliorum Fragmenta Copto-Sahidica Musei Borgiani) at Rome, 1885-89.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Realencyclopadie fur prot. Theol. und Kirche, III; Hyvernat, Etude sur les versions coptes; Revue biblique,1896,1897; Zeitschrift fur agypt. Sprache; Journal of Theol. Studies, I, 3; Nestle, Text. Crit of Greek New Testament; Forbes Robinson, Texts and Studies, IV; Oesterley in Murray\'s New Bible Dict.``175';
isbe[2317]='Cor`kor (kor): A liquid and dry measure, same as the homer, of about 90 gals. capacity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',45,14);">Eze 45:14</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOMER">HOMER</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WEIGHTS+AND+MEASURES">WEIGHTS and MEASURES</a>`1';
isbe[2318]='Cor-Ashan`kor-ash\'-an, ko-ra\'-shan (English Revised Version, the King James Version Chor-ashan; kor \'ashan, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,30);">1Sa 30:30</a>): The original reading was probably Bor- ashan, "well of Ashan."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASHAN">ASHAN</a>`1';
isbe[2319]='Coral`kor\'-al (ra\'moth, peninim): The red coral or precious coral, Corallium rubrum, is confined to the Mediterranean and Adriatic seas. It is the calcareous axis of a branching colony of polyps. It does not form reefs, but occurs in small masses from 40 to 100 fathoms below the surface. It differs totally in structure from the white corals which form coral reefs, belonging to the order of Octactinia or Eight-rayed Polyps, while the reef-building corals belong to the Hexactinia or Six-rayed Polyps.<P>Ra\'moth, apparently from r. ra\'am, "to be high" (compare rum, "to be high"), occurs in three passages. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',24,7);">Pr 24:7</a>, EVV have "too high": "Wisdom is too high for a fool." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,\'12-19\');">Job 28:12-19</a>, where various precious things are compared with wisdom, English Versions of the Bible has "Coral"(king James Version, margin "Ramoth"). It is mentioned here along with ceghor, "gold" (the Revised Version, margin "treasure"); kethem, "gold of Ophir"; shoham, "onyx" (the Revised Version, margin "beryl"); cappir, "sapphire"; zahabh, "gold"; zekhukhith, "crystal" (the Revised Version (British and American) "glass"); paz, "gold"; gabhish, "pearls" (the Revised Version (British and American) "crystal"); peninim, "rubies" (the Revised Version, margin "red coral" or "pearls"); pitedhah, "topaz." While the real meaning of some of these terms is doubtful (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=STONES,+PRECIOUS">STONES, PRECIOUS</a>), they all, including ra\'moth, appear to be precious stones or metals. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,16);">Eze 27:16</a>, ra\'moth occurs with nophekh, "emeralds" (the Revised Version, margin "carbuncles"); \'argaman, "purple"; riqmah, "broidered work"; buts, "fine linen"; kadhkodh, "Agate"(king James Version, margin "chrysoprase," the Revised Version (British and American) "rubies"). Here the context does not require a precious stone or metal, and Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A. D.) has sericum, i. e. "Chinese material" or "silk." Notwithstanding, therefore, the traditional rendering, "coral," the real meaning of ra\'moth must be admitted to be doubtful.<P>Peninim (from the root panan, "to divide up," "to separate"; compare Arabic fanan, "a branch of a tree") occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,18);">Job 28:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',3,15);">Pr 3:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',8,11);">8:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',20,15);">20:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,10);">31:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',4,7);">La 4:7</a>. In all these passages English Versions of the Bible has "rubies" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,18);">Job 28:18</a>, the Revised Version, margin "red coral" or "pearls"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',4,7);">La 4:7</a>, the Revised Version, margin "corals"). Everywhere a precious substance is indicated, but nowhere does the context give any light as to the nature of the substance, except in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',4,7);">La 4:7</a>, where we have the statement that the nobles of Jerusalem "were more ruddy in body" than peninim. This and the etymology favor a branching red substance such as precious coral. The occurrence of peninim and ra\'moth together in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',28,18);">Job 28:18</a> is, if we give the precedence to peninim, a further argument against ra\'moth meaning "coral."``37';
isbe[2320]='Corban`kor\'-ban (qorban; doron; translated "a gift," "a sacrificial offering," literally, "that which is brought near," namely, to the altar): An expression frequently used in the original text of the Old Testament; in the English Bible it occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,11);">Mr 7:11</a>; compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,5);">Mt 15:5</a>. It is the most general term for a sacrifice of any kind. In the course of time it became associated with an objectionable practice. Anything dedicated to the temple by pronouncing the votive word "Corban" forthwith belonged to the temple, but only ideally; actually it might remain in the possession of him who made the vow. So a son might be justified in not supporting his old parents simply because he designated his property or a part of it as a gift to the temple, that is, as "Corban" There was no necessity of fulfilling his vow, yet he was actually prohibited from ever using his property for the support of his parents. This shows clearly why Christ singled out this queer regulation in order to demonstrate the sophistry of tradition and to bring out the fact of its possible and actual hostility to the Scripture and its spirit.``8';
isbe[2321]='Corbe`kor\'-be.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHORBE">CHORBE</a>`1';
isbe[2322]='Cord`kord (chebhet, yether, methar, \'abhoth; schoinion):<P>(1) The Arabic chab\'l corresponds to the Hebrew chebhel and is still the common name for cord or rope throughout the East. Such ropes or cords are made of goat\'s or camel\'s hair, first spun into threads and then twisted or plaited into the larger and stronger form. Chebhel is translated rather inconsistently in the Revised Version (British and American) by "cord" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,15);">Jos 2:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,8);">Job 36:8</a>, etc.); by "line" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',8,2);">2Sa 8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',2,5);">Mic 2:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',16,6);">Ps 16:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',78,55);">78:55</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,17);">Am 7:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',2,\'1-\'">Zec 2:1</a>); by "ropes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',20,31);">1Ki 20:31</a>), and by "tacklings" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',33,23);">Isa 33:23</a>).<P>(2) Yether corresponds to the Arabic wittar, which means catgut. With a kindred inconsistency it is translated the Revised Version (British and American) by "withes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',16,7);">Jud 16:7</a> the Revised Version, margin "bowstring"); by "cord" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,11);">Job 30:11</a>), where some think it may mean "bowstring," or possibly "rein" of a bridle, and by "bowstring" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',11,2);">Ps 11:2</a>), doubtless the true meaning.<P>(3) Methar is considered the equivalent of Arabic atnab, which means tent ropes, being constantly so used by the Bedouin. They make the thing so called of goat\'s or camel\'s hair. It is used of the "cords" of the tabernacle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',10,20);">Jer 10:20</a>), of the "cords" of the "hangings" and "pillars" of the courts of the tabernacle in Exodus and Numbers, and figuratively by <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,2);">Isa 54:2</a>, "Lengthen thy cords," etc.<P>(4) \'Abhoth is thought to have its equivalent in the Arabic rubuts, which means a band, or fastening. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BAND">BAND</a>. It is translated by "cords" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,27);">Ps 118:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',129,4);">129:4</a>; by "bands" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',3,25);">Eze 3:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',39,10);">Job 39:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,4);">Ho 11:4</a>; by "ropes" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',15,13,14);">Jud 15:13-14</a>, and by "cart rope" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',5,18);">Isa 5:18</a>. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CART">CART</a>. See also <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',15,38);">Nu 15:38</a> and <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AMULET">AMULET</a>. It Seems to have the meaning of something twisted or interlaced.<P>(5) In the New Testament "cord" is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,15);">Joh 2:15</a>, translating schoinion, but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,32);">Ac 27:32</a> the same Greek word is rendered "ropes."<P>Figurative:<P>(1) of affliction (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,8);">Job 36:8</a>);<P>(2) of God\'s laws (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,3);">Ps 2:3</a>);<P>(3) of the artifices of the wicked (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',129,4);">Ps 129:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',140,5);">140:5</a>);<P>(4) of sinful habits (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',5,22);">Pr 5:22</a>);<P>(5) of true friendship or companionship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',4,12);">Ec 4:12</a>);<P>(6) possibly of the spinal cord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,6);">Ec 12:6</a>);<P>(7) of falsehood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',5,18);">Isa 5:18</a>);<P>(8) of the spirit of enterprise and devotion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,2);">Isa 54:2</a>);<P>(9) of God\'s gentleness.``47';
isbe[2323]='Cords, Small`kordz (schoinion, the diminutive of schoinos, "a rush," hence, "a rope of rushes"): Translated "small cords" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,15);">Joh 2:15</a> the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) "cords"). The same word is translated "ropes" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,32);">Ac 27:32</a>. See also <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,2);">Job 41:2</a> margin.``1';
isbe[2324]='Core`ko\'-re (Kore): In the King James Version, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jud\',1,11);">Jude 1:11</a>, used as a variant for Korah.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KORAH">KORAH</a>`1';
isbe[2325]='Coriander`kor-i-an\'-der (gadh; korion): The fruit of the Coriandrum Sativum (Natural Order Umbelliferae), a plant indigenous around the Mediterranean and extensively cultivated. The fruits are aromatic and stomatic-carminative. They are of a grayish-yellow color, ribbed, ovate-globular and in size about twice that of a hemp-seed. "The manna was like coriander seed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,7);">Nu 11:7</a>; see also <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',16,31);">Ex 16:31</a>).``1';
isbe[2326]='Corinth`kor\'-inth (Korinthos, "ornament"): A celebrated city of the Peloponnesus, capital of Corinthia, which lay north of Argolis, and with the isthmus joined the peninsula to the mainland. Corinth had three good harbors (Lechaeum, on the Corinthian, and Cenchrea and Schoenus on the Saronic Gulf), and thus commanded the traffic of both the eastern and the western seas. The larger ships could not be hauled across the isthmus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,6,37);">Ac 27:6, 37</a>); smaller vessels were taken over by means of a ship tramway with wooden rails. The Phoenicians, who settled here very early, left many traces of their civilization in the industrial arts, such as dyeing and weaving, as well as in their religion and mythology. The Corinthian cult of Aphrodite, of Melikertes (Melkart) and of Athene Phoenike are of Phoenician origin. Poseidon, too, and other sea deities were held in high esteem in the commercial city. Various arts were cultivated and the Corinthians, even in the earliest times, were famous for their cleverness, inventiveness and artistic sense, and they prided themselves on surpassing the other Greeks in the embellishment of their city and in the adornment of their temples. There were many celebrated painters in Corinth, and the city became famous for the Corinthian order of architecture: an order, which, by the way, though held in high esteem by the Romans, was very little used by the Greeks themselves. It was here, too, that the dithyramb (hymn to Dionysus) was first arranged artistically to be sung by a chorus; and the Isthmian games, held every two years, were celebrated just outside the city on the isthmus near the Saronic Gulf. But the commercial and materialistic spirit prevailed later. Not a single Corinthian distinguished himself in literature. Statesmen, however, there were in abundance: Periander, Phidon, Timoleon.<P>Harbors are few on the Corinthian Gulf. Hence, no other city could wrest the commerce of these waters from Corinth. According to Thucydides, the first ships of war were built here in 664 BC. In those early days Corinth held a leading position among the Greek cities; but in consequence of her great material prosperity she would not risk all as Athens did, and win eternal supremacy over men: she had too much to 1ose to jeopardize her material interests for principle, and she soon sank into the second class. But when Athens, Thebes, Sparta and Argos fell away, Corinth came to the front again as the wealthiest and most important city in Greece; and when it was destroyed by Mummius in 146 BC, the treasures of art carried to Rome were as great as those of Athens. Delos became the commercial center for a time; but when Julius Caesar restored Corinth a century later (46 BC), it grew so rapidly that the Roman colony soon became again one of the most prominent centers in Greece. When Paul visited Corinth, he found it the metropolis of the Peloponnesus. Jews flocked to this center of trade (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,\'1-18\');">Ac 18:1-18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,21);">Ro 16:21</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,20);">1Co 9:20</a>), the natural site for a great mart, and flourishing under the lavish hand of the Caesars; and this is one reason why Paul remained there so long (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,11);">Ac 18:11</a>) instead of sojourning in the old seats of aristocracy, such as Argos, Sparta and Athens. He found a strong Jewish nucleus to begin with; and it was in direct communication with Ephesus. But earthquake, malaria, and the harsh Turkish rule finally swept everything away except seven columns of one old Doric temple, the only object above ground left today to mark the site of the ancient city of wealth and luxury and immorality<74>the city of vice par excellence in the Roman world. Near the temple have been excavated the ruins of the famous fount of Peirene, so celebrated in Greek literature. Directly south of the city is the high rock (over 1,800 ft.) Acrocorinthus, which formed an impregnable fortress. Traces of the old ship-canal across the isthmus (attempted by Nero in 66-67 AD) were to be seen before excavations were begun for the present canal. At this time the city was thoroughly Roman. Hence, the many Latin names in the New Testament: Lucius, Tertius, Gaius, Erastus, Quartus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,\'21-23\');">Ro 16:21-23</a>), Crispus, Titus Justus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,7,8);">Ac 18:7-8</a>), Fortunatus, Achaicus (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,17);">1Co 16:17</a>). According to the testimony of Dio Chrysostomus, Corinth had become in the 2nd century of our era the richest city in Greece. Its monuments and public buildings and art treasures are described in detail by Pausanias.<P>The church in Corinth consisted principally of non-Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,2);">1Co 12:2</a>). Paul had no intention at first of making the city a base of operations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,\'1-\'">Ac 18:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,9,10);">16:9-10</a>); for he wished to return to Thessalonica (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,17,18);">1Th 2:17-18</a>). His plans were changed by a revelation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,9,10);">Ac 18:9-10</a>). The Lord commanded him to speak boldly, and he did so, remaining in the city eighteen months. Finding strong opposition in the synagogue he left the Jews and went to the Gentiles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,6);">Ac 18:6</a>). Nevertheless, Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue and his household were believers and baptisms were numerous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,8);">Ac 18:8</a>); but no Corinthians were baptized by Paul himself except Crispus, Gaius and some of the household of Stephanas (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,14,16);">1Co 1:14, 16</a>) "the firstfruits of Achaia" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,15);">1Co 16:15</a>). One of these, Gaius, was Paul\'s host the next time he visited the city (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,23);">Ro 16:23</a>). Silas and Timothy, who had been left at Berea, came on to Corinth about 45 days after Paul\'s arrival. It was at this time that Paul wrote his first Epistle to the Thessalonians (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',3,6);">1Th 3:6</a>). During Gallio\'s administration the Jews accused Paul, but the proconsul refused to allow the case to be brought to trial. This decision must have been looked upon with favor by a large majority of the Corinthians, who had a great dislike for the Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,17);">Ac 18:17</a>). Paul became acquainted also with Priscilla and Aquila (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,18,26);">Ac 18:18, 26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,3);">Ro 16:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',4,19);">2Ti 4:19</a>), and later they accompanied him to Ephesus. Within a few years after Paul\'s first visit to Corinth the Christians had increased so rapidly that they made quite a large congregation, but it was composed mainly of the lower classes: they were neither \'learned, influential, nor of noble birth\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,26);">1Co 1:26</a>).<P>Paul probably left Corinth to attend the celebration of the feast at Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,21);">Ac 18:21</a>). Little is known of the history of the church in Corinth after his departure. Apollos came from Ephesus with a letter of recommendation to the brethren in Achaia (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,27);">Ac 18:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,\'1-\'">2Co 3:1</a>); and he exercised a powerful influence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,27,28);">Ac 18:27-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,12);">1Co 1:12</a>); and Paul came down later from Macedonia. His first letter to the Corinthians was written from Ephesus. Both Titus and Timothy were sent to Corinth from Ephesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,13,15);">2Co 7:13, 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,17);">1Co 4:17</a>), and Timothy returned by land, meeting Paul in Macedonia (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,1);">2Co 1:1</a>), who visited Greece again in 56-57 or 57-58.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Leake, Travels in the Morea, IlI, 229-304; Peloponnesiaca, 392ff; Curtius, Peloponnesos, II, 514ff; Clark, Peloponnesus, 42-61; Conybeare and Howson, The Life and Epistles\' of Paul, chapter xii; Ramsay, "Corinth" (in HDB); Holm, History of Greece, I, 286ff; II, 142, and 306-16; III, 31-44, and 283; IV, 221, 251, 347 and 410-12.``71';
isbe[2327]='Corinthians, First Epistle to the`ko-rin\'-thi-anz:<P><b>I. AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES</b><P class="in15">1. External Evidence<P class="in15">2. Internal Evidence<P class="in15">3. Consent of Criticism<P class="in15">4. Ultra-Radical Attack (Dutch School)<P><b>II. TEXT OF 1 AND 2 CORINTHIANS</b><P class="in15">Integrity of 1 Corinthians<P><b>III. PAUL\'S PREVIOUS RELATIONS WITH CORINTH</b><P class="in15">1. Corinth in 55 AD<P class="in15">2. Founding of the Church<P><b>IV. DATE OF THE EPISTLE</b><P><b>V. OCCASION OF THE EPISTLE</b><P class="in15">1. A Previous Letter<P class="in15">2. Letter from Corinth<P><b>VI. CONTENTS</b><P class="in15">1. General Character<P class="in15">2. Order and Division<P class="in15">3. Outline<P class="in30">(1) <span class="noTag">1 Corinthians 1-6</span><P class="in30">(2) <span class="noTag"> 1 Corinthians 7-10</span><P class="in30">(3) <span class="noTag">1 Corinthians 11-16</span><P><b>VII. DISTINGUISHING FEATURES</b><P class="in15">1. Party Spirit<P class="in15">2. Christian Conscience<P class="in15">3. Power of the Cross<P><b>LITERATURE</b></p><hr /><P>I. Authenticity of the Two Epistles.<P>1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans, all belong to the period of Paul\'s third missionary journey. They are the most remarkable of his writings, and are usually distinguished as the four great or principal epistles; a distinction which not only is a tribute to their high originality and intrinsic worth, but also indicates the extremely favorable opinion which critics of almost all schools have held regarding their authenticity. Throughout the centuries the tradition has remained practically unbroken, that they contain the very pectus Paulinum, the mind and heart of the great apostle of the Gentiles, and preserve to the church an impregnable defense of historical Christianity. What has to be said of their genuineness applies almost equally to both.<P>1. External Evidence:<P>The two epistles have a conspicuous place in the most ancient lists of Pauline writings. In the Muratorian Fragment (circa 170) they stand at the head of the nine epistles addressed to churches, and are declared to have been written to forbid heretical schism (primum omnium Corinthiis schisma haeresis intredicens); and in Marcion\'s Apostolicon (circa 140) they stand second to Gal. They are also clearly attested in the most important writings of the subapostolic age, e.g. by Clement of Rome (circa 95), generally regarded as the friend of the apostle mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,3);">Php 4:3</a>; Ignatius (Ad Ephes., chapter xviii, second decade of 2nd century); Polycarp (chapters ii, vi, xi, first half of 2nd century), a disciple of John; and Justin Martyr (born at close of let century); while the Gnostic Ophites (2nd century) were clearly familiar with both epistles (compare Westcott, Canon, passim, and Index II; also Charteris, Canonicity, 222-224, where most of the original passages are brought together). The witness of Clement is of the highest importance. Ere the close of the let century he himself wrote a letter to the Corinthians, in which (chapter xlvii, Lightfoot\'s edition, 144) he made a direct appeal to the authority of 1 Cor: "Take up the letter of Paul the blessed apostle; what did he write to you first in the beginning of the gospel? Verily he gave you spiritual direction regarding himself, Cephas, and Apollos, for even then you were dividing yourselves into parties." It would be impossible to desire more explicit external testimony.<P>2. Internal Evidence:<P>Within themselves both epistles are replete with marks of genuineness. They are palpitating human documents, with the ring of reality from first to last. They admirably harmonize with the independent narrative of Acts; in the words of Schleiermacher (Einltg., 148), "The whole fits together and completes itself perfectly, and yet each of the documents follows its own course, and the data contained in the one cannot be borrowed from those of the other." Complex and difficult as the subjects and circumstances sometimes are, and varying as the moods of the writer are in dealing with them, there is a naturalness that compels assent to his good faith. The very difficulty created for a modern reader by the incomplete and allusive character of some of the references is itself a mark of genuineness rather than the opposite; just what would most likely be the ease in a free and intimate correspondence between those who understood one another in the presence of immediate facts which needed no careful particularization; but what would almost as certainly have been avoided in a fictitious composition. Indeed a modicum of literary sense suffices to forbid classification among the pseudepigrapha. To take but a few instances from many, it is impossible to read such passages as those conveying the remonstrance in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,\'1-\');">1Co 9</a>, the alternations of anxiety and relief in connection with the meeting of Titus in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'1-\');">2Co 2</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>, or the ever-memorable passage which begins at <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,24);">2Co 11:24</a> of the same epistle: "Of the Jews five times received I," ere, without feeling that the hypothesis of fiction becomes an absurdity. No man ever wrote out of the heart if this writer did not. The truth is that theory of pseudonymity leaves far more difficulties behind it than any it is supposed to solve. The unknown and unnamable literary prodigy of the 2nd century, who in the most daring and artistic manner gloried in the fanciful creation of those minute and life-like details which have imprinted themselves indelibly on the memory and imagination of mankind, cannot be regarded as other than a chimera. No one knows where or when he lived, or in what shape or form. But if the writings are the undoubted rescripts of fact, to whose life and personality do they fit themselves more exquisitely than to those of the man whose name stands at their head, and whose compositions they claim to be? They suit beyond compare the apostle of the missionary journeys, the tender, eager, indomitable "prisoner of the Lord," and no other. No other that has even been suggested is more than the mere shadow of a name, and no two writers have as yet seriously agreed even as to the shadow. The pertinent series of questions with which Godet (Intro to New Testament; Studies on the Epistles, 305) concludes his remarks on the genuineness may well be repeated: "What use was it to explain at length in the 2nd century a change in a plan of the journey, which, supposing it was real, had interest only for those whom the promised visit of the apostle personally concerned? When the author speaks of five hundred persons who had seen the risen Christ, of whom the most part were still alive at the time when he was writing, is he telling his readers a mere story that would resemble a bad joke? What was the use of discussing at length and giving detailed rules on the exercise of the glossolalia at a time when that gift no longer existed, so to say, in the church? Why make the apostle say: \'We who shall be alive (at the moment of the Parousia)\' at a time when everyone knew that he was long dead? In fine, what church would have received without opposition into its archives, as an epistle of the apostle, half a century after his death, a letter unknown till then, and filled with reproaches most severe and humiliating to it?"<P>3. Consent of Criticism:<P>One is not surprised, therefore, that even the radical criticism of the 19th century cordially accepted the Corinthian epistles and their companions in the great group. The men who founded that criticism were under no conceivable constraint in such a conclusion, save the constraint of obvious and incontrovertible fact. The Tubingen school, which doubted or denied the authenticity of all the rest of the epistles, frankly acknowledged the genuineness of these. This also became the general verdict of the "critical" school which followed that of Tubingen, and which, in many branches, has included the names of the leading German scholars to this day. F. C. Baur\'s language (Paul, I, 246) was: "There has never been the slightest suspicion of unauthenticity cast on these four epistles, and they bear so incontestably the character of Pauline originality, that there is no conceivable ground for the assertion of critical doubts in their case." Renan (St. Paul, Introduction, V) was equally emphatic: "They are incontestable, and uncontested."<P>4. Ultra-Radical Attack (Dutch School):<P>Reference, however, must be made to the ultra-radical attack which has gathered some adherents, especially among Dutch scholars, during the last 25 years. As early as 1792 Evanson, a retired English clergyman, rejected Rome on the ground that, according to Acts, no church existed in Rome in Paul\'s day. Bruno Bauer (1850-51-52) made a more sweeping attack, relegating the whole of the four principal epistles to the close of the 2nd century. His views received little attention, until, in 1886 onward, they were taken up and extended by a series of writers in Holland, Pierson and Naber, and Loman, followed rapidly by Steck of Bern, Volter of Amsterdam, and above all by Van Manen of Leyden. According to these writers, with slight modifications of view among themselves, it is very doubtful if Paul or Christ ever really existed; if they did, legend has long since made itself master of their personalities, and in every case what borders on the supernatural is to be taken as the criterion of the legendary. The epistles were written in the 1st quarter of the 2nd century, and as Paul, so far as he was known, was believed to be a reformer of anti-Judaic sympathies, he was chosen as the patron of the movement, and the writings were published in his name. The aim of the whole series was to further the interests of a supposed circle of clever and elevated men, who, partly imbued with Hebrew ideals, and partly with the speculations of Greek and Alexandrian philosophy, desired the spread of a universalistic Christianity and true Gnosis. For this end they perceived it necessary that Jewish legalism should be neutralized, and that the narrow national element should be expelled from the Messianic idea. Hence, the epistles The principles on which the main contentions of the critics are based may be reduced to two:<P>(1) that there are relations in the epistles so difficult to understand that, since we cannot properly understand them, the epistles are not trustworthy; and<P>(2) that the religious and ecclesiastical development is so great that not merely 20 or 30 years, but 70 or 80 more, are required, if we are to be able rationally to conceive it: to accept the situation at an earlier date is simply to accept what cannot possibly have been.<P>It is manifest that on such principles it is possible to establish what one will, and that any historical literature might be proved untrustworthy, and reshaped according to the subjective idiosyncrasies of the critic. The underlying theory of intellectual development is too rigid, and is quite oblivious of the shocks it receives from actual facts, by the advent in history from time to time of powerful, compelling, and creative personalities, who rather mould their age than are moulded by it. None have poured greater ridicule on this "pseudo-Kritik" than the representatives of the advanced school in Germany whom it rather expected to carry with it, and against whom it complains bitterly that they do not take it seriously. On the whole the vagaries of the Dutch school have rather confirmed than shaken belief in these epistles; and one may freely accept Ramsay\'s view (HDB, I, 484) as expressing the modern mind regarding them, namely, that they are "the unimpeached and unassailable nucleus of admitted Pauline writings." (Reference to the following will give a sufficiently adequate idea of the Dutch criticism and the replies that have been made to it: Van Manen, EB, article "Paul," and Expository Times, IX, 205, 257, 314; Knowling, Witness of the Epistles; Clemen, Einheitlichkeit der p. B.; Sanday and Headlam, Romans, ICC; Godet, Julicher and Zahn, in their Introductions; Schmiedel and Lipsius in the Hand-Commentar.)<P>II. Text of 1 and 2 Corinthians:<P>Integrity of 1 Corinthians:<P>The text of both epistles comes to us in the most ancient VSS, the Syriac (Peshito), the Old Latin, and the Egyptian all of which were in very early use, undoubtedly by the 3rd century. It is complete in the great Greek uncials: Codex Sinaiticus (original scribe) and a later scribe, 4th century, Codex Vaticanus (B, 4th century), Codex Alexandrinus (A, 5th century, minus two verses, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',4,13);">2Co 4:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,7);">12:7</a>), and very nearly complete in Codex Ephraemi (C, 5th century), and in the Greek-Latin Claromontanus (D, 6th century); as well as in numerous cursives. In both cases the original has been well preserved, and no exegetical difficulties of high importance are presented. (Reference should be made to the Introduction in Sanday and Headlam\'s Romans, ICC (1896), where section 7 gives valuable information concerning the text, not only of Roman, but of the Pauline epistles generally; also to the recent edition (Oxford, 1910), New Testament Graecae, by Souter, where the various readings of the text used in the Revised Version (British and American) (1881) are conveniently exhibited.) On the whole the text of 1Co flows on consistently, only at times, in a characteristic fashion, winding back upon itself, and few serious criticisms are made on its unity, although the case is different in this respect with its companion epistle Some writers, on insufficient grounds, believe that 1 Corinthians contains relics of a previous epistle (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,9);">1Co 5:9</a>), e. g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,\'17-24\');">1Co 7:17-24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,\'1-\');">9:1</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,\'1-22\');">10:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,\'1-55\');">15:1-55</a>.<P>III. Paul\'s Previous Relations with Corinth.<P>1. Corinth in 55 AD:<P>When, in the course of his 2nd missionary journey, Paul left Athens (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,1);">Ac 18:1</a>), he sailed westward to Cenchrea, and entered Corinth "in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,3);">1Co 2:3</a>). He was doubtless alone, although Silas and Timothy afterward joined him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,5);">Ac 18:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,19);">2Co 1:19</a>). The ancient city of Corinth had been utterly laid in ruins when Rome subjugated Greece in the middle of the 2nd century BC. But in the year 46 BC Caesar had caused it to be rebuilt and colonized in the Roman manner, and during the century that had elapsed it had prospered and grown enormously. Its population at this time has been estimated at between 600,000 and 700,000, by far the larger portion of whom were slaves. Its magnificent harbors, Cenchrea and Lechaeum, opening to the commerce of East and West, were crowded with ships, and its streets with travelers and merchants from almost every country under heaven. Even in that old pagan world the reputation of the city was bad; it has been compared (Baring-Gould, Study of Paul, 241) to an amalgam of new-market, Chicago and Paris, and probably it contained the worst features of each. At night it was made hideous by the brawls and lewd songs of drunken revelry. In the daytime its markets and squares swarmed with Jewish peddlers, foreign traders, sailors, soldiers, athletes in training, boxers, wrestlers, charioteers, racing-men, betting-men, courtesans, slaves, idlers and parasites of every description. The corrupting worship of Aphrodite, with its hordes of hierodouloi, was dominant, and all over the Greek-Roman world, "to behave as a Corinthian" was a proverbial synonym for leading a low, shameless and immoral life. Very naturally such a polluted and idolatrous environment accounts for much that has to be recorded of the semi-pagan and imperfect life of many of the early converts.<P>2. Founding of the Church:<P>Paul was himself the founder of the church in Corinth (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,6,10);">1Co 3:6, 10</a>). Entering the city with anxiety, and yet with almost audacious hopefulness, he determined to know nothing among its people save Jesus Christ and Him crucified (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,2);">1Co 2:2</a>). Undoubtedly he was conscious that the mission of the Cross here approached its crisis. If it could abide here, it could abide anywhere. At first he confined himself to working quietly at his trade, and cultivating the friendship of Aquila and Priscilla (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,2);">Ac 18:2</a>f); then he opened his campaign in the synagogue where he persuaded both Jews and Greeks, and ultimately, when opposition became violent, carried it on in the house of Titus Justus, a proselyte. He made deep impressions, and gradually gathered round him a number who were received into the faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,7,8);">Ac 18:7-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'14-16\');">1Co 1:14-16</a>). The converts were drawn largely but not entirely from the lower or servile classes (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,26);">1Co 1:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,21);">7:21</a>); they included Crispus and Sosthenes, rulers of the synagogue, Gaius, and Stephanas with his household, "the firstfruits of Achaia" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,15);">1Co 16:15</a>). He regarded himself joyfully as the father of this community (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,14,15);">1Co 4:14-15</a>), every member of which seemed to him like his own child.<P>IV. Date of the Epistle.<P>After a sojourn of eighteen months (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,11);">Ac 18:11</a>) in this fruitful field, Paul departed, most probably in the year 52 (compare Turner, article "Chron. New Testament," HDB, I, 422ff), and, having visited Jerusalem and returned to Asia Minor (third journey), established himself for a period of between two and three years (trietia, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,31);">Ac 20:31</a>) in Ephesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,18);">Ac 18:18</a> onward). It was during his stay there that his epistle was written, either in the spring (pre- Pentecost, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,8);">1Co 16:8</a>) of the year in which he left, 55; or, if that does not give sufficient interval for a visit and a letter to Corinth, which there is considerable ground for believing intervened between 1Co and the departure from Ephesus, then in the spring of the preceding year, 54. This would give ample time for the conjectured events, and there is no insuperable reason against it. Pauline chronology is a subject by itself, but the suggested dates for the departure from Ephesus, and for the writing of 1 Corinthians, really fluctuate between the years 53 and 57. Harnack (Gesch. der altchrist. Litt., II; Die Chron., I) and McGiffert (Apos Age) adopt the earlier date; Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveler), 56; Lightfoot (Bib. Essays) and Zahn (Einl.), 57; Turner (ut supra), 55. Many regard 57 as too late, but Robertson (HDB, I, 485-86) still adheres to it.<P>V. Occasion of the Epistle.<P>1. A Previous Letter:<P>After Paul\'s departure from Corinth, events moved rapidly, and far from satisfactorily. He was quite cognizant of them. The distance from Ephesus was not great<61>about eight days\' journey by sea<65>and in the constant coming and going between the cities news of what was transpiring must frequently have come to his ears. Members of the household of Chloe are distinctly mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,11);">1Co 1:11</a>) as having brought tidings of the contentions that prevailed, and there were no doubt other informants. Paul was so concerned by what he heard that he sent Timothy on a conciliatory mission with many commendations (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,17);">1Co 4:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,10);">16:10</a>f), although the present epistle probably reached Corinth first. He had also felt impelled, in a letter (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,9);">1Co 5:9</a>) which is now lost, to send earnest warning against companying with the immoral. Moreover, Apollos, after excellent work in Corinth, had come to Ephesus, and was received as a brother by the apostle (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,5,6);">1Co 3:5-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,12);">16:12</a>). Equally welcome was a deputation consisting of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,17);">1Co 16:17</a>), from whom the fullest information could be gained, and who were the probable bearers of a letter from the church of Corinth itself (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,1);">1Co 7:1</a>), appealing for advice and direction on a number of points.<P>2. Letter from Corinth:<P>This letter has not been preserved, but it was evidently the immediate occasion of our epistle, and its tenor is clearly indicated by the nature of the apostle\'s reply. (The letter, professing to be this letter to Paul, and its companion, professing to be Paul\'s own lost letter just referred to, which deal with Gnostic heresies, and were for long accepted by the Syrian and Armenian churches, are manifestly apocryphal. (Compare Stanley\'s Corinthians, Appendix; Harnack\'s Gesch. der altchrist. Litt., I, 37-39, and II, 506-8; Zahn, Einleitung., I, 183-249; Sanday, Encyclopedia Biblica, I, 906-7.) If there be any relic in existence of Paul\'s previous letter, it is possibly to be found in the passage <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,\'14-\');">2Co 6:14</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,1);">7:1</a>; at all events that passage may be regarded as reminiscent of its style and message.) So that 1 Corinthians is no bow drawn at a venture. It treats of a fully understood, and, on the whole, of a most unhappy situation. The church had broken into factions, and was distracted by party cries. Some of its members were living openly immoral lives, and discipline was practically in abeyance. Others had quarrels over which they dragged one another into the heathen courts. Great differences of opinion had also arisen with regard to marriage and the social relations generally; with regard to banquets and the eating of food offered to idols; with regard to the behavior of women in the assemblies, to the Lord\'s Supper and the love-feasts, to the use and value of spiritual gifts, and with regard to the hope of the resurrection. The apostle was filled with grief and indignation, which the too complacent tone of the Corinthians only intensified. They discussed questions in a lofty, intellectual way, without seeming to perceive their real drift, or the life and spirit which lay imperiled at their heart. Resisting the impulse to visit them "with a rod" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,21);">1Co 4:21</a>), the apostle wrote the present epistle, and dispatched it, if not by the hands of Stephanas and his comrades, most probably by the hands of Titus.<P>VI. Contents.<P>1. General Character:<P>In its general character the epistle is a strenuous writing, masterly in its restraint in dealing with opposition, firm in its grasp of ethical and spiritual principles, and wise and faithful in their application. It is calm, full of reasoning, clear and balanced in judgment; very varied in its lights and shadows, in its kindness, its gravity, its irony. It moves with firm tread among the commonest themes, but also rises easily into the loftiest spheres of thought and vision, breaking again and again into passages of glowing and rhythmical eloquence. It rebukes error, exposes and condemns sin, solves doubts, upholds and encourages faith, and all in a spirit of the utmost tenderness and love, full of grace and truth. It is broad in its outlook, penetrating in its insight, unending in its interest and application.<P>2. Order and Division:<P>It is also very orderly in its arrangement, so that it is not difficult to follow the writer as he advances from point to point. Weizsacker (Apos Age, I, 324-25) suggestively distinguishes the matter into<P>(1) subjects introduced by the letter from Corinth, and<P>(2) those on which Paul had obtained information otherwise.<P>He includes three main topics in the first class: marriage, meat offered to idols and spiritual gifts (there is a fourth<74>the logia or collection, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,1);">1Co 16:1</a>); six in the second class: the factions, the case of incest, the lawsuits, the free customs of the women, the abuse connected with the Supper and the denial of the resurrection. It is useful, however, to adhere to the sequence of the epistle In broadly outlining the subject-matter we may make a threefold division:<P>(1) Chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'1-\');">1-6</A>;<P>(2) Chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,\'1-\');">7-10; and<P>(3) Chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,\'1-\');">11</A> through end.<P>3. Outline:<P>(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'1-\');">1 Corinthians 1-6</a>:<P>After salutation, in which he associates Sosthenes with himself, and thanksgiving for the grace given to the Corinthians (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'1-9\');">1Co 1:1-9</a>), Paul immediately begins (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'10-13\');">1Co 1:10-13</a>) to refer to the internal divisions among them, and to the unworthy and misguided party cries that had arisen. (Many theories have been formed as to the exact significance of the so-called "Christus-party," a party whose danger becomes more obvious in 2 Cor. Compare Meyer- Heinrici, Comm., 8th edition; Godet, Intro, 250ff; Stanley, Corinthians, 29-30; Farrar, Paul, chapter xxxi; Pfleiderer, Paulinism, II, 28-31; Weiss, Intro, I, 259-65; Weizsacker, Apos Age, I, 325-33, and 354ff. Weizsacker holds that the name indicates exclusive relation to an authority, while Baur and Pfleiderer argue that it was a party watchword (virtually Petrine) taken to bring out the apostolic inferiority of Paul. On the other hand a few scholars maintain that the name does not, strictly speaking, indicate a party at all but rather designates those who were disgusted at the display of all party spirit, and with whom Paul was in hearty sympathy. See McGiffert, Apos Age, 295-97.) After denouncing this petty partisanship, Paul offers an elaborate defense of his own ministry, declaring the power and wisdom of God in the gospel of the Cross (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,\'14-\');">1:14</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,\'1-16\');">2:16</a>), returning in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,\'1-\');">3</a> to the spirit of faction, showing its absurdity and narrowness in face of the fullness of the Christian heritage in "all things" that belong to them as belonging to Christ; and once more defending his ministry in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,\'1-\');">4</a>, making a touching appeal to his readers as his "beloved children," whom he had begotten through the gospel. In chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,\'1-\');">5</a> he deals with the case of a notorious offender, guilty of incest, whom they unworthily harbor in their midst, and in the name of Christ demands that they should expel him from the church, pointing out at the same time that it is against the countenancing of immorality within the church membership that he specially warns, and had previously warned in his former epistle Ch <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',6,\'1-\');">6</a> deals with the shamefulness of Christian brethren haling one another to the heathen courts, and not rather seeking the settlement of their differences within themselves; reverting once more in the closing verses to the subject of unchastity, which irrepressibly haunts him as he thinks of them.<P>(2) <span class="noTag">1 Corinthians 7-10</span>:<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,\'1-\');">1Co 7</a> he begins to reply to two of the matters on which the church had expressly consulted him in its ep., and which he usually induces by the phrase peri de, "now concerning." The first of these bears (chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>) upon celibacy and marriage, including the case of "mixed" marriage. These questions he treats quite frankly, yet with delicacy and circumspection, always careful to distinguish between what he has received as the direct word of the Lord, and what he only delivers as his own opinion, the utterance of his own sanctified common-sense, yet to which the good spirit within him gives weight. The second matter on which advice was solicited, questions regarding eidolothuta, meats offered to idols, he discusses in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',8,\'1-\');">8</a>, recurring to it again in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,\'1-\');">10</a> to end. The scruples and casuistries involved he handles with excellent wisdom, and lays down a rule for the Christian conscience of a far-reaching kind, happily expressed: "All things are lawful; but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful; but not all things edify. Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor\'s good" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,23,24);">10:23-24</a>). By lifting their differences into the purer atmosphere of love and duty, he causes them to dissolve away. Chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,\'1-\');">9</a> contains another notable defense of his apostleship, in which he asserts the principle that the Christian ministry has a claim for its support on those to whom it ministers, although in his own case he deliberately waived his right, that no challenge on such a matter should be possible among them. The earlier portion of chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,\'1-\');">10</a> contains a reference to Jewish idolatry and sacramental abuse, in order that the evils that resulted might point a moral, and act as a solemn warning to Christians in relation to their own rites.<P>(3) <span class="noTag">1 Corinthians 11-16</span>:<P>The third section deals with certain errors and defects that had crept into the inner life and observances of the church, also with further matters on which the Corinthians sought guidance, namely, spiritual gifts and the collection for the saints. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,\'1-16\');">1Co 11:1-16</a> has regard to the deportment of women and their veiling in church, a matter which seems to have occasioned some difficulty, and which Paul deals with in a manner quite his own; passing thereafter to treat of graver and more disorderly affairs, gross abuses in the form of gluttony and drunkenness at the Lord\'s Supper, which leads him, after severe censure, to make his classic reference to that sacred ordinance (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',20,\'1-\');">20 to end</a>). Chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,\'1-\');">12</a> sets forth the diversity, yet true unity, of spiritual gifts, and the confusion and jealousy to which a false conception of them inevitably leads, obscuring that "most excellent way," the love which transcends them all, which never faileth, the greatest of the Christian graces, whose praise he chants in language of surpassing beauty (chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,\'1-\');">13</a>). He strives also, in the following chapter, to correct the disorder arising from the abuse of the gift of tongues, many desiring to speak at once, and many speaking only a vain babble which no one could understand, thinking themselves thereby highly gifted. It is not edifying: "I had rather," he declares, "speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,19);">1Co 14:19</a>). Thereafter follows the immortal chapter on the resurrection, which he had learned that some denied (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,12);">1Co 15:12</a>). He anchors the faith to the resurrection of Christ as historic fact, abundantly attested (verses <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,\'3-8\');">3-8</a>), shows how all-essential it is to the Christian hope (verses <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,\'13-19\');">13-19</a>), and then proceeds by reasoning and analogy to brush aside certain naturalistic objections to the great doctrine, "then they that are Christ\'s, at his coming" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,23);">23</a>), when this mortal shall have put on immortality, and death be swallowed up in victory (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,54);">54</a>). The closing chapter gives directions as to the collection for the saints in Jerusalem, on which his heart was deeply set, and in which he hoped the Corinthians would bear a worthy share. He promises to visit them, and even to tarry the winter with them. He then makes a series of tender personal references, and so brings the great epistle to a close.<P>VII. Distinguishing Features.<P>It will be seen that there are passages in the epistle of great doctrinal and historical importance, especially with reference to the Person of Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Eucharist and the Resurrection; also many that illuminate the nature of the religious meetings and services of the early church (compare particularly on these, Weizsacker, Apos Age, II, 246ff). A lurid light is cast on many of the errors and evils that not unnaturally still clung to those who were just emerging from paganism, and much allowance has to be made for the Corinthian environment. The thoroughness with which the apostle pursues the difficulties raised into their relations and details, and the wide scope of matters which he subjects to Christian scrutiny and criterion, are also significant. Manifestly he regarded the gospel as come to fill, not a part, but the whole, of life; to supply principles that follow the believers to their homes, to the most secluded sanctum there, out again to the world, to the market-place, the place of amusement, of temptation, of service, of trial, of worship and prayer; and all in harmony with knowing nothing "save Jesus Christ, and him crucified." For Paul regards that not as a restriction, but as a large and expansive principle. He sets the cross on an eminence so high that its shadow covers the whole activities of human life.<P>1. Party Spirit:<P>Three broad outstanding features of a practical kind may be recognized. The first is the earnest warning it conveys against a factious spirit as inimical to the Christian life. The Corinthians were imbued with the party spirit of Greek democracy, and were infected also by the sporting spirit of the great games that entered so largely into their existence. They transferred these things to the church. They listened to their teachers with itching ears, not as men who wished to learn, but as partisans who sought occasion either to applaud or to condemn. Paul recognizes that, though they are not dividing on deep things of the faith, they are giving way to "schisms" of a pettier and perhaps even more perilous kind, that appeal to the lowest elements in human nature, that cause scandal in the eyes of men and inflict grievous wounds on the Body of Christ. In combating this spirit he takes occasion to go below the surface, and to reveal the foundations of true Christian unity. That must simply be "in Christ." And this is true even if the divergence should be on higher and graver things. Any unity in such a case, still possible to cherish, must be a unity in Christ. None can be unchurched who build on Him; none severed from the true and catholic faith, who confess with their lips and testify with their lives that He is Lord.<P>2. Christian Conscience:<P>The epistle also renders a high ethical service in the rules it lays down for the guidance of the Christian conscience. In matters where the issue is clearly one of the great imperatives, the conflict need never be protracted. An earnest man will see his way. But beyond these, or not easily reducible to them, there are many matters that cause perplexity and doubt. Questions arise regarding things that do not seem to be wrong in themselves, yet whose abuse or the offense they give to others, may well cause debate. Meat offered to idols, and then brought to table, was a stumbling-block to many Corinthian Christians. They said: "If we eat, it is consenting to idolatry; we dare not partake." But there were some who rose to a higher level. They perceived that this was a groundless scruple, for an idol is nothing at all, and the meat is not affected by the superstition. Accordingly, their higher and more rational view gave them liberty and left their conscience free. But was this really all that they had to consider? Some say: "Certainly"; and Paul acknowledges that this is undoubtedly the law of individual freedom. But it is not the final answer. There has not entered into it a consideration of the mind of Christ. Christian liberty must be willing to subject itself to the law of love. Granted that a neighbor is often short-sighted and over-scrupulous, and that it would be good neither for him nor for others to suffer him to become a moral dictator; yet we are not quite relieved. The brother may be weak, but the very claim of his weakness may be strong. We may not ride over his scruples roughshod. To do so would be to put ourselves wrong even more seriously. And if the matter is one that is manifestly fraught with peril to him, conscience may be roused to say, as the apostle says: "Wherefore, if meat maketh my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore."<P>3. Power of the Cross:<P>A third notable feature of the epistle is its exaltation of the cross of Christ as the power and wisdom of God unto salvation. It was the force that began to move and unsettle, to lift and change from its base, the life of that old heathen world. It was neither Paul, nor Apollos, nor Cephas who accomplished that colossal task, but the preaching of the crucified Christ. The Christianity of Corinth and of Europe began with the gospel of Calvary and the open tomb. It can never with impunity draw away from these central facts. The river broadens and deepens as it flows, but it is never possible for it to sever itself from the living fountain from which it springs.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The following writers will be found most important and helpful:<P>1. On Matters of Introduction (Both Epistles):<P>Holtzmann, Weiss, Hausrath, Harnack, Pfleiderer, Godet, Weizsacker, Julicher, Zahn, Salmon, Knowling, McGiffert, J. H. Kennedy, Ramsay, Sabatier, Farrar, Dobschutz, Robertson (Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes)), Sanday (Encyclopaedia Biblica), Plummer (DB), Ropes (Encyclopedia Brittanica, 11th edition).<P>2. Commentaries and Lectures (on 1 Corinthians or Both):<P>Meyer-Heinrici, Godet, T. C. Edwards, Hodge, Beet, Ellicott, Schmiedel (Hand-Comm.), Evans (Speakers\' Commentary), Farrar (Pulpit Commentary), Lightfoot (chapters i through vii in Biblical Ess.), Lias (Cambridge Greek Testament), McFadyen, F. W. Robertson, Findlay (Expos. Greek Test.); and on 2 Corinthians alone: Klopper, Waite (Speakers\' Comm.), Denney (Expos. Bible), Bernard (Expos. Greek Test.).<P>3. Ancient Writers and Special Articles:<P>For ancient writers and special articles, the list at close of Plummer\'s article in Smith, Dictionary of the Bible should be consulted.``160';
isbe[2328]='Corinthians, Second Epistle to the`<p><b>I. TEXT, AUTHENTICITY AND DATE</b><P class="in15">1. Internal Evidence<P class="in15">2. External Evidence<P class="in15">3. Date<P><b>II. RESUME OF EVENTS</b><P><b>III. THE NEW SITUATION</b><P class="in15">1. The Offender<P class="in15">2. The False Teachers<P class="in15">3. The Painful Visit<P class="in15">4. The Severe Letter<P><b>IV. HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION</b><P><b>V. INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE</b><P class="in15">1. 2 Corintians 6:14-7:1<P class="in15">2. 2 Corintians 10:1-13:10<P><b>VI. CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE</b><P class="in15">1. <span class="noTag">2 Corintians 1-7</A><P class="in15">2. 2 Corintians 8-9<P class="in15">3. <span class="noTag">2 Corintians 10-13</a><P><b>VII. VALUE OF THE EPISTLE</b><p><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Text, Authenticity and Date.<P>1. Internal Evidence:<P>Compare what has already been said in the preceding article. In the two important 5th-century uncials, Codex Alexandrinus (A) and Codex Ephraemi (C), portions of the text are lacking. As to the genuineness internal evidence very vividly attests it. The distinctive elements of Pauline theology and eschatology, expressed in familiar Pauline terms, are manifest throughout. Yet the epistle is not doctrinal or didactic, but an intensely personal document. Its absorbing interest is in events which were profoundly agitating Paul and the Corinthians at the time, straining their relations to the point of rupture, and demanding strong action on Paul\'s part. Our imperfect knowledge of the circumstances necessarily hinders a complete comprehension, but the references to these events and to others in the personal history of the apostle are so natural, and so manifestly made in good faith, that no doubt rises in the reader\'s mind but that he is in the sphere of reality, and that the voice he hears is the voice of the man whose heart and nerves were being torn by the experiences through which he was passing. However scholars may differ as to the continuity and integrity of the text, there is no serious divergence among them in the opinion that all parts of the epistle are genuine writings of the apostle.<P>2. External Evidence:<P>Externally, the testimony of the sub-apostolic age, though not so frequent or precise as in the case of 1 Corinthians, is still sufficiently clear to establish the existence and use of the epistle in the 2nd century Clement of Rome is silent when he might rather have been expected to use the epistle (compare Kennedy, Second and Third Corinthians, 142ff); but it is quoted by Polycarp (Ad Phil., ii.4 and vi.1), and in the Epistle to Diognetus 5 12, while it is amply attested to by Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria.<P>3. Date:<P>It was written from Macedonia (probably from Philippi) either in the autumn of the same year as that in which 1 Corinthians was written, 54 or 55 AD, or in the autumn of the succeeding year.<P>II. Resume of Events.<P>Great difficulty exists as to the circumstances in which the epistle was written, and as to the whole situation between 1 and 2 Corinthians. In 1 Corinthians Paul had intimated his intention of visiting the Corinthians and wintering with them, coming to them through Macedonia (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,\'5-7\');">1Co 16:5-7</a>; compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,21);">Ac 19:21</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,15,16);">2Co 1:15-16</a> he refers to a somewhat different plan, Corinth<74>Macedonia<69>Corinth<74>Judaea; and describes this return from Macedonia to Corinth as a second or double benefit. But if this plan, on which he and his friends had counted, had not been entirely carried out, it had been for good reason (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,17);">2Co 1:17</a>), and not due to mere fickleness or light-hearted change to suit his own convenience. It was because he would "spare" them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,23);">2Co 1:23</a>), and not come to them "again with sorrow" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,1);">2Co 2:1</a>). That is, he had been with them, but there had been such a profound disturbance in their relations that he dared not risk a return meantime; instead, he had written a letter to probe and test them, "out of much affliction and anguish of heart...with many tears" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,4);">2Co 2:4</a>) Thank God, this severe letter had accomplished its mission. It had produced sorrow among them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,2);">2Co 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,8,9);">7:8-9</a>) but it had brought their hearts back to him with the old allegiance, with great clearing of themselves, and fear and longing and zeal (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,11);">2Co 7:11</a>). There was a period, however, of waiting for knowledge of this issue, which was to him a period of intense anxiety; he had even nervously regretted that he had written as he did (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'5-8\');">2Co 7:5-8</a>). Titus, who had gone as his representative to Corinth, was to return with a report of how this severe letter had been received, and when Titus failed to meet him at Troas <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,13);">2Co 2:13</a>, he had "no relief for his spirit," but pushed on eagerly to Macedonia to encounter him the sooner. Then came the answer, and the lifting of the intolerable burden from his mind. "He that comforteth the lowly, even God, comforted" him (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,6);">2Co 7:6</a>). The Corinthians had been swayed by a godly sorrow and repentance (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,8);">2Co 7:8</a>), and the sky had cleared again with almost unhoped-for brightness. One who had offended (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,5);">2Co 2:5</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,12);">2Co 7:12</a>)<29>but whose offense is not distinctly specified<65>had been disciplined by the church; indeed, in the revulsion of feeling against him, and in sympathy for the apostle, he had been punished so heavily that there was a danger of passing to an extreme, and plunging him into despair (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,7);">2Co 2:7</a>). Paul accordingly pleads for leniency and forgiveness, lest further resentment should lead only to a further and sadder wrong (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'6-11\');">2Co 2:6-11</a>). But in addition to this offender there were others, probably following in his train, who had carried on a relentless attack against the apostle both in his person and in his doctrine. He earnestly defends himself against their contemptuous charges of fleshliness and cowardice (chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">10</a>), and crafty venality (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,16,17);">2Co 12:16-17</a>). Another Jesus is preached, a different spirit, a different gospel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,4);">2Co 11:4</a>). They "commend themselves" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,12);">2Co 10:12</a>), but are false apostles, deceitful workers, ministers of Satan, fashioning themselves into ministers of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,13,14);">2Co 11:13-14</a>). Their attacks are vehemently repelled in an eloquent apologia (chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,\'1-\');">11 </a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,\'1-\');">12</a>), and he declares that when he comes the third time they will not be spared (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,2);">2Co 13:2</a>). Titus, accompanied by other well-known brethren, is again to be the representative of the apostle <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,6,17);">2Co 8:6, 17</a>ff. At no great interval Paul himself followed, thus making his third visit (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,14);">2Co 12:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,1);">13:1</a>), and so far fulfilled his original purpose that he spent the winter peacefully in Corinth (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,2,3);">Ac 20:2-3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,\'25-27\');">Ro 15:25-27</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,23);">1Co 16:23</a>).<P>III. The New Situation.<P>It is manifest that we are in the presence of a new and unexpected situation, whose development is not clearly defined, and concerning which we have elsewhere no source of information. To elucidate it, the chief points requiring attention are:<P>(1) The references to the offender in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'1-\');">2Co 2</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>, and to the false teachers, particularly in the later chapters of the ep.;<P>(2) the painful visit implicitly referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,1);">2:1</a>; and<P>(3) the letter described as written in tears and for a time regretted (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,4);">2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,8);">7:8</a>).<P>1. The Offender:<P>The offender in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,\'1-5\');">1Co 5:1-5</a> had been guilty of incest, and Paul was grieved that the church of Corinth did not regard with horror a crime which even the pagan world would not have tolerated. His judgment on the case was uncompromising and the severest possible<6C>that, in solemn assembly, in the name and with the power of the Lord Jesus, the church should deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. On the other hand, the offender in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,5);">2Co 2:5</a>ff is one who obviously has transgressed less heinously, and in a way more personal to the apostle. The church, roused by the apostle to show whether they indeed cared for him and stood by him (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,9);">2Co 2:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,7);">13:7</a>), had, by a majority, brought censure to bear on this man, and Paul now urged that matters should go no farther, lest an excess of discipline should really end in a triumph of Satan. It is not possible to regard such references as applying to the crime dealt with in 1 Corinthians. Purposely veiled as the statements are, it would yet appear that a personal attack had been made on the apostle; and the "many" in Corinth (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,6);">2Co 2:6</a>), having at length espoused his cause, Paul then deals with the matter in the generous spirit he might have been expected to display. Even if the offender were the same person, which is most improbable, for he can scarcely have been retained in the membership, the language is not language that could have been applied to the earlier case. There has been a new offense in new circumstances. The apostle had been grievously wronged in the presence of the church, and the Corinthians had not spontaneously resented the wrong. That is what wounded the apostle most deeply, and it is to secure their change in this respect that is his gravest concern.<P>2. The False Teachers:<P>Esp. in the later chapters of 2 Corinthians there are, as we have seen, descriptions of an opposition by false teachers that is far beyond anything met with in 1 Corinthians. There indeed we have a spirit of faction, associated with unworthy partiality toward individual preachers, but nothing to lead us to suspect the presence of deep and radical differences undermining the gospel. The general consensus of opinion is that this opposition was of a Judaizing type, organized and fostered by implacable anti-Pauline emissaries from Palestine, who now followed the track of the apostle in Achaia as they did in Galatia. As they arrogated to themselves a peculiar relation to Christ Himself ("Christ\'s men" and "ministers of Christ," <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,7);">2Co 10:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,13);">11:13</a>), it is possible that the Christus-party of 1 Corinthians (and possibly the Cephas-party) may have persisted and formed the nucleus round which these newcomers built up their formidable opposition. One man seems to have been conspicuous as their ring-leader (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,7,11);">2Co 10:7, 11</a>), and to have made himself specially obnoxious to the apostle. In all probability we may take it that he was the offender of <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'1-\');">2Co 2</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>. Under his influence the opposition audaciously endeavored to destroy the gospel of grace by personal attacks upon its most distinguished exponent. Paul was denounced as an upstart and self-seeker, destitute of any apostolic authority, and derided for the contemptible appearance he made in person, in contrast with the swelling words and presumptuous claims of his epistles It is clear, therefore, that a profound religious crisis had arisen among the Corinthians, and that there was a danger of their attachment to Paul and his doctrine being destroyed.<P>3. The Painful Visit:<P><a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,14);">2Co 12:14</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,1,2);">2Co 13:1-2</a> speak of a third visit in immediate prospect, and the latter passage also refers to a second visit that had been already accomplished; while <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,1);">2:1</a> distinctly implies that a visit had taken place of a character so painful that the apostle would never venture to endure a similar one. As this cannot possibly refer to the first visit when the church was founded, and cannot easily be regarded as indicating anything previous to 1 Corinthians which never alludes to such an experience, we must conclude that the reference points to the interval between 1 and 2 Corinthians. It was then beyond doubt that the visit "with sorrow," which humbled him (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,21);">2Co 12:21</a>) and left such deep wounds, had actually taken place. "Any exegesis," says Weizsacker justly, "that would avoid the conclusion that Paul had already been twice in Corinth is capricious and artificial" (Apostolic Age, I, 343). Sabatier (Apostle Paul, 172 note) records his revised opinion: "The reference here (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,1);">2Co 2:1</a>) is to a second and quite recent visit, of which he retained a very sorrowful recollection, including it among the most bitter trials of his apostolical career."<P>4. The Severe Letter:<P>Paul not only speaks of a visit which had ended grievously, but also of a letter which he had written to deal with the painful circumstances, and as a kind of ultimatum to bring the whole matter to an issue (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,4);">2Co 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,8);">7:8</a>). This letter was written because he could not trust himself meantime to another visit. He was so distressed and agitated that he wrote it "with many tears"; after it was written he repented of it; and until he knew its effect he endured torture so keen that he hastened to Macedonia to meet his messenger, Titus, halfway. It is impossible by any stretch of interpretation to refer this language to 1 Corinthians, which on the whole is dominated by a spirit of didactic calm, and by a consciousness of friendly rapport with its recipients. Even though there be in it occasional indications of strong feeling, there is certainly nothing that we can conceive the apostle might have wished to recall. The alternative has generally been to regard this as another case of a lost epistle Just as the writer of Acts appears to have been willing that the deplorable visit itself should drop into oblivion, so doubtless neither Paul nor the Corinthians would be very anxious to preserve an epistle which echoed with the gusts and storms of such a visit. On the other hand a strong tendency has set in to regard this intermediate epistle as at least in part preserved in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">2Co 10-13</a>, whose tone, it is universally admitted, differs from that of the preceding chapters in a remarkable way, not easily accounted for. The majority of recent writers seem inclined to favor this view, which will naturally fall to be considered under the head of "Integrity."<P>IV. Historical Reconstruction.<P>In view of such an interpretation, we may with considerable probability trace the course of events in the interval between 1 and 2 Corinthians as follows: After the dispatch of 1 Corinthians, news reached the apostle of a disquieting character; probably both Titus and Timothy, on returning from Corinth, reported the growing menace of the opposition fostered by the Judaizing party. Paul felt impelled to pay an immediate visit, and found only too sadly that matters had not been overstated. The opposition was strong and full of effrontery, and the whole trend of things was against him. In face of the congregation he was baffled and flouted. He returned to Ephesus, and poured out his indignation in a severe epistle, which he sent on by the hands of Titus. Before Titus could return, events took a disastrous form in Ephesus, and Paul was forced to leave that city in peril of his life. He went to Troas, but, unable to wait patiently there for tidings of the issue in Corinth, he crossed to Macedonia, and met Titus, possibly in Philippi. The report was happily reassuring; the majority of the congregation returned to their old attachment, and the heavy cloud of doubt and anxiety was dispelled from the apostle\'s mind. He then wrote again<69>the present epistle<6C>and forwarded it by Titus and other brethren, he himself following a little later, and finally wintering in Corinth as he had originally planned. If it be felt that the interval between spring and autumn of the same year is too brief for these events, the two epistles must be separated by a period of nearly 18 months, 1 Corinthians being referred to the spring of 54 or 55, and 2 Corinthians to the autumn of 55 or 56 AD. (Reference on the reconstruction should especially be made to Weizsacker\'s Apostolic Age, English translation, I; to Sabatier\'s Note to the English edition (1893) of his Apostle Paul; and to Robertson\'s article in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes).)<P>V. Integrity of the Epistle.<P>Although the genuineness of the various parts of the epistle is scarcely disputed, the homogeneity is much debated. Semler and some later writers, including Clemen (Einheitlichkeit), have thought that <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,\'1-\');">2Co 9</a> should be eliminated as logically inconsistent with chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-\');">8</a>, and as evidently forming part of a letter to the converts of Achaia. But the connection with chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-\');">8</a> is too close to permit of severance, and the logical objection, founded on the phraseology of <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,1);">9:1</a>, is generally regarded as hypercritical. There are two sections, however, whose right to remain integral parts of 2Co has been more forcibly challenged.<P>1. <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1</span>:<P>The passage <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,14);">2Co 6:14</a> to <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,1);">2Co 7:1</a> deals with the inconsistency and peril of intimate relations with the heathen, and is felt to be incongruous with the context. No doubt it comes strangely after an appeal to the Corinthians to show the apostle the same frankness and kindness that he is showing them; whereas <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,2);">7:2</a> follows naturally and links itself closely to such an appeal. When we remember that the particular theme of the lost letter referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',5,9);">1Co 5:9</a> was the relation of the converts to the immoral, it is by no means unlikely that we have here preserved a stray fragment of that epistle<P>2. <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 10:1-13:10</span>:<P>It is universally acknowledged that there is a remarkable change in the tone of the section <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">2 Corinthians 10:1-13:10</a>, as compared with that of the previous chapters. In the earlier chapters there is relief at the change which Titus has reported as having taken place in Corinth, and the spirit is one of gladness and content; but from chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">10</a> onward the hostility to the apostle is unexpectedly represented as still raging, and as demanding the most strenuous treatment. The opening phrase, "Now I Paul" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,1);">2Co 10:1</a>), is regarded as indicating a distinctive break from the previous section with which Timothy is associated (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,1);">2Co 1:1</a>), while the concluding verse, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,\'11-\');">2Co 13:11</a> to end, seem fittingly to close that section, but to be abruptly out of harmony with the polemic that ends at <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,10);">2Co 13:10</a>. Accordingly it is suggested that <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,11);">13:11</a> should immediately follow <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,15);">9:15</a>, and that <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">2 Corinthians 10:1-13:10</a> be regarded as a lengthy insertion from some other epistle. Those who, while acknowledging the change of tone, yet maintain the integrity of the epistle, do so on the ground that the apostle was a man of many moods, and that it is characteristic of him to make unexpected and even violent transitions; that new reports of a merely scotched antagonism may come in to ruffle and disturb his comparative contentment; and that in any case he might well deem it advisable finally to deliver his whole soul on a matter over which he had brooded and suffered deeply, so that there might be no mistake about the ground being cleared when he arrived in person. The question is still a subject of keen discussion, and is not one on which it is easy to pronounce dogmatically. On the whole, however, it must be acknowledged that the preponderance of recent opinion is in favor of theory of interpolation. Hausrath (Der Vier-Capitel-Brief des Paulus an die Korinther, 1870) gave an immense impetus to the view that this later section really represents the painful letter referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'1-\');">2Co 2</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'1-\');">7</a>. As that earlier letter, however, must have contained references to the personal offender, the present section, which omits all such references, can be regarded as at most only a part of it. This theory is ably and minutely expounded by Schmiedel (Hand-Kommentar); and Pfleiderer, Lipsius, Clemen, Krenkel, von Soden, McGiffert, Cone, Plummer, Rendall, Moffatt, Adeney, Peake, and Massie are prominent among its adherents. J. H. Kennedy (Second and Third Cor) presents perhaps the ablest and fullest argument for it that has yet appeared in English. On the other hand Sanday (Encyclopaedia Biblica) declares against it, and Robertson (Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes)) regards it as decidedly not proven; while critics of such weight as Holtzmann, Beyschlag, Klopper, Weizsacker, Sabatier, Godet, Bernard, Denney, Weiss, and Zahn are all to be reckoned as advocates of the integrity of the epistle.<P>VI. Contents of the Epistle.<P>The order of matter in 2 Corintians is quite clearly defined. There are three main divisions:<P>(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,\'1-\');">chapters 1-7</a>;<P>(2) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-\');">chapters 8</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,\'1-\');">9</A>; and<P>(3) chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">10-13</a>.<P>1. <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 1-7</span>:<P>The first seven chapters in 2 Corinthians as a whole are taken up with a retrospect of the events that have recently transpired, joyful references to the fact that the clouds of grief in connection with them have been dispelled, and that the evangelical ministry as a Divine trust and power is clearly manifested. After a cordial salutation, in which Timothy is associated, Paul starts at once to express his profound gratitude to God for the great comfort that had come to him by the good news from Corinth, rejoicing in it as a spiritual enrichment that will make his ministry still more fruitful to the church (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,\'3-11\');">2Co 1:3-11</a>). He professes his sincerity in all his relations with the Corinthians, and particularly vindicates it in connection with a change in the plan which had originally promised a return ("a second benefit") to Corinth; his sole reason for refraining, and for writing a painful letter instead, being his desire to spare them and to prove them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,12);">2Co 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,4,9);">2:4, 9</a>). Far from harboring any resentment against the man who had caused so much trouble, he sincerely pleads that his punishment by the majority should go no farther, but that forgiveness should now reign, lest the Adversary should gain an advantage over them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'5-11\');">2Co 2:5-11</a>). It was indeed an agonizing experience until the moment he met Titus, but the relief was all the sweeter and more triumphant when God at length gave it, as he might have been sure He would give it to a faithful and soul-winning servant of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,\'12-17\');">2Co 2:12-17</a>). He does not indeed wish to enter upon any further apologies or self-commendation. Some believe greatly in letters of commendation, but his living testimonial is in his converts. This he has, not of himself, but entirely through God, who alone has made him an efficient minister of the new and abiding covenant of the Spirit, whose glory naturally excels that of the old dispensation which fadeth because it really cannot bring life. Regarding this glorious ministry he must be bold and frank. It needs no veil as if to conceal its evanescence. Christ presents it unveiled to all who turn to Him, and they themselves, reflecting His glory, are spiritually transformed (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,\'1-18\');">2Co 3:1-18</a>). As for those who by God\'s mercy have received such a gospel ministry, it is impossible for them to be faint-hearted in its exercise, although the eyes of some may be blinded to it, because the god of this world enslaves them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',4,4);">2Co 4:4</a>). It is indeed wonderful that ministers of this grace should be creatures so frail, so subject to pressure and affliction, but it is not inexplicable. So much the more obvious is it that all the power and glory of salvation are from God alone (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',4,7,15);">2Co 4:7, 15</a>). Yea, even if one be called to die in this ministry, that is but another light and momentary affliction. It is but passing from a frail earthly tent to abide forever in a heavenly home (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,1);">2Co 5:1</a>). Who would not long for it, that this mortal may be swallowed up in immortality? Courage, therefore, is ours to the end, for that end only means the cessation of our separation from Christ, whom it is a joy to serve absent or present. And present we shall all ultimately be before Him on the judgment throne (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,10);">2Co 5:10</a>). That itself unspeakably deepens the earnestness with which preachers of the gospel seek to persuade men. It is the love of Christ constraining them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,14);">2Co 5:14</a>) in the ministry of reconciliation, that they should entreat men as ambassadors on Christ\'s behalf (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,20);">2Co 5:20</a>). So sacred and responsible a trust has subdued the apostle\'s own life, and is indeed the key to its manifold endurance, and to the earnestness with which he has striven to cultivate every grace, and to submit himself to every discipline (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,\'1-10\');">2Co 6:1-10</a>). Would God the Corinthians might open their hearts to him as he does to them! (Let them have no fellowship with iniquity, but perfect holiness in the fear of God, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,\'14-\');">2Co 6:14</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,1);">7:1</a>.) He has never wronged them; they are enshrined in his heart, living or dying; he glories in them, and is filled with comfort in all his affliction (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,\'11-13\');">2Co 6:11-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,\'2-4\');">7:2-4</a>). For what blessed comfort that was that Titus brought him in Macedonia to dispel his fears, and to show that the things he regretted and grieved to have written had done no harm after all, but had rather wrought in them the joyful change for which he longed! Now both they and he knew how dear he was to them. Titus, too, was overjoyed by the magnanimity of their reception of him. The apostle\'s cup is full, and "in everything he is of good courage concerning them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',7,16);">2Co 7:16</a>).<P>2. <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 8-9</span>:<P>In the second section, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-\');">2Co 8</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,\'1-\');">9</a>, the apostle, now abundantly confident of their good-will, exhorts the Corinthians on the subject of the collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem. He tells them of the extraordinary liberality of the Macedonian churches, and invites them to emulate it, and by the display of this additional grace to make full proof of their love (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-8\');">2Co 8:1-8</a>). Nay, they have a higher incentive than the liberality of Macedonia, even the self-sacrifice of Christ Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,9);">2Co 8:9</a>). Wherefore let them go on with the good work they were so ready to initiate a year ago, giving out of a willing mind, as God hath enabled them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'10-15\');">2Co 8:10-15</a>). Further to encourage them he sends on Titus and other well-known and accredited brethren, whose interest in them is as great as his own, and he is hopeful that by their aid the matter will be completed, and all will rejoice when he comes, bringing with him probably some of those of Macedonia, to whom he has already been boasting of their zeal (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'16-\');">2Co 8:16</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,\'1-5\');">9:5</a>). Above all, let them remember that important issues are bound up with this grace of Christian liberality. It is impossible to reap bountifully, if we sow sparingly. Grudging and compulsory benevolence is a contradiction, but God loveth and rewardeth a cheerful giver. This grace blesseth him that gives and him that takes. Many great ends are served by it. The wants of the needy are supplied, men\'s hearts are drawn affectionately to one another, thanksgivings abound, and God himself is glorified (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,\'6-15\');">2Co 9:6-15</a>).<P>3. <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 10-13</span>:<P>The third section, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'1-\');">2Co 10-13</a>, as has been pointed out, is a spirited and even passionate polemic, in the course of which the Judaizing party in Corinth is vigorously assailed. The enemies of the apostle have charged him with being very bold and courageous when he is absent, but humble enough when he is present. He hopes the Corinthians will not compel him to show his courage (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,2);">2Co 10:2</a>). It is true, being human, he walks in the flesh, but not in the selfish and cowardly way his opponents suggest. The weapons of his warfare are not carnal, yet are they mighty before God to cast down such strongholds as theirs, such vain imaginations and disobedience. Some boast of being "Christ\'s," but that is no monopoly; he also is Christ\'s. They think his letters are mere "sound and fury, signifying nothing"; by and by they will discover their mistake. If he should glory in his authority, he is justified, for Corinth was verily part of his God-appointed province, and he at least did not there enter on other men\'s labors. But it would be well if men who gloried confined themselves to glorying "in the Lord." For after all it is His commendation alone that is of any permanent value (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,\'3-18\');">2Co 10:3-18</a>). Will the adepts-Corinthians bear with him in a little of this foolish boasting? Truly he ventures on it out of concern for them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,2);">2Co 11:2</a>). And as they are manifest in toleration, abounding in patience toward those who have come with a different gospel, they may perhaps extend some of their indulgence to him, for though he cannot lay claim to a polished oratory comparable to that of these "super-eminent" apostles, yet at least he is not behind them in knowledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,\'4-6\');">2Co 11:4-6</a>). Can it be that he really sinned in preaching the gospel to them without fee or reward? Was it a mark of fleshly cunning when he resolved not to be burdensome to them, while he accepted supplies from Macedonia? Ah! it was not because he did not love them, but because he decided to give no occasion to those who were too ready to blame him<69>those false apostles, who, like Satan himself, masqueraded as angels of light and ministers of righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,\'7-15\');">2Co 11:7-15</a>). Come, then, let him to this glorying, this poor folly, which they in their superlative wisdom bear with so gladly in the case of those insolent creatures who now bully and degrade them (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,\'16-21\');">2Co 11:16-21</a>). Hebrews! Israelites! So is he. Ministers of Christ! There he excels them-in labors, in perils, in persecutions; in burdens, anxieties, sympathies; in visions and revelations of the Lord; in infirmities and weaknesses that have made more manifest in him the strength of Christ <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,\'22-\');">2Co 11:22</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,\'1-10\');">12:10</a>. Certainly all this is folly, but they are most to blame for it who, through lack of loyalty, have forced him to it. Did he injure them by declining to be burdensome? Is it so sore a point? Let it be forgiven! Yet when he comes again he will take no other course (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,\'11-18\');">2Co 12:11-18</a>). They must not imagine that in all this he is excusing himself to them. He is sincerely and affectionately concerning himself for their edifying. He trembles lest when they meet again they should be disappointed in each other; lest they should be found in unworthy strife and tumults, and lest he should be humbled of God before them, having cause to mourn over some who are hardened and impenitent in their sins (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,\'19-21\');">2Co 12:19-21</a>). For they must meet again<69>he is coming for the third time<6D>and this time he will not spare. Let them prove themselves whether they be in the faith; for surely they must know whether Christ be in them. He earnestly prays for their goodness and honor; not to the end that no display of his power may be called for, but simply that he will be glad to appear weak if they should appear strong. Could they but believe it, their perfecting is the aim of all his labors (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,\'1-10\');">2Co 13:1-10</a>). And so, with words of grace and tenderness, exhorting them to unity and peace, and pronouncing over them the threefold benediction, he bids them farewell (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,\'11-14\');">2Co 13:11-14</a>).<p>VII. Value of the Epistle. The chief element of value in this epistle is the revelation it gives of the apostle himself. Through all its changing moods, Paul, in perfect abandon, shows us his very soul, suffering, rejoicing, enduring, overcoming. It has been truly said that "it enables us, as it were, to lay our hands upon his breast, and feel the very throbbings of his heart."<P>(1) In relation to his converts, it shows us how sensitive he was, how easy it was to touch him on the quick, and to wound his feelings. The apostle was very human, and nowhere are his kindred limitations more obvious than in these present incidents. He would probably be the first to acquiesce, if it were said that even with him the creed was greater than the life. In the hastily written and nervously repented passages of that severe epistle; in the restless wandering, like a perturbed spirit, from Troas to Macedonia, to meet the news and know the issue of his acts, we see a man most lovable indeed, most like ourselves when issues hang in the balance, but a man not already perfect, not yet risen to the measure of the stature of Christ. Yet we see also the intensity with which Paul labored in his ministry<72>the tenacity with which he held to his mission, and the invincible courage with which he returned to the fight for his imperiled church. He loved those converts as only a great soul in Christ could love them. His keenest sorrow came in the disaster that threatened them, and he flew to their defense. He had not only won them for Christ, he was willing to die that he might keep them for Christ.<P>(2) The epistle is charged with a magnificent consciousness on the apostle\'s part of his high calling in Christ Jesus. He has been called with a Divine calling to the most glorious work in which a man can engage, to be to this estranged earth an ambassador of heaven. Received as Divine, this vocation is accepted with supreme devotion. It has been a ministry of sorrow, of strain and suffering, of hairbreadth escapes with the bare life; with its thorn in the flesh, its buffering of Satan. Yet through it all there rings the note of abounding consolation in Christ Jesus, and never was the "power of Christ," resting on frail humanity, more signally manifested.<P>LITERATURE.<P>See the references to both epistles, and to 2 Corinthians alone, under this heading in the preceding article. To the list there given should be added Moffatt\'s Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, 1911; valuable for its critical presentation of recent views, and for its references to the literature.``160';
isbe[2329]='Corinthus`ko-rin\'-thus: Latin form for Greek Korinthos in the subscription to Romans (the King James Version).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CORINTH">CORINTH</a>`1';
isbe[2330]='Cormorant`kor\'-mo-rant (shalakh; kataraktes; Latin Corvus marinus): A large sea-fowl belonging to the genus Phalacrocorax and well described by the Hebrew word used to designate it<69>which means a "plunging bird." The bird appears as large as a goose when in full feather, but plucked, the body is much smaller. The adult birds are glossy black with bronze tints, touched with white on the cheeks and sides as a festal dress at mating season, and adorned with filamentary feathers on the head, and bright yellow gape. These birds if taken young and carefully trained can be sent into the water from boats and bring to their masters large quantities of good-sized fish: commonly so used in China. The flesh is dark, tough and quite unfit to eat in the elders on account of their diet of fish. The nest is built mostly of seaweed. The eggs are small for the size of the birds, having a rough, thick, but rather soft shell of a bluish white which soon becomes soiled, as well as the nest and its immediate surroundings, from the habits of the birds. The young are leathery black, then covered with soft down of brownish black above and white beneath and taking on the full black of the grown bird at about three years. If taken in the squab state the young are said to be delicious food, resembling baked hare in flavor. The old birds are mentioned among the abominations for food (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',11,\'13-19\');">Le 11:13-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,\'12-18\');">De 14:12-18</a>).``167';
isbe[2331]='Corn`korn (daghan; sitos): A word used for cereals generally (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',27,28,37);">Ge 27:28, 37</a>, etc., the King James Version) much as our English word "corn." the American Standard Revised Version almost invariably substitutes "grain" for "corn." The latter may be taken to include<P>(1) barley,<P>(2) wheat,<P>(3) fitches (vetches),<P>(4) lentils,<P>(5) beans,<P>(6) millet,<P>(7) rye<79>the wrong translation for vetches,<P>(8) pulse<73>for all these see separate articles.<P>Rye and oats are not cultivated in Palestine. For many references to corn see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AGRICULTURE">AGRICULTURE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FOOD">FOOD</a>. "A corn kokkos, the Revised Version (British and American) "grain" of wheat" is mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,24);">Joh 12:24</a>).``1';
isbe[2332]='Cornelius`kor-ne\'-li-us (Kornelios, "of a horn"): The story of Cornelius is given in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,\1-\');">Ac 10:1</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,\1-18\');">11:18</a>.<P>1. His Family and Station:<P>The name is Roman and belonged to distinguished families in the imperial city, such as the Scipios and Sulla. Thus he was probably an Italian of Roman blood. Julian the Apostate reckons him as one of the few persons of distinction who became a Christian. He was evidently a man of importance in Caesarea and well known to the Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,22);">Ac 10:22</a>). He was a centurion in the Italian cohort. To understand this we must note that the Roman army was divided into two broad divisions, the legions and the auxiliary forces.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARMY,+ROMAN">ARMY, ROMAN</a>.<P>Legions were never permanently quartered in Palestine until the great war which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, 70 AD. From the year 6 AD, when Palestine was made into province of the second rank, until 66 AD, it was garrisoned by auxiliary troops recruited amongst the Samaritans and Syrian Greeks. The headquarters were naturally at Caesarea, the residence of the procurator. But it would not have been prudent for a garrison in Palestine to be composed wholly of troops locally recruited. Therefore the Roman government mingled with the garrison 600 soldiers, free Italian volunteers. With this cohort Cornelius was connected as centurion.<P>2. His Character:<P>He is described as devout and God-fearing, i.e. at least, one of those men so numerous in that effete age of decadent heathenism who, discontented with polytheism, yearned for a better faith, embraced, therefore, the monotheism of the Jews, read the Scriptures, and practiced more or less of the Jewish rites. He was well reported of by the Jews, and his religion showed itself in prayer at the regular hours, and in alms to the people (of Israel). Even Jewish bigotry was dumb in presence of so noble a man. Moreover, he seems to have made his house a sort of church, for his kinsfolk and friends were in sympathy with him, and among the soldiers who closely attended him were some devout ones (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,1,27);">Ac 10:1, 27</a>).<P>3. His Admission into the Christian Church:<P>The story of his conversion and admission into the Christian church is told with some minuteness in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,\'1-\');">Ac 10</a>. Nothing further is known of Cornelius, though one tradition asserts that he founded the church in Caesarea, and another legend that he became the bishop of Scamandros.<P>4. Significance of the Incident:<P>The exact importance of the incident depends upon the position of Cornelius before it occurred. Certainly he was not a proselyte of the sanctuary, circumcised, under the law, a member of the Jewish communion. This is abundantly evident from <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,28,34,45);">Ac 10:28, 34, 45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,3,18);">11:3, 18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,7,14);">15:7, 14</a>. But was he not an inferior form of proselyte, later called "proselytes of the gate"? This question has been much debated and is still under discussion. Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveler, 43) says that the expression, "God-fearing," applied to him, is always used in Acts with reference to this kind of proselytes. Such were bound to observe certain regulations of purity, probably those, this author thinks, mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,29);">Ac 15:29</a>, and which stand in close relation to the principles laid down in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',17,\'1-\');">Le 17</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',18,\'1-\');">18</a> for the conduct of strangers dwelling among Israel. Renan, on the other hand, denies that Cornelius was a proselyte at all, but simply a devout Gentile who adopted some of the Jewish ideas and religious customs which did not involve a special profession. The importance of the whole transaction to the development of the church seems to depend on the circumstance that Cornelius was probably not a proselyte at all. Thus we regard Cornelius as literally the first-fruits of the Gentiles. The step here taken by Peter was therefore one of tremendous importance to the whole development of the church. The significance of the incident consists exactly in this, that under Divine direction, the first Gentile, not at all belonging to the old theocracy, becomes a Spirit-filled Christian, entering through the front door of the Christian church without first going through the narrow gate of Judaism. The incident settled forever the great, fundamental question as to the relations of Jew and Gentile in the church. The difficulties in the way of the complete triumph of Peter\'s view of the equality of Jews and Gentiles in the Kingdom of Christ were enormous. It would have been indeed little short of miraculous if the multitude of Christian Pharisees had not raised the question again and again. Did they not dog Paul\'s steps after the Council? Certainly Ramsay is wrong in saying that the case of Cornelius was passed over or condoned as exceptional, for it was used as a precedent by both Peter and James (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,7,14);">Ac 15:7, 14</a>).<P>As for Peter\'s subsequent conduct at Antioch, no one who knows Peter need be surprised at it. The very accusation that Paul hurled at him was that for the moment he was carried into inconsistency with his principles (hupokrisis). Of course, this incident of Cornelius was only the first step in a long development; but the principle was forever settled. The rest in due time and proper order was sure to follow. By this tremendous innovation it was settled that Christianity was to be freed from the swaddling bands of Judaism and that the Christian church was not to be an appendix to the synagogue. The noble character of Cornelius was just fitted to abate, as far as possible, the prejudices of the Jewish Christians against what must have seemed to them a dangerous, if not awful, innovation.``177';
isbe[2333]='Corner`kor\'-ner (miqtsoa\', pe\'ah, pinnah; arche, gonia, akrogoniaios): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,24);">Ex 26:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',41,22);">Eze 41:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',46,21,22);">46:21-22</a>, miqtsoa\', "angle" is translated "corner"; pe\'ah, "side," "quarter" and pinnah "corner," "front," "chief," are more frequently so translated, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,26);">Ex 25:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,9);">Le 19:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,26);">Jer 9:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,23);">25:23</a>; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,2);">Ex 27:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,34);">1Ki 7:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,22);">Ps 118:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,16);">Isa 28:16</a> ("corner-stone"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,26);">Jer 51:26</a>. Other words are kanaph, "wing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,12);">Isa 11:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',7,2);">Eze 7:2</a>); katheph, "shoulder" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,11);">2Ki 11:11</a> the King James Version, twice); pa\'am, "foot" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,12);">Ex 25:12</a> the King James Version); zawiyoth, "corner-stones" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',144,12);">Ps 144:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',9,15);">Zec 9:15</a>, translated "corners"). For "corner" the Revised Version (British and American) has "side" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',36,25);">Ex 36:25</a>), "corner-stone" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',10,4);">Zec 10:4</a>), also for "stay" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,13);">Isa 19:13</a>); instead of "teacher removed into a corner" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,20);">Isa 30:20</a>), "be hidden," "hide themselves"; for "corners" we have "feet" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,12);">Ex 25:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,30);">1Ki 7:30</a>); "ribs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,4);">Ex 30:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',37,27);">37:27</a>); for "divide into corners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,22);">Ne 9:22</a>), "allot after their portions"; for "into corners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,26);">De 32:26</a>), "afar"; the words to Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,9);">Isa 41:9</a>) "called thee from the chief men \'atsilim thereof" are rendered by the Revised Version (British and American) "called thee from the corners thereof" (of the earth).<P>In the New Testament we have gonia ("angle," "corner"), "in the corners of the streets" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,5);">Mt 6:5</a>), "the head of the corner" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,42);">Mt 21:42</a>), "the four corners of the earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,1);">Re 7:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',20,8);">20:8</a>); arche ("a beginning") (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,11);">Ac 10:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,5);">11:5</a>); "chief corner stone" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,20);">Eph 2:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,6);">1Pe 2:6</a>), is a translation of akrogoniaios ("at the extreme angle").``185';
isbe[2334]='Corner Gate`kor\'-ner gat.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JERUSALEM">JERUSALEM</a>`1';
isbe[2335]='Corner-Stone`kor\'-ner ston (pinnah, zawith; akrogoniaios): Part of the public or imposing buildings, to which importance has been attached in all ages and in many nations, both on account of its actual service and its figurative meaning. Ordinarily its use in the Bible is figurative, or symbolical. No doubt the original meaning was some important stone, which was laid at the foundation of a building.<P>(1) With the Canaanites, who preceded Israel in the possession of Palestine, corner-stone laying seems to have been a most sacred and impressive ceremonial. Under this important stone of temples, or other great structures, bodies of children or older persons would be laid, consecrating the building by such human sacrifice (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FORTIFICATION">FORTIFICATION</a>, II, 1). This was one of many hideous rites and practices which Israel was to extirpate. It may throw light on the curse pronounced upon the rebuilding of Jericho (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',6,26);">Jos 6:26</a>; see PEFS, January, 1904, July, 1908).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CANAAN">CANAAN</a>.<P>(2) Old Testament references.<2E>The Hebrew word pinnah, "corner," is found or implied in every occurrence of this idea. Derived from a root signifying "to turn," it means "turning," and therefore "edge" or "corner." Ordinarily it is used with \'ebhen, "stone" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,22);">Ps 118:22</a>); or it may occur alone, having acquired for itself through frequent use the whole technical phrase-idea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',10,4);">Zec 10:4</a> the King James Version).<P>Figurative Uses:<P>While all the passages indicate the stone at the corner, there appear to be two conceptions:<P>(a) the foundation-stone upon which the structure rested (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,6);">Job 38:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,16);">Isa 28:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,26);">Jer 51:26</a>); or<P>(b) the topmost or cap-stone, which linked the last tier together (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,22);">Ps 118:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,7);">Zec 4:7</a>); in both cases it is an important or key-stone, and figurative of the Messiah, who is "the First and the Last."<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,6);">Job 38:6</a> it beautifully expresses in figures the stability of the earth, which Yahweh created. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',10,4);">Zec 10:4</a> the leader or ruler in the Messianic age is represented by the corner-stone. The ancient tradition of the one missing stone, when the temple was in building, is reflected in or has been suggested by <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,22);">Ps 118:22</a> (Midrash quoted by Pusey under <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,7);">Zec 4:7</a>). It is probable that we should read in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',144,12);">Ps 144:12</a> not "corner-stones," but "corner-pillars," or supports (compare Greek Caryatides) from a different Hebrew word, zawith, Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, under the word<P>(3) New Testament passages.<2E><a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,22);">Ps 118:22</a> is quoted and interpreted as fulfilled in Jesus Christ in a number of passages: <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,42);">Mt 21:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,10);">Mr 12:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,17);">Lu 20:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,11);">Ac 4:11</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,7);">1Pe 2:7</a>; it is also the evident basis for <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,20);">Eph 2:20</a>. <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,16);">Isa 28:16</a> is quoted twice in the New Testament: <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,33);">Ro 9:33</a>, from Septuagint combined with the words of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',8,14);">Isa 8:14</a>, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,6);">1Pe 2:6</a>, which is quoted with some variation from Septuagint. The Old Testament passages were understood by the rabbis to be Messianic, and were properly so applied by the New Testament writers.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`109';
isbe[2336]='Corners of the Earth``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EARTH,+CORNERS+OF+THE">EARTH, CORNERS OF THE</a>`1';
isbe[2337]='Cornet`kor\'-net.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MUSIC">MUSIC</a>`1';
isbe[2338]='Cornfloor`korn\'-flor (goren daghan): "Thou hast loved a reward upon every cornfloor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,1);">Ho 9:1</a> the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "hire upon every grainfloor"). Israel had deserted Yahweh for supposed material benefits and regarded bounteous crops as the gift of the heathen gods which they worshipped. Yahweh would therefore cause the corn (grain) and wine to fail (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,2);">Ho 9:2</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=THRESHING-FLOOR">THRESHING-FLOOR</a>`1';
isbe[2339]='Coronation`kor-o-na\'-shun (protoklisia): Occurs in <span class="noTag">2Macc 4:21</a> (the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "enthronement") where Apollonius was sent into Egypt for the coronation of Ptolemy Philometor as king. The Greek word protoklisia occurs nowhere else, and its meaning is uncertain. The reading in Swete is protoklesia, and this means "the first call."``1';
isbe[2340]='Corpse`korps: This word in the King James Version is the translations of two Hebrew words, pegher, and gewiyah, while nebhelah, and guphah, which mean the same, are translated "body," with which the English word "corpse" (Latin, corpus) was originally synonymical. Therefore we find the now apparently unnecessary addition of the adjective "dead" in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,35);">2Ki 19:35</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,36);">Isa 37:36</a>. The Greek equivalent is ptoma, literally, "a fallen body," "a ruin" (from pipto, "to fall"), in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,29);">Mr 6:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',11,8,9);">Re 11:8-9</a>.<P>Corpses were considered as unclean and defiling in the Old Testament, so that priests were not to touch dead bodies except those of near kinsfolk (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,\'1-3\');">Le 21:1-3</a>), the high priest and a Nazirite not even such (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,11);">Le 21:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,\'6-8\');">Nu 6:6-8</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> presents to us the ceremonial of purification from such defilement by the sprinkling with the ashes of a red heifer, cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet.<P>It was considered a great calamity and disgrace to have one\'s body left unburied, a "food unto all birds of the heavens, and unto the beasts of the earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',28,26);">De 28:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',21,10);">2Sa 21:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',79,2);">Ps 79:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,3);">Isa 34:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',7,33);">Jer 7:33</a>, etc.). Thence is explained the merit of Rizpah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',21,10);">2Sa 21:10</a>), and of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead, who protected or recovered and buried the mutilated bodies of Saul and his sons (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',31,\'11-13\');">1Sa 31:11-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,\'4-7\');">2Sa 2:4-7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',10,11,12);">1Ch 10:11-12</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BURIAL">BURIAL</a>.<P>Even the corpses of persons executed by hanging were not to remain on the tree "all night," "for he that is hanged is accursed of God; that thou defile not thy land which Yahweh thy God giveth thee for an inheritance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,23);">De 21:23</a>).``106';
isbe[2341]='Correction`ko-rek\'-shun (mucar, usually rendered "instruction," is translated "correction" in several passages): The verb from which the noun is derived signifies "to instruct" or "chastise." The idea of chastisement was very closely connected in the Hebrew mind with that of pedagogy. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHASTISEMENT">CHASTISEMENT</a>. the Revised Version (British and American) and the American Standard Revised Version have changed "correction" of the King James Version to "instruction" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',7,28);">Jer 7:28</a>, reversing the order in the margins. shebheT, rendered "rod" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,9);">Job 21:9</a>, is unnecessarily changed to "correction" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',37,13);">37:13</a>. In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',3,16);">2Ti 3:16</a>, epanorthosis, is translated "correction." The difference between correction, discipline and instruction Was not clearly drawn in the Hebrew mind.``34';
isbe[2342]='Corruption`ko-rup\'-shun: The Hebrew words mishchath, mashchath, mashchith, and their Greek equivalents, phthora, and diaphthora, with numerous derivatives and cognate verbs, imply primarily physical degeneration and decay (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',17,14);">Job 17:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,27);">Ac 2:27</a>, etc.). The term shachath, which the King James Version translates with "corruption" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',2,6);">Jon 2:6</a>, ought to be rendered "pit," as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',30,9);">Ps 30:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,7);">35:7</a> et passim, while shachath beli in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,17);">Isa 38:17</a> means the "pit of nothingness," i.e. of destruction.<P>Figurative: At an early time we find the above-given words in a non-literal sense denoting moral depravity and corruption (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,11);">Ge 6:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',32,7);">Ex 32:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,9);">Ho 9:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',6,8);">Ga 6:8</a>, etc.), which ends in utter moral ruin and hopelessness, the second death. The question has been raised whether the meaning of these words might be extended so as to include the idea of final destruction and annihilation of the spirit. Upon careful examination, however, this question must be denied both from the standpoint of the Old Testament and of the New Testament. Apart from other considerations we see this from the metaphors used in the Scriptures to illustrate the condition of "corruption," such as the "unquenchable fire," the "worm" which "dieth not" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,43,48);">Mr 9:43, 48</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,24);">Isa 66:24</a>), and "sleep" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',12,2);">Da 12:2</a>), where a careful distinction is made between the blissful state after death of the righteous and the everlasting disgrace of the godless. The later Jewish theology is also fully agreed on this point. The meaning of the words cannot therefore extend beyond the idea of utter moral degradation and depravity.``106';
isbe[2343]='Corruption, Mount of`(har ha-mashchith; to oros tou Mosoath): The hill on the right hand of which Solomon built high places for Ashtoreth, Chemosh and Milcom (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,13);">2Ki 23:13</a>). The mountain referred to is no doubt the Mount of Olives. The high places would, therefore, be on the southern height called in later Christian writings the "Mount of Offence," and now, by the Arabs, Baten el-Hawa. Har ha-mashchith is probably only a perversion of har ha-mishchah, "Mount of Anointing," a later name of the Mount of Olives.``54';
isbe[2344]='Cos`kos (Kos, "summit"; the King James Version Coos): An island off the coast of Caria, Asia Minor, one of the Sporades, mountainous in the southern half, with ridges extending to a height of 2,500 ft.; identified with the modern Stanchio. It was famous in antiquity for excellent wine, amphorae, wheat, ointments, silk and other clothing (Coae vestes). The capital was also called Cos. It possessed a famous hospital and medical school, and was the birthplace of Hippocrates (the father of medicine), of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and of the celebrated painter Apelles. The large plane tree in the center of the town (over 2,000 years old) is called "the tree of Hippocrates" to this day. The older capital, Astypalaea, was in the western part of the island, the later (since 366 BC) in the eastern part. From almost every point can be seen beautiful landscapes and picturesque views of sea and land and mountain.<P>Cos was one of the six Dorian colonies. It soon became a flourishing place of commerce and industry; later, like Corinth, it was one of the Jewish centers of the Aegean, as well as one of the financial centers of the commercial world in the eastern Mediterranean. Among the benefactors of the people of Cos was Herod the Great. It is mentioned in connection with Paul\'s third missionary journey in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,1);">Ac 21:1</a>, and in its relations with the Jews in 1Macc 15:23; Ant, XIV, vii, 2; x, 15; BJ, I, xxi. 11. For a list of works on the island see Paton-Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, ix.``71';
isbe[2345]='Cosam`ko\'-sam (Kosam): An ancestor of Jesus in Luke\'s genealogy in the 5th generation before Zerubbabel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,28);">Lu 3:28</a>).``1';
isbe[2346]='Cosmogony`koz-mog\'-o-ni.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CREATION">CREATION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EARTH">EARTH</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EVOLUTION">EVOLUTION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WORLD">WORLD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ANTHROPOLOGY">ANTHROPOLOGY</a>`1';
isbe[2347]='Cosmology`koz-mol\'-o-ji.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WORLD">WORLD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVIDENCE">PROVIDENCE</a>`1';
isbe[2348]='Costliness`kost\'-li-nes (timiotes, "preciousness," "an abundance of costly things"): Found only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',18,19);">Re 18:19</a>, "made rich by reason of her costliness."``1';
isbe[2349]='Cotes`kots.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHEEPCOTE">SHEEPCOTE</a>`1';
isbe[2350]='Cottage`kot\'-aj.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[2351]='Cotton`kot\'-\'-n (karpac is the better translation, as in the Revised Version, margin, where the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) have "green" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,6);">Es 1:6</a>): The Hebrew karpac is from the Persian kirpas and the Sanskrit karpasa, "the cotton plant." The derived words originally meant "muslin" or "calico," but in classical times the use of words allied to karpac<61>in Greek and Latin<69>was extended to include linen. The probability is in favor of "cotton" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,6);">Es 1:6</a>. This is the product of Gossypium herbaceum, a plant originally from India but now cultivated in many other lands.``1';
isbe[2352]='Couch`kouch (substantive.).<P>Couch (verb): rabhats, "to crouch," "lurk," as a beast in readiness to spring on its prey. "If thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,7);">Ge 4:7</a>, the King James Version "lieth"), waiting for it to open. Cain is warned to beware of the first temptations to evil, in his case especially a sullen and jealous disposition (compare Dante, Inferno, I, 30). See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ABEL">ABEL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CAIN">CAIN</a>. The tribe of Judah is compared for its bravery to a recumbent lion or lioness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,9);">Ge 49:9</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',24,9);">Nu 24:9</a>f); and Issachar to "a strong ass, couching down between the sheepfolds" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,14);">Ge 49:14</a>, the King James Version "between two burdens"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,16);">Jud 5:16</a>). "The deep that coucheth beneath" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,13);">De 33:13</a>), probably the springs of water, or possibly, as Driver suggests, "the subterranean deep, pictured as a gigantic monster."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ABYSS">ABYSS</a>`91';
isbe[2353]='Couching-Place`kouch\'-ing-plas (marbets; once in English Versions of the Bible, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',25,5);">Eze 25:5</a>): The same Hebrew word, however, which means simply "place of lying down" of animals in repose, is used also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,15);">Ze 2:15</a> where the translation is "a place...to lie down in." The figure, a common one in Scripture (see besides, <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',17,2);">Isa 17:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',27,10);">27:10</a>), suggests desolation.``1';
isbe[2354]='Coulter`kol\'-ter.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PLOW">PLOW</a>`1';
isbe[2355]='Council; Councillor`koun\'-sil, koun\'-siler (sumboulion): An assembly of advisers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',25,12);">Ac 25:12</a>); a body of those taking counsel (see Schurer\'s Jewish People in the Time of Christ, I (1), 60). Distinguished from sunedrion, the supreme court of the Jews, by being of a less formal character, i.e. less of an institution. For "council" in the latter sense, its most frequent use, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SANHEDRIN">SANHEDRIN</a>. A councilor (Greek bouleutes) was a member of the Sanhedrin. Applied to Joseph of Arimathea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,43);">Mr 15:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,50);">Lu 23:50</a>). In the King James Version "counsellor."``1';
isbe[2356]='Counsel; Counsellor`koun\'-sel, koun\'-seler (sumboulion): Ordinarily found as object of verb "to take" or "to give," expressing, beside the idea of a practical end to be reached, that of consultation and deliberation among those united in a common cause (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,14);">Mt 12:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,6);">Mr 3:6</a>). A counselor (sumboulos) is a confidential adviser (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,34);">Ro 11:34</a>); often in the Old Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,6);">Isa 9:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',24,6);">Pr 24:6</a>, etc.). Confounded in the King James Version with "councillor" (see above), the latter being an official adviser, which the former does not necessarily mean.``1';
isbe[2357]='Count`kount (caphar, manah; psephizo): Used of arithmetical computation "to number" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',139,18);">Ps 139:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,10);">Nu 23:10</a>); also for kathabh, "to reckon," to indicate classification among or identification with, "count for a stranger" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,15);">Job 19:15</a>); "count for his enemy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',33,10);">Job 33:10</a>). In the New Testament the arithmetical computation is less prominent, except in the sense of "calculate," psephizo, sumpsephizo, "to reckon with pebbles," each pebble representing a unit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,28);">Lu 14:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,19);">Ac 19:19</a>); of moral estimate, hegeomai and logizomai (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,7,13);">Php 3:7, 13</a>). The noun, from Hebrew kacath, "a count of" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,4);">Ex 12:4</a>), namely, in the arithmetical sense.``84';
isbe[2358]='Countenance`koun\'-te-nans:<P>(1) The noun (see also under the word <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FACE">FACE</a>) is the translation of a variety of Hebrew and Greek expressions, panim; prosopon, being the most frequent. Besides these there are found mar\'eh, "appearance," "shape," "comeliness," "visage," \'ayin, "the eye," to\'ar, "appearance," "figure," etc., and Aramaic ziw. To the Oriental the countenance mirrors, even more than to us, the character and feelings of the heart. The countenance (mar\'eh) is"fair" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,42);">1Sa 17:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,27);">2Sa 14:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',1,15);">Da 1:15</a>); in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,12);">1Sa 16:12</a>, literally, "fair of eyes"; "comely" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',2,14);">So 2:14</a>); "beautiful" (to\'ar, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,3);">1Sa 25:3</a>); "cheerful" (panim, <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,13);">Pr 15:13</a>); "angry" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,23);">Pr 15:23</a>); "fierce" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,23);">Da 8:23</a>); "troubled" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,35);">Eze 27:35</a>); "sad" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',1,18);">1Sa 1:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,2,3);">Ne 2:2-3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',7,3);">Ec 7:3</a>). The countenance is "sharpened" i.e. made keen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,17);">Pr 27:17</a>); it "falls," i.e. looks despondent, disappointed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,5,6);">Ge 4:5-6</a>); is "cast down" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,24);">Job 29:24</a>); "changed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',14,20);">Job 14:20</a>; compare "altered" into glory, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,29);">Lu 9:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',5,6,9,10);">Da 5:6, 9-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,28);">7:28</a>, Aramaic ziw). To settle one\'s countenance stedfastly upon a person (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',8,11);">2Ki 8:11</a>) is synonymous with staring or gazing at a person. Not infrequently we find compound expressions such as "light of countenance," i.e. favor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,24);">Job 29:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',4,6);">Ps 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',44,3);">44:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,15);">89:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',90,8);">90:8</a>); "health of countenance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',41,11);">Ps 41:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',43,5);">43:5</a>); "help of countenance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,5);">Ps 42:5</a>); "rebuke of countenance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',80,16);">Ps 80:16</a>); "pride of countenance" (Hebrew \'aph, literally, "haughty," "lofty nose," <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,4);">Ps 10:4</a>).<P>(2) As verb (Hebrew hadhar, "to countenance") we find the word in the King James Version of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,3);">Ex 23:3</a>, where the Revisers translate "Neither shalt thou favor (the King James Version "countenance") a poor man in his cause." Here the meaning seems to be that no distinction of persons shall be made by the judge. See <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,15);">Le 19:15</a>, where, however, a different word is used. There is therefore no need of the emendation proposed by Knobel and accepted by Kautzsch, who would read gadhol, "great," for wedhal, "and the poor" of the text. The Septuagint has penes, "poor."``106';
isbe[2359]='Counter-Charm`koun\'-ter-charm.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AMULET">AMULET</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHARM">CHARM</a>`1';
isbe[2360]='Counterfeit`koun\'-ter-fit (kibdelos, anatupoo, homoioo): "Counterfeit" occurs as the translation of kibdelos, "mixed with dross," "not genuine" (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 15:9</span>, "to make counterfeit things," the Revised Version (British and American) "mouldeth counterfeits," "spurious things, imitations"); <span class="noTag">2:16</span> the Revised Version (British and American) "base metal" (compare Septuagint <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,19);">Le 19:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',22,11);">De 22:11</a>, "mingled garment," and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,5,6);">2Co 13:5-6</a>, adokimos, "reprobate" (silver)). "Counterfeit" in the older sense of a representation occurs in The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 14:17</span> (anatupoo, "to make a likeness"), "counterfeit of his visage," the Revised Version (British and American) "imagining the likeness from afar," and Ecclesiasticus 38:27 (homoioo, "to make like"), "to counterfeit imagery," the Revised Version (British and American) "to preserve likeness in his portraiture."``185';
isbe[2361]='Countervail`koun-ter-val\' (shawah, "equalize"): To thwart or overcome by acting against with equal force; thus, "The enemy could not countervail the king\'s damage" or loss (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',7,4);">Es 7:4</a> the American Standard Revised Version reads "The adversary could not have compensated for the king\'s damage"). "Nothing doth countervail (the Revised Version (British and American) "can be taken in exchange for") a faithful friend" (Ecclesiasticus 6:15).``1';
isbe[2362]='Country`kun\'-tri (\'erets, "land," sadheh, "field"; agros, "field," chora, "region"): The foregoing are the principal words rendered "country" in English Versions of the Bible, though we find also \'adhamah, "earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',4,2);">Jon 4:2</a>); \'i, "island" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',47,4);">Jer 47:4</a> the King James Version); gelilah, "circuit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',47,8);">Eze 47:8</a> the King James Version); chebhel, "rope" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',3,14);">De 3:14</a>); maqom, "place" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',29,26);">Ge 29:26</a> the King James Version); nepheth,"hill" or "height" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,11);">Jos 17:11</a> the King James Version); genos, "race" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,36);">Ac 4:36</a> the King James Version); ge, "earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,31);">Mt 9:31</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,3);">Ac 7:3</a> the King James Version); patris, "native land" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,23);">Lu 4:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,44);">Joh 4:44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,14);">Heb 11:14</a>); perichoros, "country (the American Standard Revised Version "region") round about" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,35);">Mt 14:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,3);">Lu 3:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,37);">4:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,37);">8:37</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,14);">Heb 11:14</a>ff, "heaven" is referred to as a country. Egypt and Assyria were "far countries" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,19);">Jer 8:19</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',10,9);">Zec 10:9</a>). The hill country (compare the numerous Gibeahs (gibh\'ah, "a hill")) was the mountainous region to the north or to the south of Jerusalem. The low country, shephelah (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHEPHELAH">SHEPHELAH</a>), consisted of the foothills to the west of the hill country. The south country or <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NEGEB">NEGEB</a> (neghebh), which see, was the dry, extreme southern part of Palestine, approximately between Beersheba and Kadesh-barnea.``37';
isbe[2363]='Countryman`kun\'-tri-man (sumphuletes): "Of the same tribe" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,14);">1Th 2:14</a>); also in idiomatic rendering (genos) for those of one\'s own race or kin (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,26);">2Co 11:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,14);">Ga 1:14</a> the King James Version, "one\'s own nation"). Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,4);">Mr 6:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,3);">Ro 9:3</a>`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COUSIN">COUSIN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KINSMAN">KINSMAN</a>`1';
isbe[2364]='Couple`kup\'-l:<P>(1) Used as a noun, indicates two objects of the same kind that are considered together. Thus we read of a couple of cakes (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',13,6);">2Sa 13:6</a>, used loosely), and a couple of asses (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,1);">2Sa 16:1</a>, Hebrew tsemedh).<P>(2) Used as a verb, it means to join or fasten one thing to another. This term occurs most frequently in the description of the tabernacle (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,6,9,11);">Ex 26:6, 9, 11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',36,10,13,16);">36:10, 13, 16</a>). Couple is used in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,2);">1Pe 3:2</a> to describe the joining of fear to chaste behavior (Hebrew chabhar) .``1';
isbe[2365]='Coupling`kup\'ling: Is the EV rendering of machbereth. This Hebrew word means joining, or the place where one thing is joined to another, as of the curtains of the tabernacle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,4,5);">Ex 26:4-5</a>), and of the different parts of the ephod (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,27);">Ex 28:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,20);">39:20</a>).<P>It is also the English Versions of the Bible rendering of mechabberoth, and this refers more to the thing that joins the two objects, as beams of wood (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',34,11);">2Ch 34:11</a>), or hooks of iron (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',22,3);">1Ch 22:3</a>).``1';
isbe[2366]='Courage`kur\'-aj: Hebrew chazaq, "to show oneself strong" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,20);">Nu 13:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,12);">2Sa 10:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',19,13);">1Ch 19:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',15,8);">2Ch 15:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,4);">Ezr 10:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',27,14);">Ps 27:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',31,24);">31:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,6);">Isa 41:6</a>); ruach, "spirit," "animus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,11);">Jos 2:11</a> the King James Version); \'amats, "to be alert" (physically and mentally), "to be agile," "quick," "energetic" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',31,6,7,23);">De 31:6-7, 23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',1,6,9,18);">Jos 1:6, 9, 18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,25);">10:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',22,13);">1Ch 22:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',28,20);">28:20</a>); lebhabh, "the heart," and figuratively, "person," "spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',11,25);">Da 11:25</a>); Greek tharsos, "cheer" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,15);">Ac 28:15</a>). A virtue highly esteemed among all nations, one of the four chief "natural" (cardinal) virtues (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 8:7</span>), while cowardice ranks as one of the mortal sins (Ecclesiasticus 2:12-13; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,8);">Re 21:8</a>).``1';
isbe[2367]='Course`kors (from Latin cursus, "a running," "race," "voyage," "way"):<P>(1) euthudromeo, "forward or onward movement," as of a ship: "We made a straight course" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,11);">Ac 16:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,1);">Ac 21:1</a>); "We had finished our course." (the Revised Version (British and American) "voyage," <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,7);">Ac 21:7</a>).<P>(2) A (prescribed or self-appointed) path, as of the sun: "Swift is the sun in his course" (1Esdras 4:34); of the stars: "The stars in their courses fought against Sisera" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,20);">Jud 5:20</a> the King James Version) (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY">ASTRONOMY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTROLOGY">ASTROLOGY</a>); of a river (or irrigating canal?): "as willows by the watercourses" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,4);">Isa 44:4</a>); of a race (techo "that the word of the Lord may have free course.") (the Revised Version (British and American) "may run") (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',3,1);">2Th 3:1</a>).<P>(3) A career in such a course (dromos): "I have finished my (the Revised Version (British and American) "the") course" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',4,7);">2Ti 4:7</a>); "as John fulfilled (the Revised Version (British and American) "was fulfilling") his course" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,25);">Ac 13:25</a>); "that I might finish (the Revised Version (British and American) "may accomplish") my course" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,24);">Ac 20:24</a>).<P>(4) A way or manner, as of life: "Every one turned to his course" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,6);">Jer 8:6</a>); "their course is evil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',23,10);">Jer 23:10</a>); "walked according to the course aion, the Revised Version, [margin "age"] of this world" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,2);">Eph 2:2</a>).<P>(5) Orderly succession: "sang together by course" (the American Standard Revised Version "sang one to another") (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,11);">Ezr 3:11</a>); "by course" (the Revised Version (British and American) "in turn") (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,27);">1Co 14:27</a>); the courses of the priests and Levites (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,\'1-15\');">1Ch 27:1-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',28,1);">1Ch 28:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',5,11);">2Ch 5:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,5,8);">Lu 1:5, 8</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRIESTS+AND+LEVITES">PRIESTS and LEVITES</a>.<P>(6) A row or layer, as of masonry: "All the foundations of the earth are out of count" (the Revised Version (British and American) "are moved"; the American Standard Revised Version "are shaken") (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',82,5);">Ps 82:5</a>).<P>(7) (The tongue) "setteth on fire the course (the Revised Version (British and American) "wheel") of nature" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',3,6);">Jas 3:6</a>). The cycle of generation (ton trochon tes geneseos) here means the physical world as constituted by the round of origin and decay, and typified by the Orphic (legendary) cycle of births and deaths through which the soul passes in metempsychosis.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GAMES">GAMES</a>`75';
isbe[2368]='Course of Priests And Levites``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRIESTS+AND+LEVITES">PRIESTS and LEVITES</a>`1';
isbe[2369]='Court`kort.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[2370]='Court of the Gentiles``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE,+HEROD\'S">TEMPLE (HEROD\'S)</a>`1';
isbe[2371]='Court of the Sabbath``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COVERED+WAY">COVERED WAY</a>`1';
isbe[2372]='Court of the Sanctuary; Tabernacle; Temple`kort, sank\'-tu-a-ri: By "court" (chatser) is meant a clear space enclosed by curtains or walls, or surrounded by buildings. It was always an uncovered enclosure, but might have within its area one or more edifices.<P>1. The Tabernacle:<P>The first occurrence of the word is in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,9);">Ex 27:9</a>, where it is commanded to "make the court of the tabernacle." The dimensions for this follow in the directions for the length of the linen curtains which were to enclose it. From these we learn that the perimeter of the court was 300 cubits, and that it consisted of two squares, each 75 ft., lying east and west of one another. In the westerly square stood the tabernacle, while in that to the east was the altar of burnt offering. This was the worshipper\'s square, and every Hebrew who passed through the entrance gate had immediate access to the altar (compare W. Robertson Smith, note on <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,26);">Ex 20:26</a>, Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 435). The admission to this scene of the national solemnities was by the great east gate described in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,\'13-16\');">Ex 27:13-16</a> (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EAST+GATE">EAST GATE</a>).<P>2. Solomon\'s Temple:<P>The fundamental conception out of which grew the resolve to build a temple for the worship of Yahweh was that the new structure was to be an enlarged duplicate in stone of the tent of meeting (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE">TEMPLE</a>). The doubling in size of the holy chambers was accompanied by a doubling of the enclosed area upon which the holy house was to stand. Hitherto a rectangular oblong figure of 150 ft. in length and 75 ft. in breadth had sufficed for the needs of the people in their worship. Now an area of 300 ft. in length and 150 ft. in breadth was enclosed within heavy stone walls, making, as before, two squares, each of 150 ft. This was that "court of the priests" spoken of in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,9);">2Ch 4:9</a>, known to its builders as "the inner court" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,36);">1Ki 6:36</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,10);">Jer 36:10</a>). Its walls consisted of "three courses of hewn stone, and a course of cedar beams" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,36);">1Ki 6:36</a>), into which some read the meaning of colonnades. Its two divisions may have been marked by some fence. The innermost division, accessible only to the priests, was the site of the new temple. In the easterly division stood the altar of sacrifice; into this the Hebrew laity had access for worship at the altar. Later incidental allusions imply the existence of "chambers" in the court, and also the accessibility of the laity (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',35,4);">Jer 35:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,10);">36:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,16);">Eze 8:16</a>).<P>3. The Great Court:<P>In distinction from this "inner" court a second or "outer" court was built by Solomon, spoken of by the Chronicler as "the great court" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,9);">2Ch 4:9</a>). Its doors were overlaid with brass (bronze). Wide difference of opinion obtains as to the relation of this outer court to the inner court just described, and to the rest of the Solomonic buildings<67>particularly to "the great court" of "the house of the forest of Lebanon" of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,9,10);">1Ki 7:9-10</a>. Some identify the two, others separate them. Did this court, with its brass-covered gates, extend still farther to the east than the temple "inner" court, with, however, the same breadth as the latter? Or was it, as Keil thinks, a much larger enclosure, surrounding the whole temple area, extending perhaps 150 cubits eastward in front of the priests\' court (compare Keil, Biblical Archaeology, I,171,English translation)? Yet more radical is the view, adopted by many modern authorities, which regards "the great court" as a vast enclosure surrounding the temple and the whole complex of buildings described in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,\'1-12\');">1Ki 7:1-12</a> (see the plan, after Stade, in G. A. Smith\'s Jerusalem, II, 59). In the absence of conclusive data the question must be left undetermined.<P>4. Ezekiel\'s Temple:<P>In Ezekiel\'s plan of the temple yet to be built, the lines of the temple courts as he had known them in Jerusalem are followed. Two squares enclosed in stone walling, each of 150 ft., lie north and south of one another, and bear the distinctive names, "the inner court" and "the outer court" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,16);">Eze 8:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',10,5);">10:5</a>).<P>5. Temple of Herod:<P>In the Herodian temple the old nomenclature gives place to a new set of terms. The extensive enclosure known later as "the court of the Gentiles" does not appear under that name in the New Testament or in Josephus What we have in the tract Middoth of the Mishna and in Josephus is the mention of two courts, the "court of the priests" and "the court of Israel" (Middoth, ii.6; v. 1; Josephus, BJ, V, v, 6). The data in regard to both are difficult and conflicting. In Middoth they appear as long narrow strips of 11 cubits in breadth extending at right angles to the temple and the altar across the enclosure<72>the "court of Israel" being railed off from the "court of the priests" on the east; the latter extending backward as far as the altar, which has a distinct measurement. The design was to prevent the too near approach of the lay Israelite to the altar. Josephus makes the 11 cubits of the "court of Israel" extend round the whole "court of the priests, " inclusive of altar and temple (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE">TEMPLE</a>; and compare G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, II, 506- 9, with the reconstruction of Waterhouse in Sacred Sites of the Gospels, 111ff). For the "women\'s court," see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TREASURY">TREASURY</a>.<P>Many expressions in the Psalms show how great was the attachment of the devout-minded Hebrew in all ages to those courts of the Lord\'s house where he was accustomed to worship (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',65,4);">Ps 65:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',84,2);">84:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',92,13);">92:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',96,8);">96:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',100,4);">100:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',116,19);">116:19</a>). The courts were the scene of many historical events in the Old Testament and New Testament, and of much of the earthly ministry of Jesus. There was enacted the scene described in the parable of the Pharisee and Publican (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'10-14\');">Lu 18:10-14</a>).``17';
isbe[2373]='Courts, Judicial`joo-dish\'-al, ju-dish\'-al.<P>1. Their Organization:<P>At the advice of Jethro, Moses appointed judges (shophetim, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,\'1-\');">Ex 18</a>). In Egypt it appears that the Hebrews did not have their own judges, which, of course, was a source of many wrongs. Leaving Egypt, Moses took the judicial functions upon himself, but it was impossible that he should be equal to the task of administering justice to two and one-half million people; hence, he proceeded to organize a system of jurisprudence. He appointed judges over tens, fifties, hundreds, thousands<64>in all 78,600 judges. This system was adequate for the occasion, and these courts respectively corresponded practically to our Justices of the Peace, Mayor\'s Court, District Court, Circuit Court. Finally, there was a Supreme Court under Moses and his successors. These courts, though graded, did not afford an opportunity of appeal. The lower courts turned their difficult cases over to the next higher. If the case was simple, the judge over tens would take it, but if the question was too intricate for him, he would refer it to the next higher court, and so on until it finally reached Moses. There were certain kinds of questions which the tens, fifties, and hundreds would not take at all, and the people understood it and would bring them to the higher courts for original jurisdiction. When any court decided it, that was the end of that case, for it could not be appealed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,25,26);">Ex 18:25-26</a>). On taking possession in Palestine, the judges were to be appointed for every city and vicinity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',16,18);">De 16:18</a>), thus giving to all Israel a speedy and cheap method of adjudication. Though not so prescribed by the constitution, the judges at length were generally chosen from among the Levites, as the learned class. The office was elective. Josephus states this plainly, and various passages of the Scriptures express it positively by inference (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,13);">De 1:13</a>). Jephthah\'s election by vote of the people is clearly set forth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',11,\'5-11\');">Jud 11:5-11</a>).<P>2. Character of the Judges:<P>Among the Hebrews, the law was held very sacred; for God Himself had given it. Hence, those who administered the law were God\'s special representatives, and their person was held correspondingly sacred. These circumstances placed upon them the duty of administering justice without respect to persons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,17);">De 1:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',16,18);">16:18</a>). They were to be guided by the inalienable rights granted to every citizen by the Hebrew constitution:<P>(1) No man was to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,\'9-34\');">Nu 35:9-34</a>).<P>(2) Two or three witnesses were required to convict anyone of crime (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,6);">De 17:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,\'2-13\');">19:2-13</a>).<P>(3) Punishment for crime was not to be transferred or entailed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,16);">De 24:16</a>).<P>(4) A man\'s home was inviolate (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,10,11);">De 24:10-11</a>).<P>(5) One held to bondage but having acquired liberty through his own effort should be protected (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',23,15,16);">De 23:15-16</a>).<P>(6) One\'s homestead was inalienable (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,\'23-28\',34);">Le 25:23-28, 34</a>).<P>(7) Slavery could not be made perpetual without the person\'s own consent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,\'2-6\');">Ex 21:2-6</a>).<P>3. Their Work:<P>Gradually a legal profession developed among the Hebrews, the members of which were designated as "Lawyers" or "Scribes" also known as "Doctors of the Law" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,46);">Lu 2:46</a>). Their business was threefold:<P>(1) to study and interpret the law;<P>(2) to instruct the Hebrew youth in the law; and<P>(3) to decide questions of the law. The first two they did as scholars and teachers; the last either as judges or as advisers in some court, as, for instance, the Senate of Jerusalem or some inferior tribunal. No code can go into such details as to eliminate the necessity of subsequent legislation, and this usually, to a great extent, takes the form of judicial decisions founded on the code, rather than of separate enactment; and so it was among the Hebrews. The provisions of their code were for the most part quite general, thus affording large scope for casuistic interpretation. Regarding the points not explicitly covered by the written law, a substitute must be found either in the form of established custom or in the form of an inference drawn from the statute.<P>As a result of the industry with which this line of legal development was pursued during the centuries immediately preceding our era, Hebrew law became a most complicated science. For the disputed points, the judgments of the individual lawyers could not be taken as the standard; hence, the several disciples of the law must frequently meet for a discussion, and the opinion of the majority then prevailed. These were the meetings of the "Doctors." Whenever a case arose concerning which there had been no clear legal decision, the question was referred to the nearest lawyer; by him, to the nearest company of lawyers, perhaps the Sanhedrin, and the resultant decision was henceforth authority.<P>Before the destruction of Jerusalem technical knowledge of the law was not a condition of eligibility to the office of judge. Anyone who could command the confidence of his fellow-citizens might be elected, and many of the rural courts undoubtedly were conducted, as among us, by men of sterling quality, but limited knowledge. Such men would avail themselves of the legal advice of any "doctor" who might be within reach; and in the more dignified courts of a large municipality it was a standing custom to have a company of lawyers present to discuss and decide any new law points that might arise. Of course, frequently these men were themselves elected to the office of judge, so that practically the entire system of jurisprudence was in their hands.<P>4. Limitations under Roman Rule:<P>Though Judea at this time was a subject commonwealth, yet the Sanhedrin, which was the body of supreme legislative and judicial authority, exercised autonomous authority to such an extent that it not only administered civil cases in accordance with Jewish law<61>for without such a right a Jewish court would be impossible<6C>but it also took part to a great extent in the punishment of crime. It exercised an independent police power, hence, could send out its own officers to make arrests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,47);">Mt 26:47</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,43);">Mr 14:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,3);">Ac 4:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,17,18);">5:17-18</a>). In cases that did not involve capital punishment, its judgments were final and untrammeled (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,\'2-23\');">Ac 4:2-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,\'21-40\');">5:21-40</a>). Only in capital punishment cases must the consent of the procurator be secured, which is not only clearly stated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,31);">Joh 18:31</a>, but is also evident in the entire course of Christ\'s trial, as reported by the Synoptic Gospels. In granting or withholding his consent in such cases, the procurator could follow his pleasure absolutely, applying either the Jewish or Roman law, as his guide. In one class of cases the right to inflict capital punishment even on Roman citizens was granted the Sanhedrin, namely, when a non-Jewish person overstepped the bounds and entered the interior holy place of the temple. Even in this case the consent of the procurator must be secured, but it appears that the Roman rulers were inclined to let the law take its course against such wanton outrage of the Jews\' feelings. Criminal cases not involving capital punishment need not be referred to the procurator.<P>5. Time and Place of Sessions:<P>The city in which the Sanhedrin met was Jerusalem. To determine the particular building, and the spot on which the building stood, is interesting to the archaeologist, not to the student of law. The local courts usually held their sessions on the second and fifth day (Monday and Thursday) of the week, but we do not know whether the same custom was observed by the Great Sanhedrin. On feast days no court was held, much less on the Sabbath. Since the death penalty was not to be pronounced until the day after the trial, such cases were avoided also on the day preceding a Sabbath or other sacred day. The emphasis placed on this observance may be seen from the edicts issued by Augustus, absolving the Jews from the duty of attending court on the Sabbath.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DOCTOR">DOCTOR</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LAWYER">LAWYER</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SANHEDRIN">SANHEDRIN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SCRIBES">SCRIBES</a>`77';
isbe[2374]='Cousin`kuz\'-\'-n (anepsios): Only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',4,10);">Col 4:10</a>, where Mark is said to be "cousin" (Revised Version) to Barnabas, and not as in the King James Version, "sister\'s son." The renderings "cousin" of the King James Version for suggenes, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,36,58);">Lu 1:36, 58</a> were probably understood at the time of the translation, in the wider, and not in the more restricted, sense of the term, now almost universally prevalent. In view of this the renderings "kinswoman," "kinsfolk" in the Revised Version (British and American) are preferable. As a title of honor and dignity, it occurs in 1Esdras 4:42, etc.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KINSMAN">KINSMAN</a>`1';
isbe[2375]='Coutha`kou\'-tha, koo\'-tha.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CUTHAH">CUTHAH</a>`1';
isbe[2376]='Covenant of Salt`solt (berith melach; halas, classical Greek hals): As salt was regarded as a necessary ingredient of the daily food, and so of all sacrifices offered to Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',2,13);">Le 2:13</a>), it became an easy step to the very close connection between salt and covenant-making. When men ate together they became friends. Compare the Arabic expression, "There is salt between us"; "He has eaten of my salt," which means partaking of hospitality which cemented friendship; compare "eat the salt of the palace" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',4,14);">Ezr 4:14</a>). Covenants were generally confirmed by sacrificial meals and salt was always present. Since, too, salt is a preservative, it would easily become symbolic of an enduring covenant. So offerings to Yahweh were to be by a statute forever, "a covenant of salt for ever before Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,19);">Nu 18:19</a>). David received his kingdom forever from Yahweh by a "covenant of salt" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',13,5);">2Ch 13:5</a>). In the light of these conceptions the remark of our Lord becomes the more significant: "Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace one with another" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,50);">Mr 9:50</a>).``137';
isbe[2377]='Covenant, Ark of the`kuv\'-e-nant, kuv\'-e-nant.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARK+OF+THE+COVENANT">ARK OF THE COVENANT</a>`1';
isbe[2378]='Covenant, Book of the`(cepher ha-berith):<P>1. Historical Connection<P>2. Analysis<P>3. Critical Theories<P>4. True, or Biblical Conception<P>5. Nature of the Laws<P>LITERATURE<P><hr />The name given in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,7);">Ex 24:7</a> to a code or collection of laws found in the preceding chapters, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,\'1-\');">20-23</a>, as the terms of the covenant made with Yahweh, and given for Israel\'s guidance until a more complete legislation should be provided. In this covenant between Yahweh and Israel, Moses served as mediator; animals were sacrificed, the blood thus shed being also called "the blood of the covenant" (dam haberith, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,8);">Ex 24:8</a>).<P>1. Historical Connection:<P>This brief book of laws occupies a fitting and dearly marked place in the Pentateuchal collection. Examination of the historical context shows that it is put where it belongs and belongs where it is put. A few months after the Exodus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,1);">Ex 19:1</a>) Israel arrived at Sinai. Immediately at the command which Moses had received from Yahweh in the Mount, they prepared themselves by a ceremonial of sanctification for entrance into covenant relation with Yahweh. When the great day arrived for making this covenant, Moses in the midst of impressive natural phenomena went again to meet Yahweh in the top of the mountain. On his return (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,25);">Ex 19:25</a>), the words of the law, or the terms of the covenant, were declared to the people, and accepted by them. The first part of these covenant-terms, namely, the Decalogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,\'2-17\');">Ex 20:2-17</a>), was spoken by the Divine voice, or its declaration was accompanied by awe-inspiring natural convulsions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,18);">Ex 20:18</a>). Therefore in response to the pleadings of the terrified people Moses went up again into the mountain and received from Yahweh for them the rest of the "words" and "ordinances" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,3);">Ex 24:3</a>); and these constitute the so-called Book of the Covenant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,\'22-23\');">Ex 20:22-23</a>). In this direct and unequivocal manner the narrator connected the book with the nation\'s consecration at Sinai. The prophets regarded the making of the Sinaitic covenant as the marriage of Israel and Yahweh, and these laws were the terms mutually agreed upon in the marriage contract.<P>2. Analysis:<P>While it is not possible to arrange the materials of this document into hard-and-fast divisions, the following analysis may be suggestive and serviceable:<P>(1) directions concerning worship, specifying prohibition of images and the form of altar for animal sacrifices (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,\'23-26\');">Ex 20:23-26</a>);<P>(2) ordinances for protection of Hebrew slaves, including betrothal, for a price, of daughter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,\'2-11\');">Ex 21:2-11</a>);<P>(3) laws concerning injuries,<P>(a) to man by man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,\'12-27\');">Ex 21:12-27</a>),<P>(b) to man by beast (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,\'28-32\');">Ex 21:28-32</a>), <P>(c) to beast by man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,33,34);">Ex 21:33-34</a>),<P>(d) to beast by beast (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,35,36);">Ex 21:35-36</a>);<P>(4) concerning theft (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,\'1-4\');">Ex 22:1-4</a>);<P>(5) concerning damage to a neighbor\'s property, including violence to his daughter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,\'5-17\');">Ex 22:5-17</a>);<P>(6) sundry laws against profaning Yahweh\'s name, under which are included proper worship, avoidance of oppression and dutiful offering of first-fruits (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,\'18-31\');">Ex 22:18-31</a>);<P>(7) against various forms of injustice and unbrotherliness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,\'1-9\');">Ex 23:1-9</a>);<P>(8) festal occasions, including the Sabbatical year and the three annual feasts: unleavened bread, first-fruits and ingathering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,\'10-17\');">Ex 23:10-17</a>);<P>(9) warning against certain wrong practices in their sacrifices (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,18,19);">Ex 23:18-19</a>);<P>(10) in conclusion, a promise of God\'s continual presence with them in the person of His Angel, and the consequent triumph over enemies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,\'20-33\');">Ex 23:20-33</a>).<P>3. Critical Theories:<P>In this legislation are found two forms of laws or deliverances:<P>(1) the ordinances (mishpatim), which deal principally with civil and moral matters, are like court decisions, and are introduced by the hypothetical "if";<P>(2) words, or commands (debharim), which relate chiefly to religious duties, being introduced by the imperative "thou shalt."<P>The critical analysis and dismemberment of the books of Moses, if accepted, renders the simple historical explanation of the introduction to this body of laws untrue and impossible. The four chapters are assigned to JE, the Decalogue to E, and the Book of the Covenant to the Jahwist (Jahwist) or Elohim (E), the repetition of the Decalogue in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',32,\'1-\');">Ex 32-34</a> being the Jahwist\'s account. Ordinarily the Book of the Covenant is held to be earlier than the Decalogue, and is indeed the oldest body of Hebrew legislation. However, it could not have been given at one time, nor in the wilderness, since the laws are given for those in agricultural life, and seem to be decisions made at various times and finally gathered together. Furthermore, this more primitive code either contradicts the later legislation of the Deuteronomist (D) and the Priestly Code (P) or reveals an entirely different point of view. The chief contradictions or divergences are: nature and number of altars, absence of an official priestly class, and simpler conception of the annual feasts as agricultural celebrations. Jahwist-Elohim (JE) came into united form in the 9th or 8th century, but this body of laws existed much earlier, embodying the earliest legal developments of Hebrew life in Canaan. It is suggested by some, as Driver, LOT, although he does not attempt the analysis, that this code is itself a composite of various layers and ages.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CRITICISM">CRITICISM OF THE BIBLE (GRAF-WELLHAUSEN HYPOTHESIS)</a>.<P>4. True, or Biblical Conception:<P>But in favor of the simpler interpretation of these laws as the ethical obligations of the new bond between Yahweh and Israel some statements deserve to be made. If a solemn league and covenant was made at Sinai<61>and to this all the history, all the prophets and the Psalms give testimony<6E>there must have been some statement of the germinal and fundamental elements of the nation\'s moral relation to Yahweh. Such statement need not be final nor exhaustive, but rather intended to instruct and guide until later and more detailed directions might be given. This is exactly the position and claim of the Book of the Covenant; and that this was the thought of the editor of the Pentateuch, and that this is the first and reasonable impression made by the unsuspecting and connected reading of the record, can hardly be questioned by candid minds. In answer to the criticism that the agricultural flavor of the laws presupposes settlement in Canaan<61>a criticism rather remarkable for its bland ignorance<63>it may be suggested:<P>(1) Israel had occupied in Egypt an agricultural section, and must have been able either to form or to receive a body of laws dealing with agricultural pursuits.<P>(2) They were on the march toward a land in which they should have permanent settlement in agricultural life; and not the presence of allusions to such life, but rather their absence, should cause surprise.<P>(3) However, references to settled farm life are not so obtrusively frequent as those seeking signs would have us think. References to the animal life of the flock and herd of a shepherd people, such as the Israelites were at Sinai, are far more frequent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,28,33,35);">Ex 21:28, 33, 35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,1,10);">22:1, 10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,4);">23:4</a>, etc.). The laws are quite generic in form and conception, enforcing such duties as would devolve upon both temporary nomad and prospective tillers of the soil. R. B. Taylor therefore (article in one-vol Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes)) accepts this code as originating in the desert wanderings.<P>In answer to the view, best presented by Wellhausen in Proleg. and W. R. Smith in OTJC, that this code is in conflict with later legislation, it may be said that the Book of the Covenant, as an ethical and civil summary, is in its proper place in the narrative of the sojourn at Sinai, and does not preclude the expectancy of more elaborate organization of both ceremonial and civil order. But the whole question relates more properly to discussion of the later legislation or of the particular topics in dispute (which see). For a thorough treatment of them consult W. H. Green, Hebrew Feasts.<P>5. Nature of the Laws:<P>In the Book of the Covenant the moral elements strongly emphasized are: simplicity, directness and spirituality of worship; a high and equitable standard of right; highest consideration for the weak and the poor; humane treatment of dumb animals; purity in the relations of life; the spirit of brotherhood; and the simple and joyful life. Whatever development in details came with later legislation did not nullify the simple but lofty standards of the earlier laws.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Driver, Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, under "Exodus"; Wellhausen, Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Israel; Comp. d. Hexateuch; W. R. Smith, Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church; W. H. Green, Hebrew Feasts; Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch; Dillmann, Commentary on Exodus-Leviticus.``109';
isbe[2379]='Covenant, in the New Testament`Diatheke, was the word chosen by the Septuagint translators to render the Hebrew berith, and it appears thus nearly 300 times in the Greek Old Testament in the sense of covenant, while suntheke and entolai are each used once only. The choice of this word seems to have been occasioned by a recognition that the covenant which God makes with men is not fully mutual as would be implied in suntheke, the Greek word commonly used for covenant (although not a New Testament word), while at the same time the rarity of wills among the Jews made the common sense of diatheke relatively unfamiliar. The Apocryphal writers also frequently use the same word in the same sense and no other.<P>In the New Testament diatheke is used some thirty times in a way which makes it plain that its translation must be "covenant." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,15);">Ga 3:15</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'15-17\');">Heb 9:15-17</a> it is held by many that the sense of covenant must be set aside in favor of will or testament. But in the former passage it can be taken in the sense of a disposition of affairs or arrangement made by God, a conception in substantial harmony with its regular New Testament use and with the sense of berith. In the passage in Hebrews the interpretation is more difficult, but as it is acknowledged on all hands that the passage loses all argumentative force if the meaning testament is accepted, it seems best to retain the meaning covenant if possible. To do this it is only necessary to hold that the death spoken of is the death of the animal sometimes, if not, indeed, commonly slain in connection with the making of a covenant, and that in the mind of the author this death symbolized the death of the contracting parties so far at least as to pledge them that thereafter in the matter involved they would no more change their minds than can the dead. If this view is taken, this passage falls in line with the otherwise invariable use of the word diatheke by Jewish Hellenists.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Lightfoot, Commentary on Gal; Ramsay, Commentary on Gal; Westcott, Commentary on Hebrews; article on <span class="noTag">Heb 9:15-17</span>, Baptist Review and The Expositor., July, 1904.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TESTAMENT">TESTAMENT</a>`51';
isbe[2380]='Covenant, in the Old Testament`kuv\'-e-nant (berith):<P><b>I. GENERAL MEANING</b><P><b>II. AMONG MEN</b><P class="in15">1. Early Idea<P class="in15">2. Principal Elements<P class="in15">3. Different Varieties<P class="in15">4. Phraseology Used<P><b>III. BETWEEN GOD AND MEN</b><P class="in15">1. Essential Idea<P class="in15">2. Covenants Recorded in the Old Testament<P class="in15">3. Phraseology Used<P class="in15">4. History of Covenant Idea<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr .<<P>I. General Meaning.<P>The etymological force of the Hebrew berith is not entirely certain. It is probable that the word is the same as the Assyrian biritu, which has the common meaning "fetter," but also means "covenant." The significance of the root from which this Assyrian word is derived is uncertain. It is probable that it is "to bind," but that is not definitely established. The meaning of biritu as covenant seems to come directly from the root, rather than as a derived meaning from fetter. If this root idea is to bind, the covenant is that which binds together the parties. This, at any rate, is in harmony with the general meaning of the word.<P>In the Old Testament the word has an ordinary use, when both parties are men, and a distinctly religious use, between God and men. There can be no doubt that the religious use has come from the ordinary, in harmony with the general custom in such cases, and not the reverse. There are also two shades of meaning, somewhat distinct, of the Hebrew word: one in which it is properly a covenant, i.e. a solemn mutual agreement, the other in which it is more a command, i.e. instead of an obligation voluntarily assumed, it is an obligation imposed by a superior upon an inferior. This latter meaning, however, has clearly been derived from the other. It is easy to see that an agreement, including as the contracting parties those of unequal position, might readily include those agreements which tended to partake of the nature of a command; but the process could not readily be reversed.<P>II. Among Men.<P>1. Early Idea:<P>We consider first a covenant in which both contracting parties are men. In essence a covenant is an agreement, but an agreement of a solemn and binding force. The early Semitic idea of a covenant was doubtless that which prevailed among the Arabs (see especially W. Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, 2nd edition, passim). This was primarily blood-brotherhood, in which two men became brothers by drinking each other\'s blood. Ordinarily this meant that one was adopted into the clan of the other. Hence, this act involved the clan of one of the contracting parties, and also brought the other party into relation with the god of this clan, by bringing him into the community life of the clan, which included its god. In this early idea, then, "primarily the covenant is not a special engagement to this or that particular effect, but bond of troth and life- fellowship to all the effects for which kinsmen are permanently bound together" (W. Robertson Smith, op. cit., 315f). In this early ceremonial the religious idea was necessarily present, because the god was kindred to the clan; and the god had a special interest in the covenant because he especially protects the kindred blood, of which the stranger thus becomes a part. This religious side always persisted, although the original idea was much modified. In later usage there were various substitutes for the drinking of each other\'s blood, namely, drinking together the sacrificial blood, sprinkling it upon the parties, eating together the sacrificial meal, etc.; but the same idea found expression in all, the community of life resulting from the covenant.<P>2. Principal Elements:<P>The covenant in the Old Testament shows considerable modification from the early idea. Yet it will doubtless help in understanding the Old Testament covenant to keep in mind the early idea and form. Combining statements made in different accounts, the following seem to be the principal elements in a covenant between men. Some of the details, it is to be noted, are not explicitly stated in reference to these covenants, but may be inferred from those between God and men.<P>(1) A statement of the terms agreed upon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,29);">Ge 26:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,50,52);">31:50, 52</a>). This was a modification of the earlier idea, which has been noted, in which a covenant was all-inclusive.<P>(2) An oath by each party to observe the terms, God being witness of the oath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,31);">Ge 26:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,\'48-53\');">31:48-53</a>). The oath was such a characteristic feature that sometimes the term "oath" is used as the equivalent of covenant (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',17,13);">Eze 17:13</a>).<P>(3) A curse invoked by each one upon himself in case disregard of the agreement. In a sense this may be considered a part of the oath, adding emphasis to it. This curse is not explicitly stated in the case of human covenants, but may be inferred from the covenant with God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',27,\'15-26\');">De 27:15-26</a>).<P>(4) The formal ratification of the covenant by some solemn external act.<P>The different ceremonies for this purpose, such as have already been mentioned, are to be regarded as the later equivalents of the early act of drinking each other\'s blood. In the Old Testament accounts it is not certain that such formal act is expressly mentioned in relation to covenants between men. It seems probable, however, that the sacrificial meal of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,54);">Ge 31:54</a> included Laban, in which case it was a covenant sacrifice. In any case, both sacrificial meal and sprinkling of blood upon the two parties, the altar representing Yahweh, are mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,\'4-8\');">Ex 24:4-8</a>, with allusions elsewhere, in ratification of the covenant at Sinai between Yahweh and Israel. In the covenant of God with Abraham is another ceremony, quite certainly with the same purpose. This is a peculiar observance, namely, the cutting of animals into two parts and passing between the severed portions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,\'9-18\');">Ge 15:9-18</a>), a custom also referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,18);">Jer 34:18</a>. Here it is to be noted that it is a smoking furnace and a flaming torch, representing God, not Abraham, which passed between the pieces. Such an act, it would seem, should be shared by both parties, but in this case it is doubtless to be explained by the fact that the covenant is principally a promise by Yahweh. He is the one who binds Himself. Concerning the significance of this act there is difference of opinion. A common view is that it is in effect a formal expression of the curse, imprecating upon oneself the same, i.e. cutting in pieces, if one breaks the terms of the covenant. But, as W. R. Smith has pointed out (op. cit., 481), this does not explain the passing between the pieces, which is the characteristic feature of the ceremony. It seems rather to be a symbol that the two parties "were taken within the mystical life of the victim." (Compare the interpretation of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'15-17\');">Heb 9:15-17</a> in <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COVENANT,+IN+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT">COVENANT, IN THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>.) It would then be an inheritance from the early times, in which the victim was regarded as kindred with the tribe, and hence, also an equivalent of the drinking of each other\'s blood.<P>The immutability of a covenant is everywhere assumed, at least theoretically.<P>Other features beyond those mentioned cannot be considered as fundamental. This is the case with the setting up of a stone, or raising a heap of stones (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,45,46);">Ge 31:45-46</a>). This is doubtless simply an ancient custom, which has no direct connection with the covenant, but comes from the ancient Semitic idea of the sacredness of single stones or heaps of stones. Striking hands is a general expression of an agreement made (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,19);">Ezr 10:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',17,18);">Eze 17:18</a>, etc.).<P>3. Different Varieties:<P>In observing different varieties of agreements among men, we note that they may be either between individuals or between larger units, such as tribes and nations. In a great majority of cases, however, they are between the larger units. In some cases, also, when an individual acts it is in a representative capacity, as the head of a clan, or as a king. When the covenant is between tribes it is thus a treaty or alliance. The following passages have this use of covenant: <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,13);">Ge 14:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,27,32);">21:27, 32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,28);">26:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,44);">31:44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,32);">Ex 23:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,12,15);">34:12, 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',7,2);">De 7:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',9,6,7,11,15,16);">Jos 9:6-7, 11, 15-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',2,2);">Jud 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',11,1);">1Sa 11:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',3,12);">1Ki 3:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',15,19);">15:19</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',16,3);">2Ch 16:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',20,34);">1Ki 20:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',83,5);">Ps 83:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',33,8);">Isa 33:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,61);">Eze 16:61</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',17,\'13-19\');">17:13-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',30,5);">30:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',11,22);">Da 11:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,9);">Am 1:9</a>. In other cases it is between a king and his subjects, when it is more a command or ordinance, as <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,12,13,21);">2Sa 3:12-13, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,3);">5:3</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,3);">1Ch 11:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,\'8-18\');">Jer 34:8-18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,27);">Da 9:27</a>. In other cases it is between individuals, or between small groups, where it is an agreement or pledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,4);">2Ki 11:4</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',23,1);">2Ch 23:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,1);">Job 31:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,4);">41:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,4);">Ho 10:4</a>). Between David and Jonathan it is more specifically an alliance of friendship (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,3);">1Sa 18:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,8);">20:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,18);">23:18</a>), as also apparently in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',55,20);">Ps 55:20</a>. It means an alliance of marriage in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',2,14);">Mal 2:14</a>, but probably not in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',2,17);">Pr 2:17</a>, where it is better to understand the meaning as being "her covenant with God."<P>4. Phraseology Used:<P>In all cases of covenants between men, except <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,10);">Jer 34:10</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,27);">Da 9:27</a>, the technical phrase for making a covenant is karath berith, in which karath meant originally "to cut." Everything indicates that this verb is used with reference to the formal ceremony of ratification above mentioned, of cutting animals in pieces.<P>III. Between God and Men.<P>1. Essential Idea: As already noted, the idea of covenants between God and men doubtless arose from the idea of covenants between men. Hence, the general thought is similar. It cannot in this case, however, be an agreement between contracting parties who stand on an equality, but God, the superior, always takes the initiative. To some extent, however, varying in different cases, is regarded as a mutual agreement; God with His commands makes certain promises, and men agree to keep the commands, or, at any rate, the promises are conditioned on human obedience. In general, the covenant of God with men is a Divine ordinance, with signs and pledges on God\'s part, and with promises for human obedience and penalties for disobedience, which ordinance is accepted by men. In one passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',25,14);">Ps 25:14</a>), it is used in a more general way of an alliance of friendship between God and man.<P>2. Covenants Recorded in the Old Testament:<P>A covenant of this general kind is said in the Old Testament to have been made by God with Noah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',9,\'9-17\');">Ge 9:9-17</a> and elsewhere). In this the promise is that there shall be no more deluge. A covenant is made with Abraham, the thought of which includes his descendants. In this the promise of God is to multiply the descendants of Abraham, to give them the land of Canaan, and to make them a blessing to the nations. This is narrated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,18);">Ge 15:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',17,\'2-21\');">17:2-21</a>, etc. A covenant is made with the nation Israel at Sinai (Horeb) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,5);">Ex 19:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,7,8);">24:7-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,10,27,28);">34:10, 27-28</a>, etc.), ratified by a covenant sacrifice and sprinkling of blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,\'4-8\');">Ex 24:4-8</a>). This constituted the nation the peculiar people of God, and was accompanied by promises for obedience and penalties for disobedience. This covenant was renewed on the plains of Moab (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',29,1);">De 29:1</a>). In these national covenants the individual had a place, but only as a member of the nation. The individual might forfeit his rights under the covenant, however, by deliberate rebellion against Yahweh, sinning "with a high hand" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',15,30);">Nu 15:30</a>f), and then he was regarded as no longer a member of the nation, he was "cut off from among his people," i.e. put to death. This is the teaching of the Priestly Code (P), and is also implied elsewhere; in the mercy of God, however, the punishment was not always inflicted. A covenant with the tribe of Levi, by which that became the priestly tribe, is alluded to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,9);">De 33:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,21);">Jer 33:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',2,4);">Mal 2:4</a>ff. The covenant with Phinehas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,12,13);">Nu 25:12-13</a>) established an everlasting priesthood in his line. The covenant with Joshua and Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',24,\'1-\');">Jos 24</a>) was an agreement on their part to serve Yahweh only. The covenant with David (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',7,\'1-\');">2Sa 7</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',17,\'1-\');">1Ch 17</a>; see also <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,3,18,34,39);">Ps 89:3, 18, 34, 39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',132,12);">132:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,21);">Jer 33:21</a>) contained a promise that his descendants should have an everlasting kingdom, and should stand to God in the relation of sonship. The covenant with Jehoiada and the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,17);">2Ki 11:17</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',23,3);">2Ch 23:3</a>) was an agreement on their part to be the people of Yahweh. The covenant with Hezekiah and the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,10);">2Ch 29:10</a>) consisted essentially of an agreement on their part to reform the worship; the covenant with Josiah and the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,3);">2Ki 23:3</a>), of an agreement on their part to obey the Book of the Law. The covenant with Ezra and the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,3);">Ezr 10:3</a>) was an agreement on their part to put away foreign wives and obey the law. The prophets also speak of a new covenant, most explicitly in Jeremiah, but with references elsewhere, which is connected with the Messianic time (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,6);">Isa 42:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,8);">49:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',55,3);">55:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',59,21);">59:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,8);">61:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,31,33);">Jer 31:31, 33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',32,40);">32:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,5);">50:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,60,62);">Eze 16:60, 62</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',20,37);">20:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',34,25);">34:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',37,26);">37:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,18);">Ho 2:18</a>).<P>3. Phraseology Used:<P>Various phrases are used of the making of a covenant between God and men. The verb ordinarily used of making covenants between men, karath, is often used here as well. The following verbs are also used: heqim, "to establish" or "confirm"; nathan, "to give"; sim, "to place"; tsiwwah, "to command"; \'abhar, "to pass over," followed by be, "into"; bo, "to enter," followed by be; and the phrase nasa\' berith \'al pi, "to take up a covenant upon the mouth of someone."<P>4. History of Covenant Idea:<P>The history of the covenant idea in Israel, as between God and man, is not altogether easy to trace. This applies especially to the great covenants between God and Israel, namely, the one with Abraham, and the one made at Sinai. The earliest references to this relation of Israel to Yahweh under the term "covenant" are in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,7);">Ho 6:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,1);">8:1</a>. The interpretation of the former passage is doubtful in details, but the reference to such a covenant seems clear. The latter is considered by many a later addition, but largely because of this mention of the covenant. No other references to such a covenant are made in the prophets before Jeremiah. Jeremiah and Ezekiel speak of it, and it is implied in Second-Isaiah. It is a curious fact, however, that most of the later prophets do not use the term, which suggests that the omission in the earlier prophets is not very significant concerning a knowledge of the idea in early times.<P>In this connection it should be noted that there is some variation among the Hexateuchal codes in their treatment of the covenants. Only one point, however, needs special mention. The Priestly Code (P) gives no explicit account of the covenant at Sinai, and puts large emphasis upon the covenant with Abraham. There are, however, apparent allusions to the Sinaitic covenant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',2,13);">Le 2:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',24,8);">24:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',26,9,15,25,44,45);">26:9, 15, 25, 44-45</a>). The facts indicate, therefore, principally a difference of emphasis.<P>In the light partly of the facts already noted, however, it is held by many that the covenant idea between God and man is comparatively late. This view is that there were no covenants with Abraham and at Sinai, but that in Israel\'s early conceptions of the relation to Yahweh He was their tribal God, bound by natural ties, not ethical as the covenant implies. This is a larger question than at first appears. Really the whole problem of the relation of Israel to Yahweh throughout Old Testament history is involved, in particular the question at what time a comprehensive conception of the ethical character of God was developed. The subject will therefore naturally receive a fuller treatment in other articles. It is perhaps sufficient here to express the conviction that there was a very considerable conception of the ethical character of Yahweh in the early history of Israel, and that consequently there is no sufficient reason for doubting the fact of the covenants with Abraham and at Sinai. The statement of W. Robertson Smith expresses the essence of the matter (op. cit., 319): "That Yahweh\'s relation is not natural but ethical is the doctrine of the prophets, and is emphasized, in dependence on their teaching, in the Book of Deuteronomy. But the passages cited show that the idea had its foundation in pre prophetic times; and indeed the prophets, though they give it fresh and powerful application, plainly do not regard the conception as an innovation."<P>A little further consideration should be given to the new covenant of the prophets. The general teaching is that the covenant was broken by the sins of the people which led to the exile. Hence, during the exile the people had been cast off, the covenant was no longer in force. This is stated, using other terminology, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,3);">Ho 3:3</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,9);">1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,2);">2:2</a>. The prophets speak, however, in anticipation, of the making of a covenant again after the return from the exile. For the most part, in the passages already cited, this covenant is spoken of as if it were the old one renewed. Special emphasis is put, however, upon its being an everlasting covenant, as the old one did not prove to be, implying that it will not be broken as was that one. Jeremiah\'s teaching, however, has a little different emphasis. He speaks of the old covenant as passed away (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,32);">31:32</a>). Accordingly he speaks of a new covenant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,31,33);">31:31, 33</a>). This new covenant in its provisions, however, is much like the old. But there is a new emphasis upon individuality in approach to God. In the old covenant, as already noted, it was the nation as a whole that entered into the relation; here it is the individual, and the law is to be written upon the individual heart.<P>In the later usage the specific covenant idea is sometimes less prominent, so that the term is used practically of the religion as a whole; see <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',56,4);">Isa 56:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,18);">Ps 103:18</a>.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Valeton, ZATW, XII, XIII (1892-93); Candlish, The Expositor Times,1892,Oct., Nov.; Kraetzschmar, Die Bundesvorstellung im Altes Testament, Marburg, 1896; articles "Covenant" in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes) and Encyclopedia Biblica.``12';
isbe[2381]='Covenant, the New`(berith chadhashah, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,31);">Jer 31:31</a>; he diatheke kaine, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,8,13);">Heb 8:8, 13</a>, etc., or nea, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,24);">Heb 12:24</a>: the former Greek adjective has the sense of the "new" primarily in reference to quality, the latter the sense of "young," the "new," primarily in reference to time):<P>1. Contrast of "New" and "Old"<22>The Term "Covenant"<P>2. Christ\'s Use at the Last Supper<P>3. Relation to <span class="noTag">Exodus 24</span><P>4. Use in Epistle to the Hebrews<P>5. The Mediator of the New Covenant<P>6. "Inheritance" and "Testament"<P>7. Relation to <span class="noTag">Jeremiah 31:31-34</span><P>8. To Ezekiel<P>9. Contrast of Old and New in <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 3</span><hr /><P>1. Contrast of "New" and "Old"<22>the Term "Covenant":<P>The term "New" Covenant necessarily implies an "Old" Covenant, and we are reminded that God\'s dealings with His people in the various dispensations of the world\'s history have been in terms of covenant. The Holy Scriptures by their most familiar title keep this thought before us, the Old Testament and the New Testament or Covenant; the writings produced within the Jewish "church" being the writings or Scriptures of the Old Covenant, those within the Christian church, the Scriptures of the New Covenant. The alternative name "Testament"<22>adopted into our English description through the Latin, as the equivalent of the Hebrew berith, and the Greek diatheke, which both mean a solemn disposition, compact or contract<63>suggests the disposition of property in a last will or testament, but although the word diatheke may bear that meaning, the Hebrew berith does not, and as the Greek usage in the New Testament seems especially governed by the Old Testament usage and the thought moves in a similar plane, it is better to keep to the term "covenant." The one passage which seems to favor the "testament" idea is <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,16,17);">Heb 9:16-17</a> (the Revisers who have changed the King James Version "testament" into "covenant" in every other place have left it in these two verses), but it is questionable whether even here the better rendering would not be "covenant" (see below). Certainly in the immediate context "covenant" is the correct translation and, confessedly, "testament," if allowed to stand, is an application by transition from the original thought of a solemn compact to the secondary one of testamentary disposition. The theological terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace" do not occur in Scripture, though the ideas covered by the terms, especially the latter, may easily be found there. The "New Covenant" here spoken of is practically equivalent to the Covenant of Grace established between God and His redeemed people, that again resting upon the eternal Covenant of Redemption made between the Father and the Son, which, though not so expressly designated, is not obscurely indicated by many passages of Scripture.<P>2. Christ\'s Use at Last Supper:<P>Looking at the matter more particularly, we have to note the words of Christ at the institution of the Supper. In all the three Synoptists, as also in Paul\'s account (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,28);">Mt 26:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,24);">Mr 14:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,20);">Lu 22:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,25);">1Co 11:25</a>) "covenant" occurs. Matthew and Mark, "my blood of the (new) covenant"; Luke and Paul, "the new covenant in my blood." The Revisers following the critical text, have omitted "new" in Matthew and Mark, but even if it does not belong to the original MS, it is implied, and there need be little doubt that Jesus used it. The old covenant was so well known to these Jewish disciples, that to speak of the covenant in this emphatic way, referring manifestly to something other than the old Mosaic covenant, was in effect to call it a "new" covenant. The expression, in any case, looks back to the old and points the contrast; but in the contrast there are points of resemblance.<P>3. Relation to <span class="noTag">Exodus 24</span>:<P>It is most significant that Christ here connects the "new" covenant with His "blood." We at once think, as doubtless the disciples would think, of the transaction described in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,7);">Ex 24:7</a>, when Moses "took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people" those "words," indicating God\'s undertaking on behalf of His people and what He required of them; "and they said, All that Yahweh hath spoken will we do, and be obedient," thus taking up their part of the contract. Then comes the ratification. "Moses took the blood (half of which had already been sprinkled on the altar), and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant which Yahweh hath made with you concerning all these words" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,8);">8</a>). The blood was sacrificial blood, the blood of the animals sacrificed as burnt offerings and peace offerings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,5,6);">Ex 24:5-6</a>). The one half of the blood sprinkled on the altar tells of the sacrifice offered to God, the other half sprinkled on the people, of the virtue of the same sacrifice applied to the people, and so the covenant relation is fully brought about. Christ, by speaking of His blood in this connection, plainly indicates that His death was a sacrifice, and that through that sacrifice His people would be brought into a new covenant relationship with God. His sacrifice is acceptable to God and the virtue of it is to be applied to believers<72>so all the blessings of the new covenant are secured to them; the blood "is poured out for you" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,20);">Lu 22:20</a>). He specifically mentions one great blessing of the new covenant, the forgiveness of sins<6E>"which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,28);">Mt 26:28</a>).<P>4. Use in Epistle to the Hebrews:<P>This great thought is taken up in Hebrews and fully expounded. The writer draws out fully the contrast between the new covenant and the old by laying stress upon the perfection of Christ\'s atonement in contrast to the material and typical sacrifices (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'11-23\');">Heb 9:11-23</a>). He was "a high priest of the good things to come," connected with "the greater and more perfect tabernacle." He entered the heavenly holy place "through his own blood," not that of "goats and calves," and by that perfect offering He has secured "eternal redemption" in contrast to the temporal deliverance of the old dispensation. The blood of those typical offerings procured ceremonial cleansing; much more, therefore, shall the blood of Christ avail to cleanse the conscience "from dead works to serve the living God"<22>that blood which is so superior in value to the blood of the temporal sacrifices, yet resembles it in being sacrificial blood. It is the blood of Him "who, through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God." It is the fashion in certain quarters nowadays to say that it is not the blood of Christ, but His spirit of self-sacrifice for others, that invests the cross with its saving power, and this verse is sometimes cited to show that the virtue lies in the surrender of the perfect will, the shedding of the blood being a mere accident. But this is not the view of the New Testament writers. The blood-shedding is to them a necessity. Of course, it is not the natural, material blood, or the mere act of shedding it, that saves. The blood is the life. The blood is the symbol of life; the blood shed is the symbol of life outpoured<65>of the penalty borne; and while great emphasis must be laid, as in this verse it is laid, upon Christ\'s perfect surrender of His holy will to God, yet the essence of the matter is found in the fact that He willingly endured the dread consequences of sin, and as a veritable expiatory sacrifice shed His precious blood for the remission of sins.<P>5. The Mediator of the New Covenant:<P>On the ground of that shed blood, as the writer goes on to assert, "He is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,15);">Heb 9:15</a>). Thus Christ fulfils the type in a twofold way: He is the sacrifice upon which the covenant is based, whose blood ratifies it, and He is also, like Moses, the Mediator of the covenant. The death of Christ not only secures the forgiveness of those who are brought under the new covenant, but it was also for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, implying that all the sacrifices gained their value by being types of Christ, and the forgiveness enjoyed by the people of God in former days was bestowed in virtue of the great Sacrifice to be offered in the fullness of time.<P>6. "Inheritance" and "Testament":<P>Not only does the blessing of perfect forgiveness come through the new covenant, but also the promise of the "eternal inheritance" in contrast to the earthly inheritance which, under the old covenant, Israel obtained. The mention of the inheritance is held to justify the taking of the word in the next verse as "testament," the writer passing to the thought of a testamentary disposition, which is only of force after the death of the testator. Undoubtedly there is good ground for the analogy, and all the blessings of salvation which come to the believer may be considered as bequeathed by the Saviour in His death, and accruing to us because He has died. It has, in that sense, tacitly to be assumed that the testator lives again to be His own executor and to put us in possession of the blessings. Still, we think there is much to be said in favor of keeping to the sense of "covenant" even here, and taking the clause, which, rendered literally, is: "a covenant is of force (or firm) over the dead," as meaning that the covenant is established on the ground of sacrifice, that sacrifice representing the death of the maker of the covenant. The allusion may be further explained by a reference to <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,9,10,17);">Ge 15:9-10, 17</a>, which has generally been considered as illustrating the ancient Semitic method of making a covenant: the sacrificial animals being divided, and the parties passing between the pieces, implying that they deserved death if they broke the engagement. The technical Hebrew phrase for making a covenant is "to cut a covenant."<P>There is an interesting passage in Herodotus iii. 8, concerning an Arabian custom which seems akin to the old Hebrew practice. "The Arabians observe pledges as religiously as any people; and they make them in the following manner; when any wish to pledge their faith, a third person standing between the two parties makes an incision with a sharp stone in the palm of the hand, nearest the longest fingers of both the contractors; then taking some of the nap from the garments of each, he smears seven stones placed between him and the blood; and as he does this he invokes Bacchus and Urania. When this ceremony is completed, the person who pledges his faith binds his friends as sureties to the stranger, or the citizen, if the contract is made with a citizen; and the friends also hold themselves obliged to observe the engagement"<22>Cary\'s translation.<P>Whatever the particular application of the word in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,17);">Ge 15:17</a>, the central idea in the passage is that death, blood-shedding, is necessary to the establishment of the covenant, and so he affirms that the first covenant was not dedicated without blood, and in proof quotes the passage already cited from <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,\'1-\');">Ex 24</a>, and concludes that "apart from shedding of blood there is no remission" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,22);">Heb 9:22</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COVENANT,+IN+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT">COVENANT, IN THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>.<P>7. Relation to <span class="noTag">Jeremiah 31:31-34</span>:<P>This new covenant established by Christ was foretold by the prophet Jeremiah, who uses the very word "new covenant" in describing it, and very likely Christ had that description in mind when Hebrews used the term, and meant His disciples to understand that the prophetic interpretation would in Him be realized. There is no doubt that the author of Hebrews had the passage in mind, for he has led up to the previous statement by definitely quoting the whole statement of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,\'31-34\');">Jer 31:31-34</a>. He had in <a onClick="return mV(\'Heb\',7,\'1-\');">Heb 7</a> spoken of the contrast between Christ s priesthood "after the order of Melchizedek" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Heb\',7,11);">11</a>) and the imperfect Aaronic priesthood, and he designates Jesus as "the surety of a better covenant" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Heb\',7,22);">22</a>). Then in <a onClick="return mV(\'Heb\',8,\'1-\')">Heb 8</a>, emphasizing the thought of the superiority of Christ\'s heavenly high-priesthood, he declares that Christ is the "mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Heb\',8,6)">6</a>). The first covenant, he says, was not faultless, otherwise there would have been no need for a second; but the fault was not in the covenant but in the people who failed to keep it, though perhaps there is also the suggestion that the external imposition of laws could not suffice to secure true obedience. "For finding fault with them he saith, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." The whole passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,\'1-\');">Jer 8-12</a>) would repay careful study, but we need only note that not only is there prominence given to the great blessings of the covenant, perfect forgiveness and fullness of knowledge, but, as the very essence of the covenant<6E>that which serves to distinguish it from the old covenant and at once to show its superiority and guarantee its permanence<63>there is this wonderful provision: "I will put my laws into their mind, and on their heart also will I write them: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people." This at once shows the spirituality of the new covenant. Its requirements are not simply given in the form of external rules, but the living Spirit possesses the heart; the law becomes an internal dominating principle, and so true obedience is secured.<P>8. To Ezekiel:<P>Ezekiel had spoken to the same effect, though the word "new covenant" is not used in the passage, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',36,27);">Eze 36:27</a>: "I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them." In chapter 37 Ezekiel again speaks of the great blessings to be enjoyed by the people of God, including cleansing, walking in God\'s statutes, recognition as God\'s people, etc., and he distinctly says of this era of blessing: "I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them" (verse 26). Other important foreshadowings of the new covenant are found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,10);">Isa 54:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',55,3);">55:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',59,21);">59:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,8);">61:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,\'18-23\');">Ho 2:18-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,\'1-4\');">Mal 3:1-4</a>. We may well marvel at the spiritual insight of these prophets, and it is impossible to attribute their forecasts to natural genius; they can only be accounted for by Divine inspiration.<P>The writer to the Hebrews recurs again and again to this theme of the "New Covenant"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,16,17);">Heb 10:16-17</a> he cites the words of Jeremiah already quoted about writing the law on their minds, and remembering their sins no more. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,24);">Heb 12:24</a>, he speaks of "Jesus the mediator of a new covenant," and "the blood of sprinkling," again connecting the "blood" with the "covenant," and finally, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,20);">Heb 13:20</a>, he prays for the perfection of the saints through the "blood of an eternal covenant."<P>9. Contrast of Old and New in <span class="noTag">2 Corinthians 3</span>:<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,\'1-\');">2Co 3</a> Paul has an interesting and instructive contrast between the old covenant and the new. He begins it by saying that "our sufficiency is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,5,6);">2Co 3:5-6</a>). The "letter" is the letter of the law, of the old covenant which could only bring condemnation, but the spirit which characterizes the new covenant gives life, writes the law upon the heart. He goes on to speak of the old as that "ministration of death" which nevertheless "came with glory" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,7);">2Co 3:7</a>), and he refers especially to the law, but the new covenant is "the ministration of the spirit," the "ministration of righteousness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,8,9);">2Co 3:8-9</a>), and has a far greater glory than the old. The message of this "new covenant" is "the gospel of Christ." The glory of the new covenant is focused in Christ; rays forth from Him. The glory of the old dispensation was reflected upon the face of Moses, but that glory was transitory and so was the physical manifestation (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,13);">2Co 3:13</a>). The sight of the shining face of Moses awed the people of Israel and they revered him as leader specially favored of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,\'7-13\');">2Co 3:7-13</a>). When he had delivered his message he veiled his face and thus the people could not see that the glow did not last; every time that he went into the Divine presence he took off the veil and afresh his face was lit up with the glory, and coming out with the traces of that glory lingering on his countenance he delivered his message to the people and again veiled his face (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,\'29-35\');">Ex 34:29-35</a>), and thus the transitoriness and obscurity of the old dispensation were symbolized. In glorious contrast to that symbolical obscurity, the ministers of the gospel, of the new covenant, use great boldness of speech; the veil is done away in Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,12);">2Co 3:12</a>ff). The glory which comes through Him is perpetual, and fears no vanishing away.``110';
isbe[2382]='Cover; Covering`kuv\'-er, kuv\'-er-ing: The translation of several Hebrew words. The covering of the ark (mikhceh, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,13);">Ge 8:13</a>) was possibly the lid of a hatchway (compare Mitchell, World before Abraham, 215).<P>To the sons of Kohath was assigned the task of caring for the furniture of the Tabernacle whenever the camp was moved, a suitable covering (kacah) of sealskin being designated for each of the specially sacred objects, the temple curtains also being used (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,8,9,11,12);">Nu 4:8-9, 11-12</a>ff).<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,15);">Nu 19:15</a> (tsamidh) may refer to anything used as a lid or covering; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,7);">Job 24:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,19);">31:19</a> (kecuth) refer to clothing or bed-covering.<P>Figurative: "Abaddon hath no covering"; (kecuth) from God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,6);">Job 26:6</a>); "He will destroy...the face of the covering (ha-loT) that covereth all peoples" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',25,7);">Isa 25:7</a>). The removal of the veil, often worn as a token of mourning (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',19,4);">2Sa 19:4</a>), signified the destruction of death.``164';
isbe[2383]='Covered Way`kuv\'-erd wa (mecakh, "a covered walk"): Mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,18);">2Ki 16:18</a> (the King James Version "covert") as a gallery belonging to the temple, concerning the purpose of which opinions differ. Some consider it to have been the place where the king stood or sat during the Sabbath services; others, a public place for teaching; others, the way by which the priest entered the sanctuary on the Sabbath.``1';
isbe[2384]='Covering, For the Head`kuv\'-er-ing, (peribolaion): Mentioned in the New Testament only in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,15);">1Co 11:15</a>: "For her hair is given her for a covering," literally, "something cast round," probably equivalent to "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=VEIL">veil</a>" (which see). Read in the light of the context: "Every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonoreth her head" (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,5);">5</a>). The meaning would seem to be that Nature itself, in providing women with a natural veil, has taught the lesson underlying the prevailing custom, that woman should not be unveiled in the public assemblies.``47';
isbe[2385]='Covert`kuv\'-ert: Now seldom used, except for game, and then generally spelt "cover." "A covered way" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,18);">2Ki 16:18</a> the King James Version); also a shelter of any kind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',4,6);">Isa 4:6</a>); "a hiding place," "a lair," "a hut" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',38,40);">Job 38:40</a>); "a place of secrecy," "a secret way" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,20);">1Sa 25:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',40,21);">Job 40:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',61,4);">Ps 61:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',16,4);">Isa 16:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,2);">32:2</a>); "a den," "a lair" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,38);">Jer 25:38</a>).``1';
isbe[2386]='Covet`kuv\'-et (\'awah; zeloo, "to desire earnestly," "to set the heart and mind upon anything"): Used in two senses: good, simply to desire earnestly but legitimately. e.g. the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,31);">1Co 12:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,39);">14:39</a>; bad, to desire unlawfully, or to secure illegitimately (batsa\'; epithumeo, <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',7,7);">Ro 7:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',13,9);">13:9</a>, etc.); hence, called "lust" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,28);">Mt 5:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,6);">1Co 10:6</a>), "concupiscence" (the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',7,8);">Ro 7:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,5);">Col 3:5</a>).``1';
isbe[2387]='Covetousness`kuv\'-et-us-nes: Has a variety of shades of meaning determined largely by the nature of the particular word used, or the context, or both. Following are some of the uses:<P>(1) To gain dishonestly (batsa\'), e.g. the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,21);">Ex 18:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',33,31);">Eze 33:31</a>.<P>(2) The wish to have more than one possesses, inordinately, of course (pleonexia), e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,15);">Lu 12:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,5);">1Th 2:5</a>.<P>(3) An inordinate love of money philarguros, the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,14);">Lu 16:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',3,2);">2Ti 3:2</a>; philarguria, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,10);">1Ti 6:10</a>; negative in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,5);">Heb 13:5</a>, the King James Version.<P>Covetousness is a very grave sin; indeed, so heinous is it that the Scriptures class it among the very gravest and grossest crimes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,3);">Eph 5:3</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,5);">Col 3:5</a> it is "idolatry," while in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',6,10);">1Co 6:10</a> it is set forth as excluding a man from heaven. Its heinousness, doubtless, is accounted for by its being in a very real sense the root of so many other forms of sin, e.g. departure from the faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,9,10);">1Ti 6:9-10</a>); lying (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',5,\'22-25\');">2Ki 5:22-25</a>); theft (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',7,21);">Jos 7:21</a>); domestic trouble (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,27);">Pr 15:27</a>); murder (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',22,12);">Eze 22:12</a>); indeed, it leads to "many foolish and hurtful lusts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,9);">1Ti 6:9</a>). Covetousness has always been a very serious menace to mankind, whether in the Old Testament or New Testament period. It was one of the first sins that broke out after Israel had entered into the promised land (Achan, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',7,\'1-\');">Jos 7</a>); and also in the early Christian church immediately after its founding (Ananias and Sapphira, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,\'1-\');">Ac 5</a>); hence, so many warnings against it. A careful reading of the Old Testament will reveal the fact that a very great part of the Jewish law<61>such as its enactments and regulations regarding duties toward the poor, toward servants; concerning gleaning, usury, pledges, gold and silver taken during war<61>was introduced and intended to counteract the spirit of covetousness.<P>Eerdmans maintains (Expos, July, 1909) that the commandment, "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor\'s house" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,17);">Ex 20:17</a>), meant to the Israelite that he should not take anything of his neighbor\'s possessions that were momentarily unprotected by their owner. Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,23);">Ex 34:23</a>ff. Thus, it refers to a category of acts that is not covered by the commandment, "Thou shalt not steal." It is an oriental habit of mind from of old that when anyone sees abandoned goods which he thinks desirable, there is not the least objection to taking them, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,17);">Ex 20:17</a> b is probably an explanation of what is to be understood by "house" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,17);">Ex 20:17a</a>.<P>Examples of covetousness: Achan (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',7,\'1-\');">Jos 7</a>); Saul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',15,9,19);">1Sa 15:9, 19</a>); Judas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,14,15);">Mt 26:14-15</a>); Ananias and Sapphira (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,\'1-11\');">Ac 5:1-11</a>); Balaam (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,15);">2Pe 2:15</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Jud\',1,11);">Jude 1:11</a>).``53';
isbe[2388]='Cow; Kine`kou, kin (baqar (compare Arabic baqar, "cow"); \'eghlath baqar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,21);">Isa 7:21</a>); parah (compare Arabic furar, "young of a sheep, goat, or cow"); paroth \'aloth (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,7,10);">1Sa 6:7, 10</a>), "milch kine," from \'ul," to suckle"; \'eleph): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',4,1);">Am 4:1</a>, the term, "kine of Bashan," is applied to the voluptuous women of Samaria. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,\'1-36\');">Ge 41:1-36</a> is the narration of Pharaoh\'s dream of the seven fat and seven lean kine. In Isaiah\'s vision (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,7);">Isa 11:7</a>) we have: "And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together." Cows do not seem to have been sacrificed. The sacrifice of the kine that brought the ark back from the Philistines (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14);">1Sa 6:14</a>) was due to the exceptional circumstances.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CALF">CALF</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CATTLE">CATTLE</a>`37';
isbe[2389]='Coz`koz (kots, "thorn"): A man of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,8);">1Ch 4:8</a>). the American Standard Revised Version has added the article, making the name Hakkoz without sufficient reason. The name occurs with the article (Ha-qots) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,61);">Ezr 2:61</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,4,21);">Ne 3:4, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,63);">7:63</a>, and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,10);">1Ch 24:10</a>, but not with reference to the same person. Coz was of the tribe of Judah, while Hakkoz belonged to the family of Aaron.``1';
isbe[2390]='Cozbi`koz\'-bi (kozbi, "deceitful"): A Midianite woman, distinguished as the daughter of Zur, "head of the people of a fathers\' house in Midian." She was slain by Phinehas at Shittim in company with "Zimri, the son of Salu, a prince of a fathers\' house among the Simeonites" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,\'6-18\');">Nu 25:6-18</a>).``1';
isbe[2391]='Cozeba`ko-ze\'-ba (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,22);">1Ch 4:22</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ACHZIB">ACHZIB</a>`1';
isbe[2392]='Cracknel`krak\'nel: Occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,3);">1Ki 14:3</a>, where Jeroboam bids his wife go to Abijah to inquire concerning their son: "And take with thee ten loaves and cracknels" (King James Version margins "cakes," the English Revised Version "cracknels," the American Standard Revised Version "cakes"). The Hebrew word is niqquddim, from naqadh, "to prick" or "mark"; most probably cakes with holes pricked in them like our biscuits.``1';
isbe[2393]='Craft; Craftiness; Crafty`kraft, kraf\'-ti-nes, kraf\'-ti, (panourgia), (panourgos): The original meaning is that of "ability to do anything," universally applied in a bad sense to unscrupulous wickedness, that stops short of no measure, however reprehensible, in order to attain its purposes; then, in a modified form, to resourcefulness in wrong, cunning (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,25);">Da 8:25</a>; <span class="noTag">2Macc 12:24</span>; the Revised Version, margin "jugglery"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',20,23);">Lu 20:23</a>, Jesus perceives "the craftiness" of His adversaries, i.e. the complicated network which they have laid to ensnare Him. The art with which a plot is concealed, and its direction to the ruin of others, are elements that enter into the meaning. Heinrici on <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,19);">1Co 3:19</a> illustrates from Plato the distinction between craftiness and wisdom. There is a touch of humor in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,16);">2Co 12:16</a>, when Paul speaks of his conduct toward the Corinthians as having been "crafty."``84';
isbe[2394]='Crafts`<b>I. SOURCES OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE CRAFTS OF THE BIBLE</b><P>1. Written Records and Discoveries of Craftsmanship<P class="in15">(1) Jewish<P class="in15">(2) Canaanitish and Phoenician<P class="in15">(3) Assyrian and Babylonian<P class="in15">(4) Egyptian<p>2. Post-Biblical Writings<P>3. Present Methods in Bible Lands<P><b>II. CRAFTS MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE</b><p class="in15">1. Brickmaking<p class="in15">2. Carpentering (Wood-Working)<p class="in15">3. Carving (Engraving)<p class="in15">4. Ceramics<p class="in15">5. Dyeing and Cleansing<p class="in15">6. Embroidering (Needlework)<p class="in15">7. Glass-Making<p class="in15">8. Grinding<p class="in15">9. Mason Work<p class="in15">10. Metal-Working (Mining)<p class="in15">11. Oil-Making<p class="in15">12. Painting<p class="in15">13. Paper-Making<p class="in15">14. Perfume-Making<p class="in15">15. Plastering<p class="in15">16. Spinning and Weaving<p class="in15">17. Tanning<p class="in15">18. Tent-Making<p class="in15">19. Wine-Making<P><b>III. CRAFTSMEN</b><P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Sources of Our Knowledge of the Crafts of the Bible.<P>1. Written Records and Discoveries of Craftsmanship:<P>Our knowledge of the arts and crafts of Bible times has come to us through two principal ways. First, from Biblical, Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian written records. Of these the Egyptian are the most illuminating. Second, from examples of ancient handicraft which have been buried and preserved through many centuries and brought to light again by modern discoveries.<P>(1) Jewish.<P>The chief written documents from which we may learn about Hebrew handicraft are the Bible records. A study of what few references there are leads us to believe that before the Israelites came in contact with the people of Canaan and Phoenicia they had not developed any considerable technical skill (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',5,6);">1Ki 5:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',14,1);">1Ch 14:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',2,7,14);">2Ch 2:7, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,7);">Ezr 3:7</a>). Some of the simpler operations, such as the spinning and weaving of the common fabrics and the shaping of domestic utensils, were performed in the household (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,25,26);">Ex 35:25-26</a>) but the weaving and dyeing of fine fabrics, carving, inlaying, metal-working, etc., was the work of foreigners, or was learned by the Jews after the Exodus, from the dwellers in Palestine<P>The Jews, however, gradually developed skill in many of these crafts. It is believed that as early as Nehemiah\'s time, Jewish craftsmen had organized into guilds (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,8,31,32);">Ne 3:8, 31-32</a>). In post-Biblical times the Jews obtained monopolies in some of the industries, as for example, glass-making and dyeing. These trades remained the secrets of certain families for generations. It is because of this secrecy and the mystery that surrounded these trades, and is still maintained in many places, that we know so little as to how they were conducted. Until recently the principal indigo dyers in Damascus were Jews, and the Jews shared with Moslem craftsmen the right to make glass. In some of the Syrian cities Jewish craftsmen are now outnumbering other native workmen in certain trades.<P>Few examples of Hebrew handicraft have been discovered by the archaeologists which shed much light upon early Hebrew work. Aside from the pottery of the Israelite period, and a few seals and coins, no traces of Hebrew workmanship remain. It is even doubtful how many of the above objects are really the work of this people.<P>(2) Canaanitish and Phoenician.<P>It is generally conceded that what technical skill the Hebrews acquired resulted from their contact with the Canaanites and Phoenicians. Frequent mention of the workmanship of these peoples is made in the Bible, but their own records are silent. Ezekiel\'s account of the glories of Tyre (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,\'1-\');">Eze 27</a>) gives some idea of the reputation of that city for craftsmanship: "Thy builders have perfected thy beauty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,4);">Eze 27:4</a>); "Syria was thy merchant...Damascus was thy merchant for the multitude of thy handiworks" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,16,18);">Eze 27:16, 18</a>). Adad-nirari III (812-783 BC), the Assyrian king, enumerates the tribute which he exacted from the king of Damascus.<P>"Variegated cloth, linen, an ivory bed, a seat of inlaid ivory, a table" were among the captured articles. These were probably Phoenician work.<P>Many examples of Phoenician craftsmanship have been discovered. These are characterized, from the standpoint of art, by a crudeness which distinguishes them from the more delicately and artistically wrought work of their teachers, the Babylonians and Egyptians. The credit remains, however, to the Phoenicians of introducing skilled workmanship into Palestine. The Phoenicians, too, furnished the means of intercourse between the Babylonians and Egyptians. From the very earliest times there was an interchange of commodities and ideas between the people of the Nile and those of the Tigris and Euphrates.<P>(3) Assyrian and Babylonian.<P>The Babylonians and Assyrians made few references to their own handicraft in their records, but the explorers of recent years have revealed many examples of the remarkable workmanship of the early inhabitants of Mesopotamia. In referring to a silver vase found in that country (Telloh), dating from the 4th millennium BC, Clay (see "Literature") says "the whole is exceedingly well rendered and indicates remarkable skill, which in no respect is less striking than that of Egyptian contemporaries in this handicraft." Jewelry, weapons, votive images, various utensils, tools of many kinds, statues in the hardest stones, delicately wrought, gems, dating from the times of Abraham and earlier, lead us to ask when these people acquired their skill.<P>2. and 3. Egyptian and Post-Biblical Craftsmanship:<P>(4) Egyptian.<P>The written records of Egypt are doubly important, because they not only refer to the various crafts, but also illustrate the processes by drawings which can leave no doubt as to how the workmen accomplished their ends. The extensive explorations in Egypt have given to the world many priceless relics of craftsmanship, some of them dating from the very dawn of civilization. Among the ruins of early Syrian and Palestinian cities are found numerous objects witnessing to the skill of the Egyptians. These objects and the evidences of the influence of their work on the Phoenician arts show the part that the Egyptians played in moulding the ideas of the workmen who were chosen to build the temple at Jerusalem. In the following brief summary of the crafts mentioned in the Bible, it will be noticeable how well they may be illustrated by the monuments of the Nile country. To confirm the knowledge derived from the above sources, post-Biblical writings and some of the present-day customs in Bible lands are valuable. These will be mentioned in discussing the various crafts.<P>II. Crafts Mentioned in the Bible.<P>(For a more detailed treatment of the crafts see under separate articles.)<P>1. Brickmaking:<P>This industry probably originated in Babylonia, but the knowledge of the process was early carried to Egypt, where later the Hebrews, along with other captives, were driven to making the bricks of the Egyptian kings. The making of sun-dried bricks called for little skill, but the firing and glazing of bricks required trained workmen.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BRICK">BRICK</a>.<P>2. Carpentering (Wood-Working):<P>Wood was extensively used by ancient builders. With the exception of the Egyptian antiquities, little remains but the records to indicate this fact. Numerous references are made to the carpenter work in building the temple and subsequent repairing of this structure (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',5,6);">1Ki 5:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',2,3);">2Ch 2:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',12,11);">2Ki 12:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',24,12);">2Ch 24:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',22,6);">2Ki 22:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,7);">Ezr 3:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',4,1);">4:1</a>). David\'s house and that of Solomon and his favorite wife were made partly of wood. In the story of the building of the tabernacle, wood-working is mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,\'1-\');">Ex 25</a>). The people of Tyre built ships of cypress, with masts of cedar wood and oars of oak (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,5,6);">Eze 27:5-6</a>). Idols were carved from wood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',29,17);">De 29:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,18);">2Ki 19:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,19);">Isa 37:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',45,20);">45:20</a>). The Philistines built a wooden cart to carry the ark (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,7);">1Sa 6:7</a>). Threshing instruments and yokes were made of wood (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',24,22);">2Sa 24:22</a>). Ezra read the law from a pulpit of wood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',8,4);">Ne 8:4</a>). Solomon\'s chariots were made of wood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',3,9);">So 3:9</a>). Inlaid work, still a favorite form of decoration in Syria, was used by the Phoenicians (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,6);">Eze 27:6</a>). How the ancient carpenters did their work can assumed from the Egyptian monuments. Some of the operations there pictured are still performed in the same ways.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TOOLS">TOOLS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CARPENTER">CARPENTER</a>.<P>3. Carving (Engraving):<P>The terms "carving" and "engraving" are used interchangeably in translating Old Testament passages. The first mention made of engraved objects is the signet of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,18);">Ge 38:18</a>). The art of engraving on various hard objects, such as clay, bone, ivory, metals and precious stones, probably came from Mesopotamia. The Hebrews learned engraving from the Canaanites. The nature of this engraving is shown by the Assyrian cylinders and Egyptian scarabs. It is doubtful how many of the signets found in Palestine are Hebrew work, as the engraved devices are mostly Phoenician or Egyptian. From the earliest times it has been the custom in the Orient for men of affairs to carry constantly with them their signets. The seal was set in a ring, or, as was the case with Judah, and as the Arabs do today, it was worn on a cord suspended about the neck. One of the present-day sights in a Syrian city street is the engraver of signets, seated at his low bench ready to cut on one of his blank seals the buyer\'s name or sign.<P>The second form of carving is suggested by the Decalogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,4);">Ex 20:4</a>). The commandment explains why sculpturing remained undeveloped among the Jews, as it has to this day among the Moslems. In spite of the commandment, however, cherubim were carved on the wooden fittings of the temple interior (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,23);">1Ki 6:23</a>).<P>Among the peoples with whom the Jews came in contact, stone-cutting had reached a high degree of perfection. No stone proved too hard for their tools. In Egyptian and Phoenician tombs the carving was often done on plastered surfaces.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CARVING">CARVING</a>.<P>4. Ceramics:<P>Both the Egyptians and Babylonians were skilled in molding and baking objects of clay. The early Babylonian records consist of burnt clay tablets. Glazed bricks formed an important decorative feature. In Egypt, idols, scarabs and amulets were often made of fired clay, glazed or unglazed. By far the most important branch of ceramic art was the making of jars for holding water or other liquids. These jars have been used throughout the East from earliest times. The Jews learned what they knew about this art from the Phoenicians.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POTTERY">POTTERY</a>.<P>5. Dyeing and Cleansing:<P>Dyeing is one of the oldest of the crafts. The only references to the act of dyeing in the Bible are<P>(a) in connection with the dyed skins of animals (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,5);">Ex 25:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,14);">26:14</a>), and<P>(b) <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,30);">Jud 5:30</a>.<P>That it was a highly developed trade is implied in the many other references to dyed stuffs both in the Bible and in profane literature. Cleansing was done by the fuller, who was probably a dyer also.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COLOR">COLOR</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DYE">DYE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FULLER">FULLER</a>.<P>6. Embroidering (Needlework):<P>Very little is known of the work of embroidering, further than that it was the working-in of color designs on cloth. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,7);">Eze 27:7</a> we learn that it was one of the exports of Egypt.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EMBROIDERY">EMBROIDERY</a>.<P>7. Glass-Making:<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,19);">De 33:19</a> "hidden treasures of the sand" is interpreted by some to mean the making of glass objects from the sand. There can be no question about the Hebrews being acquainted with glass-making, as its history extends back to very early times. The Egyptians and Phoenicians made bottles, glass beads, idols, etc. These objects are among those usually found in the tombs. Glass beads of very early manufacture were found in the mound at Gezer. Some of the pigments used for painting were made of powdered colored glass. In the New Testament we read of the "sea of glass like unto crystal" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,6);">Re 4:6</a>).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GLASS">GLASS</a>.<P>8. Grinding:<P>Grinding was a domestic task and can hardly be classed as one of the crafts. When flour was needed, the housewife, or more likely the servant, rubbed the wheat or barley between two millstones (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MILLSTONE">MILLSTONE</a>) or, with a rounded river stone, crushed the wheat on a large flat stone. It is still a common custom in Syria and Palestine for two women to work together as indicated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,41);">Mt 24:41</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,35);">Lu 17:35</a>. Grinding of meal was a menial task, considered the employment of a concubine; hence, setting Samson to grinding at the mill was intended as a disgrace.<P>9. Mason Work:<P>The rhythmic sound of the stone cutter at his work never ceases in the prosperous oriental city. It is more common today, however, than in the earlier centuries when only high officials could afford stone houses. Frequently only the temple or shrines or tombs of a city were made of stone. As such buildings were very common, and much attention was paid to every detail of their construction, there was developed an efficient corps of masons, especially in Egypt and Syria. When the Israelites abandoned their nomadic life, among the first things that they planned were permanent places of worship. As these developed into structures more pretentious than mere piles of stones, the builders naturally resorted to the skill of the master builders of the country. A visitor to Jerusalem may still see the work of the ancient masons. The so-called Solomon\'s quarries under the city, the great drafted stones of the temple area, belong to an early date. The very shape of the masons\' tools may be determined from the marks on the stones.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MASON">MASON</a>.<P>10. Metal-Working (Mining):<P>Among the oldest objects that have been preserved are those of silver, gold and bronze. These are proof that the ancients understood the various processes of mining, smelting, refining and working of metals.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MINING">MINING</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=METAL+WORKING">METAL WORKING</a>.<P>11. Oil-Making:<P>The oil referred to in the Bible is olive oil. Pliny mentions many other oils which were extracted in Egypt. The oils were usually extracted by first crushing the fruit and then pressing the crushed mass. At Gezer, Tell es Cafi and other ancient ruins old oil presses have been discovered.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=OIL">OIL</a>.<P>12. Painting:<P>One who has visited the tombs and temples of Egypt will never forget the use which the ancient Egyptian painters made of colors. The otherwise somber effect produced by expansive plain walls was overcome by sculpturing, either in relief or intaglio, on a coating of stucco, and then coloring these engravings in reds, yellows, greens and blues. Architectural details were also painted. The capitals of columns and the columns themselves received special attention from the painter. Colors were similarly used by the Greeks and Phoenicians. In the Sidon tombs, at Palmyra and similar ruins, traces of painting are still evident.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PAINTING">PAINTING</a>.<P>13. Paper-Making:<P>The word "paper" occurs twice, once in the Old Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,7);">Isa 19:7</a> the King James Version) and once in New Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Jo\',1,12);">2Jo 1:12</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,7);">Isa 19:7</a> the Revised Version (British and American) renders "paper reeds," "meadows." <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PAPYRUS">PAPYRUS</a> (which see) occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',18,2);">Isa 18:2</a> and the Revised Version, margin of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,3);">Ex 2:3</a>. The nearest approach to our paper which the ancients possessed was that made from a species of papyrus. The process consisted in spreading out, side by side, long strips of the inner lining of the papyrus reed, then over these other strips at right angles to the first, afterward soaking with some adhesive material and finally pressing and drying. Sheets made in this way were fastened together with glue into a long scroll. The Greek for papyrus plant is "biblos," from which the English word "Bible" is derived. Parchment, leather and leaves were also used as paper. The natives of Syria and Palestine still call a sheet of paper a "leaf" (Arabic waraqet).<P>14. Perfume-Making:<P>The art of perfume-making dates back to the ancient Egyptians. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,35);">Ex 30:35</a> we have the first mention of scented anointing oils. The perfumers\' (the King James Version "confectioner" or "apothecary") products were used<P>(a) for religious rites as offerings and to anoint the idols and<P>(b) for personal use on the body or clothes. Some perfumes were powders (incense); others were scented oils or fats (ointments).<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PERFUME">PERFUME</a>.<P>15. Plastering:<P>(The King James Version "Plaistering.") The trade of plastering dates back to the beginning of the history of building. There were two reasons for using plastering or stucco:<P>(a) to render the buildings more resisting to the weather and<P>(b) to make the surfaces more suitable for decoration by engraving or painting.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PLASTER">PLASTER</a>.<P>16. Spinning and Weaving:<P>The arts of spinning and weaving were early practiced in the household (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,25);">Ex 35:25</a>). Many different fibers were spun and woven into cloth. Fabrics of wool, cotton, flax, silk, wood fiber have been preserved from Bible times. In the more progressive communities, the weaving of the fabrics was taken over by the weavers who made it their profession. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,21);">1Ch 4:21</a> it is stated that many of the families of the house of Asbea were workers in fine linen. The modern invasion of European manufacturers has not yet driven out the weavers who toil at looms much like those described by the ancient Egyptian drawings.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SPINNING">SPINNING</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WEAVING">WEAVING</a>.<P>17. Tanning:<P>Although it is known that tanning was practiced, the only reference to this trade mentioned in the Bible is to Simon the tanner (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,43);">Ac 9:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,6,32);">10:6, 32</a>). Leather girdles are mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',1,8);">2Ki 1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,4);">Mt 3:4</a>. Relics taken from the tombs show that the ancients understood the various methods for preserving skins which are used in present-day practice.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TANNER">TANNER</a>.<P>18. Tent-Making:<P>We think of Paul as the tent-maker. The tents which he made however were probably not like those so frequently referred to in the Old Testament. Tents in Paul\'s time were made from Cilician cloth. Paul\'s work was probably the sewing together of the proper lengths of cloth and the attaching of ropes and loops. In Old Testament times the tents were made of strips of coarse goat\'s hair cloth or of the skins of animals.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TENT">TENT</a>.<P>19. Wine-Making:<P>This article is being written within sound of festivities about the winepresses of Mt. Lebanon where men and women are gathered for the annual production of wine and molasses (Arabic, dibs). Their process is so like that of Bible times that one is transported in thought to similar festivities that must have attended the wine-making even so far back as the early Egyptian kings. That these workers understood the precautions necessary for procuring a desirable product is evidenced by early writings. The choice of proper soil for the vineyards, the adding of preservatives to keep the wine, boiling the juice to kill undesirable ferments, guarding against putting new wine into old bottles, are examples of their knowledge of wine-making.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WINE+PRESS">WINE PRESS</a>.<P>III. Craftsmen.<P>Craftsmen were early segregated into groups. A trade usually remained in a family. This is true to some extent in the East today. In such cities as Beirut, Damascus, or Aleppo the shops of the craftsmen of a given trade will be found grouped together. There is a silver and goldsmiths\' market (Arabic suq), an iron market, a dyeing quarter, etc. Jewish craftsmen in early times sat separately in the synagogues. Some crafts were looked upon with disfavor, especially those which brought men in contact with women, as for example, the trade of goldsmith, carder, weaver, fuller or tanner. There was a fellow-feeling among craftsmen referred to by Isaiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,6,7);">Isa 41:6-7</a>). This same feeling is observed among Syrian workmen today. The Arab has many phrases of encouragement for a man at his work, such as, "Peace to your hands," "May God give you strength." A crowd of men pulling at a pulley rope, for example, shout or sing together as they pull.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Sardinia, Judea, etc.; History of Art in Ancient Egypt; History of Art in Phoenicia and Cyprus; Wilkinson, The Ancient Egyptians; Macalister, Bible Side-Lights from the Mound of Gezer; Standard Dict. of the Bible; Bliss, Macalister and Wunsch, Excavations in Palestine; Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands during the 19th Century; Harper, The Bible and Modern Discoveries; Delitzsch, Jewish Artisan Life, etc.; Clay, Light on the Old Testament from Babel; Jewish Encyclopedia.``133';
isbe[2395]='Crag`krag (shen (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,12);">1Sa 7:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,4);">14:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',39,28);">Job 39:28</a> the King James Version and the English Revised Version)): In a mountainous country composed of sedimentary rocks, like the cretaceous rocks of Palestine, cliffs are formed on a slope where hard strata are underlaid by softer strata. The soft strata wear away more rapidly, undermining the hard strata above them, which for a time project, but finally break off by vertical joint planes, the fragments rolling down to form the talus slope at the foot of the cliff. As the breaking off of the undermined hard strata proceeds irregularly, there are left projecting crags, sometimes at the top of the cliff, and sometimes lower down. Two such crags (shen ha-cela\', "sharp rock," the Revised Version (British and American) "rocky crag"), which were given particular names, Bozez and Seneh, marked the scene of the exploit of Jonathan described in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,\'1-\');">1Sa 14</a>. Conder failed to identify the crags, and it has been proposed to alter the text rather extensively to make it read: "wall of rock" instead of "crag" (Encyclopedia Biblica, under the word "Michmash"). Such rocks form safe resting-places for birds of prey, as it is said of the eagle in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',39,28);">Job 39:28</a> English Revised Version: " She dwelleth on the rock and hath her lodging there, Upon the crag of the rock, and the stronghold."``37';
isbe[2396]='Crane`kran (\'aghur; geranos; Latin Grus cinerea): A bird of the family gruidae. The crane is mentioned twice in the Bible: once on account of its voice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',38,14);">Isa 38:14</a>: "Like a swallow or a crane, so did I chatter"); again because of the unforgettable picture these birds made in migration (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,7);">Jer 8:7</a>): "Yea, the stork in the heavens knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle-dove and the swallow and the crane observe the time of their coming; but my people know not the law of Yahweh." Some commentators have adduced reasons for dropping the crane from the ornithology of the Bible, but this never should be permitted. They were close relatives of stork, heron and ibis; almost as numerous as any of these, and residents of Palestine, except in migration. The two quotations concerning them fit with their history, and point out the two features that made them as noticeable as any birds of Palestine. Next to the ostrich and pelican they were the largest birds, having a wing sweep of 8 ft. from tip to tip and standing 4 ft. in height. In migration such immense flocks passed over Palestine as to darken the sky, and when they crossed the Red Sea they appeared to sweep from shore to shore, and so became the most noticeable migratory bird, for which reason, no doubt, they were included in Isaiah\'s reference to spring migration with the beloved doves, used in sacrifice and for caged pets, and with the swallows that were held almost sacred because they homed in temples. Not so many of them settled in Palestine as of the storks, but large flocks lived in the wilderness south of Jerusalem, and a few pairs homed near water as far north as Merom. The grayish-brown cranes were the largest, and there were also a crested, and a white crane. They nested on the ground or in trees and laid two large eggs, differing with species. The eggs of the brown bird were a light drab with brown speckles, and those of the white, rough, pale-blue with brown splotches. They were not so affectionate in pairs or to their young as storks, but were average parents. It is altogether probable that they were the birds intended by Isaiah, because they best suited his purpose, the crane and the swallow being almost incessant talkers among birds. The word "chatter," used in the Bible, exactly suits the notes of a swallow, but is much too feeble to be used in describing the vocalizing of the crane. They migrated in large wedge-shaped companies and cried constantly on wing. They talked incessantly while at the business of living, and even during the watches of the night they scarcely ceased passing along word that all was well, or sending abroad danger signals. The Arabs called the cry of the cranes "bellowing." We usually express it by whooping or trumpeting. Any of these words is sufficiently expressive to denote an unusual voice, used in an unusual manner, so that it appealed to the prophet as suitable for use in a strong comparison.``167';
isbe[2397]='Crashing`krash\'-ing (shebher): This word, meaning "a breach," figuratively "destruction," is translated "crashing" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',1,10);">Ze 1:10</a>: "a great crashing from the hills," representing the doom to fall on evil-doers in Jerusalem, as the enemy advanced against the city from the north.``1';
isbe[2398]='Crates`kra\'-tez (Krates), governor of the Cyprians, left as deputy of Sostratus when the latter, who was governor of Jerusalem, was summoned to Antioch by Antiochus Epiphanes, in consequence of a dispute with Menelaus (2Macc 4:29). As Cyprus was not at the time in the possession of Antiochus, the words have been generally taken to mean Krates "who had formerly been, or afterward was, governor of the Cyprians." The Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A. D.) translates the Greek into "Sostratus autem praelatus est Cypriis."``1';
isbe[2399]='Creation`kre-a\'-shun (bara\' "to create"; ktisis, "that which is created," "creature"):<br><br><div class="in15"<P>1. Creation as Abiding<P>2. Mistaken Ideas<P>3. True Conception<P>4. The Genesis Cosmogony<P>5. Matter not Eternal<P>6. "Wisdom" in Creation<P>7. A Free, Personal Act<P>8. Creation and Evolution<P>9. Is Creation Eternal?<P>10. Creation ex nihilo<P>11. From God\'s Will<P>12. Error of Pantheism<P>13. First Cause a Necessary Presupposition<P>14. The End<6E>the Divine Glory<P>LITERATURE</div><hr /><P>1. Creation as Abiding:<P>Much negative ground has been cleared away for any modern discussion of the doctrine of creation. No idea of creation can now be taken as complete which does not include, besides the world as at first constituted, all that to this day is in and of creation. For God creates not being that can exist independently of Him, His preserving agency being inseparably connected with His creative power. We have long ceased to think of God\'s creation as a machine left, completely made, to its own automatic working. With such a doctrine of creation, a theistic evolution would be quite incompatible.<P>2. Mistaken Ideas:<P>Just as little do we think of God\'s creative agency, as merely that of a First Cause, linked to the universe from the outside by innumerable sequences of causes and effects. Nature in her entirety is as much His creation today as she ever was. The dynamic ubiquity of God, as efficient energy, is to be affirmed. God is still All and in All, but this in a way sharply distinguished from pantheistic views, whether of the universe as God, or of God as the universe. Of His own freedom He creates, so that Gnostic theories of natural and necessary emanation are left far behind. Not only have the "carpenter" and the "gardener" theories<65>with, of course, the architect or world-builder theory of Plato<74>been dismissed; not only has the conception of evolution been proved harmonious with creative end, plan, purpose, ordering, guidance; but evolutionary science may itself be said to have given the thought of theistic evolution its best base or grounding. The theistic conception is, that the world<6C>that all cosmic existences, substances, events<74>depend upon God.<P>3. True Conception:<P>The doctrine of creation<6F>of the origin and persistence, of all finite existences<65>as the work of God, is a necessary postulation of the religious consciousness. Such consciousness is marked by deeper insight than belongs to science. The underlying truth is the anti-patheistic one, that the energy and wisdom<6F>by which that, which was not, became<6D>were, in kind, other than its own. For science can but trace the continuity of sequences in all Nature, while in creation, in its primary sense, this law of continuity must be transcended, and the world viewed solely as product of Divine Intelligence, immanent in its evolution. For God is the Absolute Reason, always immanent in the developing universe. Apart from the cosmogonic attempts at the beginning of Genesis, which are clearly religious and ethical in scope and character, the Old Testament furnishes no theoretic account of the manner and order in which creative process is carried on.<P>4. The Genesis Cosmogony:<P>The early chapters of Genesis were, of course, not given to reveal the truths of physical science, but they recognize creation as marked by order, continuity, law, plastic power of productiveness in the different kingdoms, unity of the world and progressive advance. The Genesis cosmogony teaches a process of becoming, as well as a creation (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EVOLUTION">EVOLUTION</a>). That cosmogony has been recognized by Haeckel as meritoriously marked by the two great ideas of separation or differentiation, and of progressive development or perfecting of the originally simple matter. The Old Testament presents the conception of time-worlds or successive ages, but its real emphasis is on the energy of the Divine Word, bringing into being things that did not exist.<P>5. Matter not Eternal:<P>The Old Testament and the New Testament, in their doctrine of creation, recognize no eternal matter before creation. We cannot say that the origin of matter is excluded from the Genesis account of creation, and this quite apart from the use of bard\', as admitting of material and means in creation. But it seems unwise to build upon Genesis passages that afford no more than a basis which has proved exegetically insecure. The New Testament seems to favor the derivation of matter from the non-existent<6E>that is to say, the time-worlds were due to the effluent Divine Word or originative Will, rather than to being built out of God\'s own invisible essence. So the best exegesis interprets <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,3);">Heb 11:3</a>.<P>6. "Wisdom" in Creation:<P>In Old Testament books, as the Psalms, Proverbs, and Jeremiah, the creation is expressly declared to be the work of Wisdom<6F>a Wisdom not disjoined from Goodness, as is yet more fully brought out in the Book of Job. The heavens declare the glory of God, the world manifests or reveals Him to our experience, as taken up and interpreted by the religious consciousness. The primary fact of the beginning of the time-worlds<64>the basal fact that the worlds came into being by the Word of God<6F>is something apprehensible only by the power of religious faith, as the only principle applicable to the case (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,3);">Heb 11:3</a>). Such intuitive faith is really an application of first principles in the highest<73>and a truly rational one (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LOGOS">LOGOS</a>). In creation, God is but expressing or acting out the conscious Godhood that is in Him. In it the thought of His absolute Wisdom is realized by the action of His perfect Love. It is philosophically necessary to maintain that God, as the Absolute Being, must find the end of creation in Himself. If the end were external to, and independent of, Him, then would He be conditioned thereby.<P>7. A Free, Personal Act:<P>What the religious consciousness is concerned to maintain is, the absolute freedom of God in the production of the universe, and the fact that He is so much greater than the universe that existence has been by Him bestowed on all things that do exist. The Scriptures are, from first to last, shot through with this truth. Neither Kant nor Spencer, from data of self-consciousness or sense-perception, can rise to the conception of creation, for they both fail to reach the idea of Divine Personality. The inconceivability of creation has been pressed by Spencer, the idea of a self-existent Creator, through whose agency it has been made, being to him unthinkable. As if it were not a transparent sophism, which Spencer\'s own scientific practice refuted, that a hypothesis may not have philosophical or scientific valuee, because it is what we call unthinkable or inconceivable. As if a true and sufficient cause were not enough, or a Divine act of will were not a vera causa. Dependent existence inevitably leads thought to demand existence that is not dependent.<P>8. Creation and Evolution:<P>Creation is certainly not disproved by evolution, which does not explain the origin of the homogeneous stuff itself, and does not account for the beginning of motion within it. Of the original creative action, lying beyond mortal ken or human observation, science<63>as concerned only with the manner of the process<73>is obviously in no position to speak. Creation may, in an important sense, be said not to have taken place in time, since time cannot be posited prior to the existence of the world. The difficulties of the ordinary hypothesis of a creation in time can never be surmounted, so long as we continue to make eternity mean simply indefinitely prolonged time. Augustine was, no doubt, right when, from the human standpoint, he declared that the world was not made in time, but with time. Time is itself a creation simultaneous with, and conditioned by, world-creation and movement. To say, in the ordinary fashion, that God created in time, is apt to make time appear independent of God, or God dependent upon time. Yet the time-forms enter into all our psychological experience, and a concrete beginning is unthinkable to us.<P>9. Is Creation Eternal?:<P>The time-conditions can be transcended only by some deeper intuition than mere logical insight can supply<6C>by such intuitive endeavor, in fact, as is realized in the necessary belief in the self-existent God If such an eternal Being acts or creates, He may be said to act or create in eternity; and it is legitimate enough, in such wise, to speak of His creative act as eternal. This seems preferable to the position of Origen, who speculatively assumed an eternal or unbeginning activity for God as Creator, because the Divine Nature must be eternally self-determined to create in order to the manifestation of its perfections. Clearly did Aquinas perceive that we cannot affirm an eternal creation impossible, the creative act not falling within our categories of time and space. The question is purely one of God\'s free volition, in which<63>and not in "nothing"<22>the Source of the world is found.<P>10. Creation ex nihilo:<P>This brings us to notice the frequently pressed objection that creation cannot be out of nothing, since out of nothing comes nothing. This would mean that matter is eternal. But the eternity of matter, as something other than God, means its independence of God, and its power to limit or condition Him. We have, of course, no direct knowledge of the origin of matter, and the conception of its necessary self-existence is fraught with hopeless difficulties and absurdities. The axiom, that out of nothing nothing comes, is not contradicted in the case of creation. The universe comes from God; it does not come from nothing. But the axiom does not really apply to the world\'s creation, but only to the succession of its phenomena. Entity does not spring from non-entity. But there is an opposite and positive truth, that something presupposes something, in this case rather some One<6E>aliquis rather than aliquid.<P>11. From God\'s Will:<P>It is enough to know that God has in Himself the powers and resources adequate for creating, without being able to define the ways in which creation is effected by Him. It is a sheer necessity of rational faith or spiritual reason that the something which conditions the world is neither hule, nor elemental matter, but personal Spirit or originative Will. We have no right to suppose the world made out of nothing, and then to identify, as Erigena did, this "nothing" with God\'s own essence. What we have a right to maintain is, that what God creates or calls into being owes its existence to nothing save His will alone, Ground of all actualities. Preexistent Personality is the ground and the condition of the world\'s beginning.<P>12. Error of Pantheism:<P>In this sense, its beginning may be said to be relative rather than absolute. God is always antecedent to the universe<73>its prius, Cause and Creator. It remains an effect, and sustains a relation of causal dependence upon Him. If we say, like Cousin, that God of necessity creates eternally, we run risk of falling into Spinozistic pantheism, identifying God, in excluding from Him absolute freedom in creation, with the impersonal and unconscious substance of the universe. Or if, with Schelling, we posit in God something which is not God<6F>a dark, irrational background, which original ground is also the ground of the Divine Existence<63>we may try to find a basis for the matter of the universe, but we are in danger of being merged<65>by conceptions tinged with corporeity<74>in that form of pantheism to which God is but the soul of the universe.<P>The universe, we feel sure, has been caused; its existence must have some ground; even if we held a philosophy so idealistic as to make the scheme of created things one grand illusion, an illusion so vast would still call for some explanatory Cause. Even if we are not content with the conception of a First Cause, acting on the world from without and antecedently in time, we are not yet freed from the necessity of asserting a Cause. An underlying and determining Cause of the universe would still need to be postulated as its Ground.<P>13. First Cause a Necessary Presupposition:<P>Even a universe held to be eternal would need to be accounted for<6F>we should still have to ask how such a universe came to be. Its endless movement must have direction and character imparted to it from some immanent ground or underlying cause. Such a self-existent and eternal World-Ground or First Cause is, by an inexorable law of thought, the necessary correlate of the finitude, or contingent character of the world. God and the world are not to be taken simply as cause and effect, for modern metaphysical thought is not content with such a mere ens extra-mundanum for the Ground of all possible experience. God, self-existent Cause of the ever-present world and its phenomena, is the ultimate Ground of the possibility of all that is.<P>14. The End<6E>the Divine Glory:<P>Such a Deity, as causa sui, creatively bringing forth the world out of His own potence, cannot be allowed to be an arbitrary resting-place, but a truly rational Ground, of hidest thought. Nor can His Creation be allowed to be an aimless and mechanical universe: it is shot through with end or purpose that tends to reflect the glory of the eternal and personal God, who is its Creator in a full and real sense. But the Divine. action is not dramatic: of His working we can truly say, with <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',45,15);">Isa 45:15</a>, "Verily thou art a God that thyself." As creation becomes progressively disclosed to us, its glory, as revealing God, ought to excite within us an always deeper sense of the sentiment of <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',8,1,9);">Ps 8:1, 9</a>, "O Yahweh our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!"<P>LITERATURE.<P>James Orr, Christian View of God and the World, 1st edition, 1893; J. Iverach, Christianity and Evolution, 1894; S. Harris, God the Creator and Lord of All, 1897; A. L. Moore, Science and the Faith, 1889; B. P. Bowne, Studies in Theism, new edition, 1902; G. P. Fisher, Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, new edition, 1902; J. Lindsay, Recent Advances in Theistic Philosophy of Religion, 1897; A. Dorner, Religionsphilosophie, 1903; J. Lindsay, Studies in European Philosophy, 1909; O. Dykes, The Divine Worker in Creation and Providence, 1909; J. Lindsay, The Fundamental Problems of Metaphysics, 1910.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ANTHROPOLOGY">ANTHROPOLOGY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EARTH">EARTH</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WORLD">WORLD</a>`96';
isbe[2400]='Creator`kre-a\'-ter (ktistes, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',4,19);">1Pe 4:19</a>): The distinctive characteristic of Deity, as the Creator, is that He is the Cause of the existent universe<73>Cause of its being, not merely of its evolution or present arrangements.<P>1. God as Creator:<P>The doctrine of His being the Creator implies, that is to say, that He is the real and the exclusive Agent in the production of the world. For, as Herder remarked, the thought of the Creator is the most fruitful of all our ideas. As Creator, He is the Unconditioned, and the All-conditioning, Being. The universe is thus dependent upon Him, as its causative antecedent. He calls it, as Aquinas said, "according to its whole substance," into being, without any presupposed basis. His power, as Creator, is different in kind from finite power. But the creative process is not a case of sheer almightiness, creating something out of nothing, but an expression of God, as the Absolute Reason, under the forms of time and space, causality and finite personality. In all His work, as Creator, there is no incitement from without, but it rather remains an eternal activity of self- manifestation on the part of a God who is Love.<P>2. Purpose in Creation:<P>God\'s free creative action is destined to realize archetypal ends and ideals, which are peculiar to Himself. For thought cannot be content with the causal category under which He called the world into being, but must run on to the teleological category, wherein He is assumed to have created with a purpose, which His directive agency will see at last fulfilled. As Creator, He is distinct from the universe, which is the product of the free action of His will. This theistic postulation of His freedom, as Creator, rules out all theories of necessary emanation. His creative action was in no way necessarily eternal<61>not even necessary to His own blessedness or perfection, which must be held as already complete in Himself. To speak, as Professor James does, of "the stagnant felicity of the Absolute\'s own perfection" is to misconceive the infinite plenitude of His existence, and to place Him in a position of abject and unworthy dependence upon an eternal activity of world-making.<P>3. Relation to Time:<P>God\'s action, as Creator, does not lower our conception of His changelessness, for it is a gratuitous assumption to suppose either that the will to create was a sudden or accidental thing, or that He could not will a change, without, in any proper sense, changing His will. Again, grave difficulties cluster around the conception of His creative thought or purpose as externalized in time, the chief source of the trouble being, as is often imperfectly realized, that, in attempting to view things as they were when time began, we are really trying to get out of, and beyond, experience, to the thinking of which time is an indispensable condition. God\'s work as Creator must have taken place in time, since the world must be held as no necessary element in the Absolute Life.<P>4. Christ in Creation:<P>The self-determined action of the Divine Will, then, is to be taken as the ultimate principle of the cosmos. Not to any causal or meta-physical necessity, but to Divine or Absolute Personality, must the created world be referred. "Of him, and through him, and unto him, are all things" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,36);">Ro 11:36</a>). This creative action of God is mediated by Christ<73>by whom "were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,16);">Col 1:16</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CREATION">CREATION</a>`96';
</script>
<script src="./study/isbe/author.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./study/isbe/isbeDisplay.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/MainFooter.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink