exlim/blb
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
blb/study/isbe/4400.html

112 lines
334 KiB
HTML
Raw 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[4401]='Holy Place`(ha-qodhesh, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,33);">Ex 26:33</a>, ha-hekhal, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,17);">1Ki 6:17</a>, etc.; he prote skene, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,6);">Heb 9:6</a>f):<P>1. The Terms:<P>The tabernacle consisted of two divisions to which a graduated scale of holiness is attached: "The veil shall separate unto you between the holy place and the most holy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,33);">Ex 26:33</a>). This distinction was never abrogated. In the Epistle to the Hebrews these divisions are called the "first" and "second" tabernacles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,6);">Heb 9:6</a>f). The term "holy place" is not indeed confined to the outer chamber of the sanctuary; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,16);">Le 6:16</a>, it is applied to "the court of the tent of meeting." But the other is its technical use. In Solomon\'s temple we have a different usage. The word hekhal, "temple," is not at first applied, as after, to the whole building, but is the designation specifically of the holy place, in distinction from the debhir, or "oracle" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,3,5,16,17,33);">1Ki 6:3, 5, 16-17, 33</a>, etc.; so in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',41,1,2,4);">Eze 41:1-2, 4</a>, etc.). The wider usage is later (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,10,11,13);">2Ki 11:10-11, 13</a>, etc.).<P>2. Size of the Holy Place:<P>The size of the holy place differed at different times. The holy place of the tabernacle was 20 cubits long by 10 broad and 10 high (30 x 15 x 15 ft.); that of Solomon\'s temple was twice this in length and breadth—40 by 20 cubits; but it is contended by many (Bahr, etc.) that in height it was the full internal height of the building—30 cubits; the Herodian temple has the same dimensions of length and breadth, but Josephus and Middoth give largely increased, though differing, numbers for the height (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE,+HEROD\'S">TEMPLE, HEROD\'S</A>).<P>3. Contents of Holy Place:<P>The contents of the holy place were from the beginning ordered to be these (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,23);">Ex 25:23</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,\'1-10\');">30:1-10</a>): the altar of incense, a golden candlestick (in Solomon\'s temple increased to ten, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,49);">1Ki 7:49</a>), and a table of showbread (likewise increased to ten, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,8);">2Ch 4:8</a>). For the construction, position, history and uses of these objects, see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TABERNACLE,+A">TABERNACLE</A>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE,+A1">TEMPLE</a>, and articles under the several headings. This, as shown by Josephus and by the sculptures on the Arch of Titus, continued to be the furniture of the holy place till the end.<P>4. Symbolism:<P>As the outer division of the sanctuary, into which, as yet, not the people, but only their representatives in the priesthood, were admitted while yet the symbols of the people\'s consecrated life (prayer, light, thanksgiving) were found in it, the holy place may be said to represent the people\'s relation to God in the earthly life, as the holy of holies represented God\'s relation to the people in a perfected communion. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the holy place is not largely dwelt on as compared with the court in which the perfect sacrifice was offered, and the holiest of all into which Christ has now entered (Christ passes "through" the tabernacle into the holiest, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,11);">9:11</A>). It pertains, however, evidently to the earthly sphere of Christ\'s manifestation, even as earth is the present scene of the church\'s fellowship. Through earth, by the way which Christ has opened up, the believer, already in spirit, finally in fact, passes with Him into the holiest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,19);">Heb 10:19</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,8);">Heb 9:8</a>; see Westcott, Hebrews, 233ff).``17';
isbe[4402]='Holy Spirit, 1`ho\'-li spir\'-it:<P><b>I. OLD TESTAMENT TEACHINGS AS TO THE SPIRIT</b><P class="in15">1. Meaning of the Word<P class="in15">2. The Spirit in Relation to the Godhead<P class="in15">3. The Spirit in External Nature<P class="in15">4. The Spirit of God In Man<P class="in15">5. Imparting Powers for Service<p class="in30">(1) Judges and Warriors<p class="in30">(2) Wisdom for Various Purposes<p class="in30">(3) In Prophecy<P class="in15">6. Imparting Moral Character<P class="in15">7. The Spirit in in the Messiah<P class="in15">8. Predictions of Future Outpouring of the Spirit<P><b>II. THE SPIRIT IN THE NON-CANONICAL LITERATURE</b><P class="in15">1. The Spirit in Josephus<P class="in15">2. The Spirit in the Pseudepigrapha<P class="in15">3. The Spirit in the Wisdom of Solomon<P class="in15">4. The Spirit in Philo<P><b>III. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT</b><P class="in15">1. In Relation to the Person and Work of Christ<p class="in30">(1) Birth of Jesus<p class="in30">(2) Baptism of Jesus<p class="in30">(3) Temptation of Jesus<p class="in30">(4) Public Ministry of Jesus<p class="in30">(5) Death and Resurrection and Pentecostal Gift<P class="in15">2. The Holy Spirit in the Kingdom of God<p class="in30">(1) Synoptic Teachings<p class="in30">(2) In the Writings of John<p class="in30">(3) In Acts<p class="in30">(4) In Paul\'s Writings<p class="in45">(a) The Spirit and Jesus<p class="in45">(b) In Bestowing Charismatic Gifts<p class="in45">(c) In the Beginnings of the Christian Life<p class="in45">(d) In the Religious and Moral Life<p class="in45">(e) In the Church<p class="in45">(f) In the Resurrection of Believers<p class="in30">(5) The Holy Spirit in Other New Testament Writings<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>The expression Spirit, or Spirit of God, or Holy Spirit, is found in the great majority of the books of the Bible. In the Old Testament the Hebrew word uniformly employed for the Spirit as referring to God\'s Spirit is ruach meaning "breath," "wind" or "breeze." The verb form of the word is ruach, or riach used only in the Hiphil and meaning "to breathe," "to blow." A kindred verb is rawach, meaning "to breathe" "having breathing room," "to be spacious," etc. The word always used in the New Testament for the Spirit is the Greek neuter noun pneuma, with or without the article, and for Holy Spirit, pneuma hagion, or to pneuma to hagion. In the New Testament we find also the expressions, "the Spirit of God," "the Spirit of the Lord," "the Spirit of the Father," "the Spirit of Jesus," "of Christ." The word for Spirit in the Greek is from the verb pneo, "to breathe," "to blow." The corresponding word in the Latin is spiritus, meaning "spirit."<P>I. Old Testament Teachings as to the Spirit.<P>1. Meaning of the Word:<P>At the outset we note the significance of the term itself. From the primary meaning of the word which is "wind," as referring to Nature, arises the idea of breath in man and thence the breath, wind or Spirit of God. We have no way of tracing exactly how the minds of the Biblical writers connected the earlier literal meaning of the word with the Divine Spirit. Nearly all shades of meaning from the lowest to the highest appear in the Old Testament, and it is not difficult to conceive how the original narrower meaning was gradually expanded into the larger and wider. The following are some of the shades of Old Testament usage. From the notion of wind or breath, ruach came to signify:<P>(1) the principle of life itself; spirit in this sense indicated the degree of vitality: "My spirit is consumed, my days are extinct" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',17,1);">Job 17:1</a>; also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',15,19);">Jud 15:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,12);">1Sa 30:12</a>);<P>(2) human feelings of various kinds, as anger (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,3);">Jud 8:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',29,11);">Pr 29:11</a>), desire (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',26,9);">Isa 26:9</a>), courage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,11);">Jos 2:11</a>);<P>(3) intelligence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,3);">Ex 28:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,24);">Isa 29:24</a>);<P>(4) general disposition (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',34,18);">Ps 34:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,17);">Psa 51:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,29);">Pr 14:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',16,18);">16:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',29,23);">29:23</a>).<P>No doubt the Biblical writers thought of man as made in the image of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,27);">Ge 1:27</a>f), and it was easy for them to think of God as being like man. It is remarkable that their anthropomorphism did not go farther. They preserve, however, a highly spiritual conception of God as compared with that of surrounding nations. But as the human breath was an invisible part of man, and as it represented his vitality, his life and energy, it was easy to transfer the conception to God in the effort to represent His energetic and transitive action upon man and Nature. The Spirit of God, therefore, as based upon the idea of the ruach or breath of man, originally stood for the energy or power of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',31,3);">Isa 31:3</a>; compare A. B. Davidson, Theology of the Old Testament, 117-18), as contrasted with the weakness of the flesh.<P>2. The Spirit in Relation to the Godhead:<P>We consider next the Spirit of God in relation to God Himself in the Old Testament. Here there are several points to be noted. The first is that there is no indication of a belief that the Spirit of God was a material particle or emanation from God. The point of view of Biblical writers is nearly always practical rather than speculative. They did not philosophize about the Divine nature. Nevertheless, they retained a very clear distinction between spirit and flesh or other material forms. Again we observe in the Old Testament both an identification of God and the Spirit of God, and also a clear distinction between them. The identification is seen in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',139,7);">Ps 139:7</a> where the omni-presence of the Spirit is declared, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',63,10);">Isa 63:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,33);">Jer 31:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',36,27);">Eze 36:27</a>. In a great number of passages, however, God and the Spirit of God are not thought of as identical, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,2);">Ge 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,3);">6:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,20);">Ne 9:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,11);">Ps 51:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',104,29);">104:29</a>f. Of course this does not mean that God and the Spirit of God were two distinct beings in the thought of Old Testament writers, but only that the Spirit had functions of His own in distinction from God. The Spirit was God in action, particularly when the action was specific, with a view to accomplishing some particular end or purpose of God. The Spirit came upon individuals for special purposes. The Spirit was thus God immanent in man and in the world. As the angel of the Lord, or angel of the Covenant in certain passages, represents both Yahweh Himself and one sent by Yahweh, so in like manner the Spirit of Yahweh was both Yahweh within or upon man, and at the same time one sent by Yahweh to man.<P>Do the Old Testament teachings indicate that in the view of the writers the Spirit of Yahweh was a distinct person in the Divine nature? The passage in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,26);">Ge 1:26</a> is scarcely conclusive. The idea and importance of personality were but slowly developed in Israelite thought. Not until some of the later prophets did it receive great emphasis, and even then scarcely in the fully developed form. The statement in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,26);">Ge 1:26</a> may be taken as the plural of majesty or as referring to the Divine council, and on this account is not conclusive for the Trinitarian view. Indeed, there are no Old Testament passages which compel us to understand the complete New Testament doctrine of the Trinity and the distinct personality of the Spirit in the New Testament sense. There are, however, numerous Old Testament passages which are in harmony with the Trinitarian conception and prepare the way for it, such as <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',139,7);">Ps 139:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',63,10);">Isa 63:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',48,16);">48:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,5);">Hag 2:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,6);">Zec 4:6</a>. The Spirit is grieved, vexed, etc., and in other ways is conceived of personally, but as He is God in action, God exerting power, this was the natural way for the Old Testament writers to think of the Spirit.<P>The question has been raised as to how the Biblical writers were able to hold the conception of the Spirit of God without violence to their monotheism. A suggested reply is that the idea of the Spirit came gradually and indirectly from the conception of subordinate gods which prevailed among some of the surrounding nations (I.F. Wood, The Spirit of God in Biblical Literature, 30). But the best Israelite thought developed in opposition to, rather than in analogy with, polytheism. A more natural explanation seems to be that their simple anthropomorphism led them to conceive the Spirit of God as the breath of God parallel with the conception of man\'s breath as being part of man and yet going forth from him.<P>3. The Spirit in External Nature:<P>We consider next the Spirit of God in external Nature. "And the Spirit of God moved (was brooding or hovering) upon the face of the waters" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,2);">Ge 1:2</a>). The figure is that of a brooding or hovering bird (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,11);">De 32:11</a>). Here the Spirit brings order and beauty out of the primeval chaos and conducts the cosmic forces toward the goal of an ordered universe. Again in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',104,\'28-30\');">Ps 104:28-30</a>, God sends forth His Spirit, and visible things are called into being: "Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created; and thou renewest the face of the ground." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,13);">Job 26:13</a> the beauty of the heavens is ascribed to the Spirit: "By his Spirit the heavens are garnished." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,15);">Isa 32:15</a> the wilderness becomes a fruitful field as the result of the outpouring of the Spirit. The Biblical writers scarcely took into their thinking the idea of second causes, certainly not in the modern scientific sense. They regarded the phenomena of Nature as the result of God\'s direct action through His Spirit. At every point their conception of the Spirit saved them from pantheism on the one hand and polytheism on the other.<P>4. The Spirit of God in Man:<P>The Spirit may next be considered in imparting natural powers both physical and intellectual. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',2,7);">Ge 2:7</a> God originates man\'s personal and intellectual life by breathing into his nostrils "the breath of life." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,22);">Nu 16:22</a> God is "the God of the spirits of all flesh." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,3);">Ex 28:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',31,3);">31:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,31);">35:31</a>, wisdom for all kinds of workmanship is declared to be the gift of God. So also physical life is due to the presence of the Spirit of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,3);">Job 27:3</a>); and Elihu declares (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',33,4);">Job 33:4</a>) that the Spirit of God made him. See also <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',37,14);">Eze 37:14</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',39,29);">Eze 39:29</a>. Thus man is regarded by the Old Testament writers, in all the parts of his being, body, mind and spirit, as the direct result of the action of the Spirit of God. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,3);">Ge 6:3</a> the Spirit of God "strives" with or "rules" in or is "humbled" in man in the antediluvian world. Here reference is not made to the Spirit\'s activity over and above, but within the moral nature of man.<P>5. Imparting Powers for Service:<P>The greater part of the Old Testament passages which refer to the Spirit of God deal with the subject from the point of view of the covenant relations between Yahweh and Israel. And the greater portion of these, in turn, have to do with gifts and powers conferred by the Spirit for service in the ongoing of the kingdom of God. We fail to grasp the full meaning of very many statements of the Old Testament unless we keep constantly in mind the fundamental assumption of all the Old Testament, namely, the covenant relations between God and Israel. Extraordinary powers exhibited by Israelites of whatever kind were usually attributed to the Spirit. These are so numerous that our limits of space forbid an exhaustive presentation. The chief points we may notice.<P>(1) Judges and Warriors.<P>The children of Israel cried unto Yahweh and He raised up a savior for them, Othniel, the son of Kenaz: "And the Spirit of Yahweh came upon him, and he judged Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',3,10);">Jud 3:10</a>). So also Gideon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,34);">Jud 6:34</a>): "The Spirit of Yahweh came upon (literally, clothed itself with) Gideon." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',11,29);">11:29</a> "the spirit of Yahweh came upon Jephthah"; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',13,25);">Jud 13:25</a> "the Spirit of Yahweh began to move" Samson. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',14,6);">14:6</a> "the Spirit of Yahweh came mightily upon him." In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,14);">1Sa 16:14</a> we read "the Spirit of Yahweh departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from Yahweh troubled him." In all this class of passages, the Spirit imparts special endowments of power without necessary reference to the moral character of the recipient. The end in view is not personal, merely to the agent, but concerns theocratic kingdom and implies the covenant between God and Israel. In some cases the Spirit exerts physical energy in a more direct way (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',2,16);">2Ki 2:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',2,1);">Eze 2:1</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',3,12);">3:12</a>).<P>(2) Wisdom for Various Purposes.<P>Bezalel is filled with the Spirit of God in wisdom and in understanding to work in gold, and silver and brass, etc., in the building of the tabernacle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',31,\'2-4\');">Ex 31:2-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,31);">35:31</a>); and the Spirit of wisdom is given to others in making Aaron\'s garments (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,3);">Ex 28:3</a>). So also of one of the builders of Solomon\'s temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,14);">1Ki 7:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',2,14);">2Ch 2:14</a>). In these cases there seems to be a combination of the thought of natural talents and skill to which is superadded a special endowment of the Spirit. Pharaoh refers to Joseph as one in whom the Spirit of God is, as fitting him for administration and government (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,38);">Ge 41:38</a>). Joshua is qualified for leadership by the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',27,18);">Nu 27:18</a>). In this and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',34,9);">De 34:9</a>, Joshua is represented as possessing the Spirit through the laying on of the hands of Moses. This is an interesting Old Testament parallel to the bestowment of the Spirit by laying on of hands in the New Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,17);">Ac 8:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,6);">19:6</a>). Daniel is represented as having wisdom to interpret dreams through the Spirit, and afterward because of the Spirit he is exalted to a position of authority and power (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',4,8);">Da 4:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',5,\'11-14\');">5:11-14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,3);">6:3</a>). The Spirit qualifies Zerubbabel to rebuild the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,6);">Zec 4:6</a>). The Spirit was given to the people for instruction and strengthening during the wilderness wanderings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,20);">Ne 9:20</a>), and to the elders along with Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,17,25);">Nu 11:17, 25</a>). It thus appears how very widespread were the activities of the redemptive Spirit, or the Spirit in the covenant. All these forms of the Spirit\'s action bore in some way upon the national life of the people, and were directed in one way or another toward theocratic ends.<P>(3) In Prophecy.<P>The most distinctive and important manifestation of the Spirit\'s activity in the Old Testament was in the sphere of prophecy. In the earlier period the prophet was called seer (ro\'eh), and later he was called prophet (nabhi\'). The word "prophet" (prophetes) means one who speaks for God. The prophets were very early differentiated from the masses of the people into a prophetic class or order, although Abraham himself was called a prophet, as were Moses and other leaders (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',20,7);">Ge 20:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',18,15);">De 18:15</a>). The prophet was especially distinguished from others as the man who possessed the Spirit of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,7);">Ho 9:7</a>). The prophets ordinarily began their messages with the phrase, "thus saith Yahweh," or its equivalent. But they ascribed their messages directly also to the Spirit of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',2,2);">Eze 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,3);">8:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',11,1,24);">11:1, 24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',13,3);">13:3</a>). The case of Balaam presents some difficulties (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',24,2);">Nu 24:2</a>). He does not seem to have been a genuine prophet, but rather a diviner, although it is declared that the Spirit of God came upon him. Balaam serves, however, to illustrate the Old Testament point of view. The chief interest was the national or theocratic or covenant ideal, not that of the individual. The Spirit was bestowed at times upon unworthy men for the achievement of these ends. Saul presents a similar example. The prophet was God\'s messenger speaking God\'s message by the Spirit. His message was not his own. It came directly from God, and at times overpowered the prophet with its urgency, as in the case of Jeremiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',1,4);">1:4</a>ff).<P>There are quite perceptible stages in the development of the Old Testament prophecy. In the earlier period the prophet was sometimes moved, not so much to intelligible speech, as by a sort of enthusiasm or prophetic ecstasy. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',10,\'1-\');">1Sa 10</a> we have an example of this earlier form of prophecy, where a company with musical instruments prophesied together. To what extent this form of prophetic enthusiasm was attended by warnings and exhortations, if so attended at all, we do not know. There was more in it than in the excitement of the diviners and devotees of the surrounding nations. For the Spirit of Yahweh was its source.<P>In the later period we have prophecy in its highest forms in the Old Testament. The differences between earlier and later prophecy are probably due in part to the conditions. The early period required action, the later required teaching. The judges on whom the Spirit came were deliverers in a turbulent age. There was not need for, nor could the people have borne, the higher ethical and spiritual truths which came in later revelations through the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah and others. See <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,2);">2Sa 23:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',2,2);">Eze 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,3);">8:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',11,24);">11:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',13,3);">13:3</a>; .<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',3,8);">Mic 3:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,7);">Ho 9:7</a>.<P>A difficulty arises from statements such as the following: A lying spirit was sometimes present in the prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,21);">1Ki 22:21</a>f); Yahweh puts a spirit in the king of Assyria and turns him back to his destruction (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,7);">Isa 37:7</a>); because of sin, a lying prophet should serve the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',2,11);">Mic 2:11</a>); in Micaiah\'s vision Yahweh sends a spirit to entice Ahab through lying prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,19);">1Ki 22:19</a>); an evil spirit from Yahweh comes upon Saul (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,14);">1Sa 16:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,10);">18:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',19,9);">19:9</a>). The following considerations may be of value in explaining these passages. Yahweh was the source of things generally in Old Testament thought. Its pronounced monotheism appears in this as in so many other ways. Besides this, Old Testament writers usually spoke phenomenally. Prophecy was a particular form of manifestation with certain outward marks and signs. Whatever presented these outward marks was called prophecy, whether the message conveyed was true or false. The standard of discrimination here was not the outward signs of the prophet, but the truth or right of the message as shown by the event. As to the evil spirit from Yahweh, it may be explained in either of two ways. First, it may have referred to the evil disposition of the man upon whom God\'s Spirit was acting, in which case he would resist the Spirit and his own spirit would be the evil spirit. Or the "evil spirit from Yahweh" may have referred, in the prophet\'s mind, to an actual spirit of evil which Yahweh sent or permitted to enter the man. The latter is the more probable explanation, in accordance with which the prophet would conceive that Yahweh\'s higher will was accomplished, even through the action of the evil spirit upon man\'s spirit. Yahweh\'s judicial anger against transgression would, to the prophet\'s mind, justify the sending of an evil spirit by Yahweh.<P>6. Imparting Moral Character:<P>The activity of the Spirit in the Old Testament is not limited to gifts for service. Moral and spiritual character is traced to the Spirit\'s operations as well. "Thy holy Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,11);">Ps 51:11</a>); "his holy spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',63,10);">Isa 63:10</a>); "thy good Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,20);">Ne 9:20</a>); "Thy Spirit is good" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',143,10);">Ps 143:10</a>) are expressions pointing to the ethical quality of the Spirit\'s action. "Holy" is from the verb form (qadhash), whose root meaning is doubtful, but which probably meant "to be separated" from which it comes to mean to be exalted, and this led to the conception to be Divine. And as Yahweh is morally good, the conception of "the holy (= Divine) one" came to signify the holy one in the moral sense. Thence the word was applied to the Spirit of Yahweh. Yahweh gives His good Spirit for instruction (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,20);">Ne 9:20</a>); the Spirit is called good because it teaches to do God\'s will (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',143,10);">Ps 143:10</a>); the Spirit gives the fear of the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,\'2-5\');">Isa 11:2-5</a>); judgment and righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,15);">Isa 32:15</a>); devotion to the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,\'3-5\');">Isa 44:3-5</a>); hearty obedience and a new heart (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',36,26);">Eze 36:26</a>f); penitence and prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',12,10);">Zec 12:10</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,11);">Ps 51:11</a> there is an intense sense of guilt and sin coupled with the prayer, "Take not thy holy Spirit from me." Thus, we see that the Old Testament in numerous ways recognizes the Holy Spirit as the source of inward moral purity, although the thought is not so developed as in the New Testament.<P>7. The Spirit in the Messiah:<P>In both the first and the second sections of Isaiah, there are distinct references to the Spirit in connection with the Messiah, although the Messiah is conceived as the ideal King who springs from the root of David in some instances, and in others as the Suffering Servant of Yahweh. This is not the place to discuss the Messianic import of the latter group of passages which has given rise to much difference of opinion. As in the case of the ideal Davidic King which, in the prophet\'s mind, passes from the lower to the higher and Messianic conception, so, under the form of the Suffering Servant, the "remnant" of Israel becomes the basis for an ideal which transcends in the Messianic sense the original nucleus of the conception derived from the historic events in the history of Israel. The prophet rises in the employment of both conceptions to the thought of the Messiah who is the "anointed" of Yahweh as endued especially with the power and wisdom of the Spirit. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,\'1-5\');">Isa 11:1-5</a> a glowing picture is given of the "shoot out of the stock of Jesse." The Spirit imparts "wisdom and understanding" and endows him with manifold gifts through the exercise of which he shall bring in the kingdom of righteousness and peace. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,1);">Isa 42:1</a>ff, the "servant" is in like manner endowed most richly with the gifts of the Spirit by virtue of which he shall bring forth "justice to the Gentiles." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>ff occur the notable words cited by Jesus in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,18);">Lu 4:18</a>f; beginning, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me" etc. In these passages the prophet describes elaborately and minutely the Messiah\'s endowment with a wide range of powers, all of which are traced to the action of God\'s Spirit.<P>8. Predictions of Future Outpouring of the Spirit:<P>In the later history of Israel, when the sufferings of the exile pressed heavily, there arose a tendency to idealize a past age as the era of the special blessing of the Spirit, coupled with a very marked optimism as to a future outpouring of the Spirit. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,5);">Hag 2:5</a> reference is made to the Mosaic period as the age of the Spirit, "when ye came out of Egypt, and my Spirit abode among you." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,3);">Isa 44:3</a> the Spirit is to be poured out on Jacob and his seed; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',59,20);">Isa 59:20</a> a Redeemer is to come to Zion under the covenant of Yahweh, and the Spirit is to abide upon the people. The passage, however, which especially indicates the transition from Old Testament to New Testament times is that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,28,32);">Joe 2:28, 32</a> which is cited by Peter in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'17-21\');">Ac 2:17-21</a>. In this prophecy the bestowal of the Spirit is extended to all classes, is attended by marvelous signs and is accompanied by the gift of salvation. Looking back from the later to the earlier period of Old Testament history, we observe a twofold tendency of teaching in relation to the Spirit. The first is from the outward gift of the Spirit for various uses toward a deepening sense of inner need of the Spirit for moral purity, and consequent emphasis upon the ethical energy of the Spirit. The second tendency is toward a sense of the futility of the merely human or theocratic national organization in and of itself to achieve the ends of Yahweh, along with a sense of the need for the Spirit of God upon the people generally, and a prediction of the universal diffusion of the Spirit.<P>II. The Spirit in Non-Canonical Jewish Literature.<P>In the Palestinian and Alexandrian literature of the Jews there are comparatively few references to the Spirit of God. The two books in which the teachings as to the Spirit are most explicit and most fully developed are of Alexandrian origin, namely, The Wisdom of Solomon and the writings of Philo.<P>In the Old Testament Apocrypha and in Josephus the references to the Spirit are nearly always merely echoes of a long-past age when the Spirit was active among men. In no particular is the contrast between the canonical and noncanonical literature more striking than in the teaching as to the Spirit of God.<p>1. The Spirit of Josephus:<P>Josephus has a number of references to the Holy Spirit, but nearly always they have to do with the long-past history of Israel. He refers to 22 books of the Old Testament which are of the utmost reliability. There are other books, but none "of like authority," because there has "not been an exact succession of prophets" (Josephus, Against Apion I, 8). Samuel is described as having a large place in the affairs of the kingdom because he is a prophet (Ant., VI, v, 6). God appears to Solomon in sleep and teaches him wisdom (ibid., VIII, ii); Balaam prophesies through the Spirit\'s power (ibid., IV, v, 6); and Moses was such a prophet that his words were God\'s words (ibid., IV, viii, 49). In Josephus we have then simply a testimony to the inspiration and power of the prophets and the books written by them, in so far as we have in him teachings regarding the Spirit of God. Even here the action of the Spirit is usually implied rather than expressed.<P>2. The Spirit in the Pseudepigrapha:<P>In the pseudepigraphic writings the Spirit of God is usually referred to as acting in the long-past history of Israel or in the future Messianic age. In the apocalyptic books, the past age of power, when the Spirit wrought mightily, becomes the ground of the hopes of the future. The past is glorified, and out of it arises the hope of a future kingdom of glory and power. Enoch says to Methuselah: "The word calls me and the Spirit is poured out upon me" (En 91:1). In <span class="noTag">49:1-4</span> the Messiah has the Spirit of wisdom, understanding and might. Enoch is represented as describing his own translation. "He was carried aloft in the chariots of the Spirit" (En 70:2). In Jubilees 31:16 Isaac is represented as prophesying, and in <span class="noTag">25:13</span> it is said of Rebekah that the" Holy Spirit descended into her mouth." Sometimes the action of the Spirit is closely connected with the moral life, although this is rare. "The Spirit of God rests" on the man of pure and loving heart (XII the Priestly Code (P), Benj. 8). In Simeon 4 it is declared that Joseph was a good man and that the Spirit of God rested on him. There appears at times a lament for the departed age of prophecy (1Macc 9:27; 14:41). The future is depicted in glowing colors. The Spirit is to come in a future judgment (XII the Priestly Code (P), <span class="noTag">Levi 18</span>); and the spirit of holiness shall rest upon the redeemed in Paradise (<span class="noTag">Levi 18</span>); and in <span class="noTag">Levi 2</span> the spirit of insight is given, and the vision of the sinful world and its salvation follows. Generally speaking, this literature is far below that of the Old Testament, both in moral tone and religious insight. Much of it seems childish, although at times we encounter noble passages. There is lacking in it the prevailing Old Testament mood which is best described as prophetic, in which the writer feels constrained by the power of God\'s Spirit to speak or write. The Old Testament literature thus possesses a vitality and power which accounts for the strength of its appeal to our religious consciousness.<P>3. The Spirit in the Wisdom of Solomon:<P>We note in the next place a few teachings as to the Spirit of God in Wisd. Here the ethical element in character is a condition of the Spirit\'s indwelling. "Into a malicious soul wisdom shall not enter: nor dwell in the body that is subject unto sin. For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and will not abide when unrighteousness cometh in" (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 1:4f</span>). This "holy spirit of discipline" is evidently God\'s Holy Spirit, for in <span class="noTag">1:7</span> the writer proceeds to assert, "For the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world," and in <span class="noTag">1:8,9</span> there is a return to the conception of unrighteousness as a hindrance to right speaking. In The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 7:7</span> the Spirit of Wisdom comes in response to prayer. In <span class="noTag">7:22-30</a> is an elaborate and very beautiful description of wisdom: "In her is an understanding spirit, holy, one only, manifold, subtle, lively, clear, undefiled, plain, not subject to hurt, loving the thing that is good, quick, which cannot be letted, ready to do good, kind to man, steadfast, sure," etc. "She is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness," etc. No one can know God\'s counsel except by the Holy Spirit (<span class="noTag">9:17</span>). The writer of The Wisdom of Solomon was deeply possessed of the sense of the omnipresence of the Spirit of God, as seen in <span class="noTag">1:7 and in 12:1</span>. In the latter passage we read: "For thine incorruptible spirit is in all things."<P>4. The Spirit in Philo:<P>In Philo we have what is almost wholly wanting in other Jewish literature, namely, analytic and reflective thought upon the work of the Spirit of God. The interest in Philo is primarily philosophic, and his teachings on the Spirit possess special interest on this account in contrast with Biblical and other extra-Biblical literature. In his Questions and Solutions, 27, 28, he explains the expression in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,1);">Ge 8:1</a>: "He brought a breath over the earth and the wind ceased." He argues that water is not diminished by wind, but only agitated and disturbed. Hence, there must be a reference to God\'s Spirit or breath by which the whole universe obtains security. He has a similar discussion of the point why the word "Spirit" is not used instead of "breath" in Gen in the account of man\'s creation, and concludes that "to breathe into" here means to "inspire," and that God by His Spirit imparted to man mental and moral life and capacity for Divine things (Allegories, xiii). In several passages Philo discusses prophecy and the prophetic office. One of the most interesting relates to the prophetic office of Moses (Life of Moses, xxiiiff). He also describes a false prophet who claims to be "inspired and possessed by the Holy Spirit" (On Those Who Offer Sacrifice, xi). In a very notable passage, Philo describes in detail his own subjective experiences under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and his language is that of the intellectual mystic. He says that at times he found himself devoid of impulse or capacity for mental activity, when suddenly by the coming of the Spirit of God, his intellect was rendered very fruitful: "and sometimes when I have come to my work empty I have suddenly become full, ideas being, in an invisible manner, showered upon me and implanted in me from on high; so that through the influence of Divine inspiration I have become greatly excited and have known neither the place in which I was, nor those who were present, nor myself, nor what I was saying, nor what I was writing," etc. (Migrations of Abraham, vii).<P>In Philo, as in the non-canonical literature generally, we find little metaphysical teaching as to the Spirit and His relations to the Godhead. On this point there is no material advance over the Old Testament teaching. The agency of the Holy Spirit in shaping and maintaining the physical universe and as the source of man\'s capacities and powers is clearly recognized in Philo. In Philo, as in Josephus, the conception of inspiration as the complete occupation and domination of the prophet\'s mind by the Spirit of God, even to the extent of suspending the operation of the natural powers, comes clearly into view. This is rather in contrast with, than in conformity to, the Old Testament and New Testament conception of inspiration, in which the personality of the prophet remains intensely active while under the influence of the Spirit, except possibly in cases of vision and trance.``127';
isbe[4403]='Holy Spirit, 2`III. The Holy Spirit in the New Testament.<P>In the New Testament there is unusual symmetry and completeness of teaching as to the work of the Spirit of God in relation to the Messiah Himself, and to the founding of the Messianic kingdom. The simplest mode of presentation will be to trace the course of the progressive activities of the Spirit, or teachings regarding these activities, as these are presented to us in the New Testament literature as we now have it, so far as the nature of the subject will permit. This will, of course, disturb to some extent the chronological order in which the New Testament books were written, since in some cases, as in John\'s Gospel, a very late book contains early teachings as to the Spirit.<P>1. In Relation to the Person and Work of Christ:<P>(1) Birth of Jesus.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,18);">Mt 1:18</a> Mary is found with child "of the Holy Spirit" (ek pneumatos hagiou); an angel tells Joseph that that "which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,20);">Mt 1:20</a>), all of which is declared to be in fulfillment of the prophecy that a virgin shall bring forth a son whose name shall be called Immanuel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,14);">Isa 7:14</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a> the angel says to Mary that the Holy Spirit (pneuma hagion) shall come upon her, and the power of the Most High (dunamis Hupsistou) shall overshadow her. Here "Holy Spirit" and "power of the Most High" are parallel expressions meaning the same thing; in the one case emphasizing the Divine source and in the other the holiness of "the holy thing which is begotten" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>). In connection with the presentation of the babe in the temple, Simeon is described as one upon whom the Holy Spirit rested, to whom revelation was made through the Spirit and who came into the temple in the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,\'25-28\');">Lu 2:25-28</a>). So also Anna the prophetess speaks concerning the babe, evidently in Luke\'s thought, under the influence of the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,36);">Lu 2:36</a>).<P>It is clear from the foregoing that the passages in Matthew and Luke mean to set forth, first, the supernatural origin, and secondly, the sinlessness of the babe born of Mary. The act of the Holy Spirit is regarded as creative, although the words employed signify "begotten" or "born" (gennethen, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',1,20);">Mt 1:20</a>; and gennomenon, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,35);">Lu 1:35</a>). There is no hint in the stories of the nativity concerning the pretemporal existence of Christ. This doctrine was developed later. Nor is there any suggestion of the immaculate conception or sinlessness of Mary, the mother of our Lord. Dr. C.A. Briggs has set forth a theory of the sinlessness of Mary somewhat different from the Roman Catholic view, to the effect that the Old Testament prophecies foretell the purification of the Davidic line, and that Mary was the culminating point in the purifying process, who thereby became sinless (Incarnation of the Lord, 230-34). This, however, is speculative and without substantial Biblical warrant. The sinlessness of Jesus was not due to the sinlessness of His mother, but to the Divine origin of His human nature, the Spirit of God.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,5);">Heb 10:5</a>ff the writer makes reference to the sinless body of Christ as affording a perfect offering for sins. No direct reference is made to the birth of Jesus, but the origin of His body is ascribed to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,5);">Heb 10:5</a>), though not specifically to the Holy Spirit.<P>(2) Baptism of Jesus.<P>The New Testament records give us very little information regarding the growth of Jesus to manhood. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,40);">Lu 2:40</a>ff a picture is given of the boyhood, exceedingly brief, but full of significance. The "child grew, and waxed strong, filled with wisdom (m "becoming full of wisdom"): and the grace of God was upon him." Then follows the account of the visit to the temple. Evidently in all these experiences, the boy is under the influence and guidance of the Spirit. This alone would supply an adequate explanation, although Luke does not expressly name the Spirit as the source of these particular experiences. The Spirit\'s action is rather assumed.<P>Great emphasis, however, is given to the descent of the Spirit upon Jesus at His baptism. <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,16);">Mt 3:16</a> declares that after His baptism "the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him." <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,10);">Mr 1:10</a> repeats the statement in substantially equivalent terms. <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,22);">Lu 3:22</a> declares that the Spirit descended in "bodily form, as a dove" (somatiko eidei hos peristeran). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,32,33);">Joh 1:32-33</a> the Baptist testifies that he saw the Spirit descending upon Jesus as a dove out of heaven, and that it abode upon Him, and, further, that this descent of the Spirit was the mark by which he was to recognize Jesus as "he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit."<P>We gather from these passages that at the baptism there was a new communication of the Spirit to Jesus in great fullness, as a special anointing for His Messianic vocation. The account declares that the dovelike appearance was seen by Jesus as well as John, which is scarcely compatible with a subjective experience merely. Of course, the dove here is to be taken as a symbol, and not as an assertion that God\'s Spirit assumed the form of a dove actually. Various meanings have been assigned to the symbol. One connects it with the creative power, according to a Gentile usage; others with the speculative philosophy of Alexandrian Judaism, according to which the dove symbolized the Divine wisdom or reason. But the most natural explanation connects the symbolism of the dove with the brooding or hovering of the Spirit in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1:2);">Ge 1:2</a>. In this new spiritual creation of humanity, as in the first physical creation, the Spirit of God is the energy through which the work is carried on. Possibly the dove, as a living organism, complete in itself, may suggest the totality and fullness of the gift of the Spirit to Jesus. At Pentecost, on the contrary, the Spirit is bestowed distributively and partially at least to individuals as such, as suggested by the cloven tongues as of fire which "sat upon each one of them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,3);">Ac 2:3</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,34);">Joh 3:34</a> emphasizes the fullness of the bestowal upon Jesus: "For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for he giveth not the Spirit by measure." In the witness of the Baptist the permanence of the anointing of Jesus is declared: "Upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,33);">1:33</a>).<P>It is probable that the connection of the bestowal of the Spirit with water baptism, as seen later in the Book of Acts, is traceable to the reception of the Spirit by Jesus at His own baptism. Baptism in the Spirit did not supersede water baptism.<P>The gift of the Spirit in fullness to Jesus at His baptism was no doubt His formal and public anointing for His Messianic work (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,38);">Ac 10:38</a>). The baptism of Jesus could not have the same significance with that of sinful men. For the symbolic cleansing from sin had no meaning for the sinless one. Yet as an act of formal public consecration it was appropriate to the Messiah. It brought to a close His private life and introduced Him to His public Messianic career. The conception of an anointing for public service was a familiar one in the Old Testament writings and applied to the priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,41);">Ex 28:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',40,13);">40:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3,5,16);">Le 4:3, 5, 16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,20,22);">6:20, 22</a>); to kings (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',9,16);">1Sa 9:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',10,1);">10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',15,1);">15:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,3,13);">16:3, 13</a>); sometimes to prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,16);">1Ki 19:16</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,2);">Ps 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',20,6);">20:6</a>). These anointings were with oil, and the oil came to be regarded as a symbol of the Spirit of God.<P>The anointing of Jesus with the Holy Spirit qualified Him in two particulars for His Messianic office.<P>(a) It was the source of His own endowments of power for the endurance of temptation, for teaching, for casting out demons, and healing the sick, for His sufferings and death, for His resurrection and ascension. The question is often raised, why Jesus, the Divine one, should have needed the Holy Spirit for His Messianic vocation. The reply is that His human nature, which was real, required the Spirit\'s presence. Man, made in God\'s image, is constituted in dependence upon the Spirit of God. Apart from God\'s Spirit man fails of his true destiny, simply because our nature is constituted as dependent upon the indwelling Spirit of God for the performance of our true functions. Jesus as human, therefore, required the presence of God\'s Spirit, notwithstanding His Divine-human consciousness.<P>(b) The Holy Spirit\'s coming upon Jesus in fullness also qualified Him to bestow the Holy Spirit upon His disciples. John the Baptist especially predicts that it is He who shall baptize in the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,11);">Mt 3:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1:8);">Mr 1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,16);">Lu 3:16</a>; see also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,22);">Joh 20:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,5);">Ac 1:5</a>). It was especially true of the king that He was anointed for His office, and the term Messiah (mashiach, equivalent to the Greek ho Christos), meaning the Anointed One, points to this fact.<P>(3) Temptation of Jesus.<P>The facts as to the temptation are as follows: In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,1);">Mt 4:1</a> we are told that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,12);">Mr 1:12</a> declares in his graphic way that after the baptism "straightway the Spirit driveth (ekballei) him forth into the wilderness." <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,1);">Lu 4:1</a> more fully declares that Jesus was "full of the Holy Spirit," and that He was "led in the Spirit in the wilderness during 40 days." The impression which the narratives of the temptation give is of energetic spiritual conflict. As the Messiah confronted His life task He was subject to the ordinary conditions of other men in an evil world. Not by sheer divinity and acting from without as God, but as human also and a part of the world, He must overcome, so that while He was sinless, it was nevertheless true that the righteousness of Jesus was also an achieved righteousness. The temptations were no doubt such as were peculiar to His Messianic vocation, the misuse of power, the presumption of faith and the appeal of temporal splendor. To these He opposes the restraint of power, the poise of faith and the conception of a kingdom wholly spiritual in its origin, means and ends. Jesus is hurled, as it were, by the Spirit into this terrific conflict with the powers of evil, and His conquest, like the temptations themselves, was not final, but typical and representative. It is a mistake to suppose that the temptations of Jesus ended at the close of the forty days. Later in His ministry, He refers to the disciples as those who had been with Him in His temptations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,28);">Lu 22:28</a>). The temptations continued throughout His life, though, of course, the wilderness temptations were the severest test of all, and the victory there contained in principle and by anticipation later victories. Comment has been made upon the absence of reference to the Holy Spirit\'s influence upon Jesus in certain remarkable experiences, which in the case of others would ordinarily have been traced directly to the Spirit, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,14);">Lu 11:14</a>ff, etc. (compare the article by James Denney in DCG, I, 732, 734). Is it not true, however, that the point of view of the writers of the Gospels is that Jesus is always under the power of the Spirit? At His baptism, in the temptation, and at the beginning of His public ministry (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,14);">Lu 4:14</a>) very special stress is placed upon the fact. Thenceforward the Spirit\'s presence and action are assumed. From time to time, reference is made to the Spirit for special reasons, but the action of the Spirit in and through Jesus is always assumed.<P>(4) Public Ministry of Jesus.<P>Here we can select only a few points to illustrate a much larger truth. The writers of the Gospels, and especially Luke, conceived of the entire ministry of Jesus as under the power of the Holy Spirit. After declaring that Jesus was "full of the Holy Spirit" and that He was led about by the Spirit in the wilderness forty days in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,1);">Luk 4:1</a>, he declares, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,14);">4:14</a>, that Jesus "returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee." This is followed in the next verse [<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,15);">Luk 4:15</a>] by a general summary of His activities: "And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all." Then, as if to complete his teaching as to the relation of the Spirit to Jesus, he narrates the visit to Nazareth and the citation by Jesus in the synagogue there of Isaiah\'s words beginning, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me," with the detailed description of His Messianic activity, namely, preaching to the poor, announcement of release to the captives, recovering of sight to the blind, and to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>f). Jesus proclaims the fulfillment of this prophecy in Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,21);">Lu 4:21</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,18);">Mt 12:18</a>ff a citation from <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,\'1-3\');">Isa 42:1-3</a> is given in connection with the miraculous healing work of Jesus. It is a passage of exquisite beauty and describes the Messiah as a quiet and unobtrusive and tender minister to human needs, possessed of irresistible power and infinite patience. Thus the highest Old Testament ideals as to the operations of the Spirit of God come to realization, especially in the public ministry of Jesus. The comprehensive terms of the description make it incontestably clear that the New Testament writers thought of the entire public life of Jesus as directed by the Spirit of God. We need only to read the evangelic records in order to fill in the details.<P>The miracles of Jesus were wrought through the power of the Holy Spirit. Occasionally He is seized as it were by a sense of the urgency of His work in some such way as to impress beholders with the presence of a strange power working in Him. In one case men think He is beside Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,21);">Mr 3:21</a>); in another they are impressed with the authoritativeness of His teaching (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,22);">Mr 1:22</a>); in another His intense devotion to His task makes Him forget bodily needs (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,31);">Joh 4:31</a>); again men think He has a demon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,48);">Joh 8:48</a>); at one time He is seized with a rapturous joy when the 70 return from their successful evangelistic tour, and Luke declares that at that hour Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,21);">Lu 10:21</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,25);">Mt 11:25</a>). This whole passage is a remarkable one, containing elements which point to the Johannine conception of Jesus, on which account Harnack is disposed to discredit it at certain points (Sayings of Jesus, 302). One of the most impressive aspects of this activity of Jesus in the Spirit is its suppressed intensity. Nowhere is there lack of self-control. Nowhere is there evidence of a coldly didactic attitude, on the one hand, or of a loose rein upon the will, on the other. Jesus is always an intensely human Master wrapped in Divine power. The miracles contrast strikingly with the miracles of the apocryphal gospels. In the latter all sorts of capricious deeds of power are ascribed to Jesus as a boy. In our Gospels, on the contrary, no miracle is wrought until after His anointing with the Spirit at baptism.<P>A topic of especial interest is that of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Jesus cast out demons by the power of God\'s Spirit. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,31);">Mt 12:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,28);">Mr 3:28</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,10);">Lu 12:10</a>, we have the declaration that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is an unpardonable sin. Mark particularizes the offense of the accusers of Jesus by saying that they said of Jesus, "He hath an unclean spirit." The blasphemy against the Spirit seems to have been not merely rejection of Jesus and His words, which might be due to various causes. It was rather the sin of ascribing works of Divine mercy and power-works which had all the marks of their origin in the goodness of God—to a diabolic source. The charge was that He cast out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils. We are not to suppose that the unpardonable nature of the sin against the Holy Spirit was due to anything arbitrary in God\'s arrangements regarding sin. The moral and spiritual attitude involved in the charge against Jesus was simply a hopeless one. It presupposed a warping or wrenching of the moral nature from the truth in such degree, a deep-seated malignity and insusceptibility to Divine influences so complete, that no moral nucleus remained on which the forgiving love of God might work.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BLASPHEMY">BLASPHEMY</A>.<P>(5) Death, Resurrection and Pentecostal Gift.<P>It is not possible to give here a complete outline of the activities of Jesus in the Holy Spirit. We observe one or two additional points as to the relations of the Holy Spirit to Him. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">Heb 9:14</a> it is declared that Christ "through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,4);">Ro 1:4</a>, Paul says He was "declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead" (compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,11);">Ro 8:11</a>).<P>As already noted, John the Baptist gave as a particular designation of Jesus that it was He who should baptize with the Holy Spirit, in contrast with his own baptism in water. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,22);">Joh 20:22</a>, after the resurrection and before the ascension, Jesus breathed on the disciples and said "Receive ye the Holy Spirit." There was probably a real communication of the Spirit in this act of Jesus in anticipation of the outpouring in fullness on the day of Pentecost. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,2);">Ac 1:2</a> it is declared that He gave commandment through the Holy Spirit, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,5);">Ac 1:5</a> it is predicted by Him that the disciples should "be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence"; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,8);">Ac 1:8</a> it is declared, "Ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you."<P>It is clear from the preceding that in the thought of the New Testament writers Jesus is completely endued with the power of the Holy Spirit. It is in large measure the Old Testament view of the Spirit; that is to say, the operation of the Spirit in and through Jesus is chiefly with a view to His official Messianic work, the charismatic Spirit imparting power rather than the Spirit for holy living merely. Yet there is a difference between the Old Testament and New Testament representations here. In the Old Testament the agency of the Spirit is made very prominent when mighty works are performed by His power. In the Gospels the view is concentrated less upon the Spirit than upon Jesus Himself, though it is always assumed that He is acting in the power of the Spirit. In the case of Jesus also, the moral quality of His words and deeds is always assumed.<P>2. The Holy Spirit in the Kingdom of God:<P>Our next topic in setting forth the New Testament teaching is the Holy Spirit in relation to the kingdom of God. Quite in harmony with the plenary endowment of Jesus, the founder of the kingdom, with the power of the Spirit, is the communication of the Spirit to the agents employed by Providence in the conduct of the affairs of the kingdom. We need, at all points, in considering the subject in the New Testament to keep in view the Old Testament background. The covenant relations between God and Israel were the presupposition of all the blessings of the Old Testament. In the New Testament there is not an identical but an analogous point of view. God is continuing His work among men. Indeed in a real sense He has begun a new work, but this new work is the fulfillment of the old. The new differs from the old in some very important respects, chiefly indeed in this, that now the national and theocratic life is wholly out of sight. Prophecy no longer deals with political questions. The power of the Spirit no longer anoints kings and judges for their duties. The action of the Spirit upon the cosmos now ceases to receive attention. In short, the kingdom of God is intensely spiritualized, and the relation of the Spirit to the individual or the church is nearly always that which is dealt with.<P>(1) Synoptic Teachings.<P>We consider briefly the synoptic teachings as to the Holy Spirit in relation to the kingdom of God. The forerunner of Jesus goes before His face in the Spirit and power of Elijah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,17);">Lu 1:17</a>). Of him it had been predicted that he should be filled with the Holy Spirit from His mother\'s womb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,15);">Lu 1:15</a>). The Master expressly predicts that the Holy Spirit will give the needed wisdom when the disciples are delivered up. "It is not ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,11);">Mr 13:11</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,12);">Lu 12:12</a> it is also declared that "The Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to say." Likewise in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,20);">Mt 10:20</a>, "It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,13);">Lu 11:13</a> is a beautiful saying: If we who are evil give good gifts to our children, how much more shall the "heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him." This is a variation from the parallel passage in Matthew (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,11);">7:11</a>), and illustrates Luke\'s marked emphasis upon the operations of the Spirit. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,19);">Mt 28:19</a>, the disciples are commanded to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This passage has been called in question, but there is not sufficient ground for its rejection. Hitherto there has been almost no hint directly of the personality of the Spirit or the Trinitarian implications in the teaching as to the Spirit. Here, however, we have a very suggestive hint toward a doctrine of the Spirit which attains more complete development later.<P>(2) In the Writings of John<P>In the Gospel of John there is a more elaborate presentation of the office and work of the Holy Spirit, particularly in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,\'1-\');">Joh 14-17</a>. Several earlier passages, however, must be noticed. The passage on the new birth in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,5);">Joh 3:5</a>ff we notice first. The expression, "except one be born of water and the Spirit," seems to contain a reference to baptism along with the action of the Spirit of God directly on the soul. In the light of other New Testament teachings, however, we are not warranted in ascribing saving efficacy to baptism here. The "birth," in so far as it relates to baptism, is symbolic simply, not actual. The outward act is the fitting symbolic accompaniment of the spiritual regeneration by the Spirit. Symbolism and spiritual fact move on parallel lines. The entrance into the kingdom is symbolically effected by means of baptism, just as the "new birth" takes place symbolically by the same means.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,51);">Joh 6:51</a>ff we have the very difficult words attributed to Jesus concerning the eating of His flesh and the drinking of His blood. The disciples were greatly distressed by these words, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,63);">Joh 6:63</a> Jesus insists that "it is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing." One\'s view of the meaning of this much-discussed passage will turn largely on his point of view in interpreting it. If he adopts the view that John is reading back into the record much that came later in the history, the inference will probably follow that Jesus is here referring to the Lord\'s Supper. If on the other hand it is held that John is seeking to reproduce substantially what was said, and to convey an impression of the actual situation, the reference to the Supper will not be inferred. Certainly the language fits the later teaching in the establishment of the Supper, although John omits a detailed account of the Supper. But Jesus was meeting a very real situation in the carnal spirit of the multitude which followed Him for the loaves and fishes. His deeply mystical words seem to have been intended to accomplish the result which followed, namely, the separation of the true from the false disciples. There is no necessary reference to the Lord\'s Supper specifically, therefore, in His words. Spiritual meat and drink, not carnal, are the true food of man. He Himself was that food, but only the spiritually susceptible would grasp His meaning. It is difficult to assign any sufficient reason why Jesus should have here referred to the Supper, or why John should have desired to introduce such reference into the story at this stage.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,37);">Joh 7:37</a>ff we have a saying of Jesus and its interpretation by John which accords with the synoptic reference to a future baptism in the Holy Spirit to be bestowed by Jesus: "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, from within him shall flow rivers of living water." John adds: "But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified." No doubt John\'s Gospel is largely a reproduction of the facts and teachings of Jesus in the evangelist\'s own words. This passage indicates, however, that John discriminated between his own constructions of Christ\'s teachings and the teachings themselves, and warns us against the custom of many exegetes who broadly assume that John employed his material with slight regard for careful and correct statement, passing it through his own consciousness in such manner as to leave us his own subjective Gospel, rather than a truly historical record. The ethical implications of such a process on John\'s part would scarcely harmonize with his general tone and especially the teachings of his Epistles. No doubt John\'s Gospel contains much meaning which he could not have put into it prior to the coming of the Spirit. But what John seeks to give is the teaching of Jesus and not his own theory of Jesus.<P>We give next an outline of the teachings in the great <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,\'1-\');">Joh 14 to 17</a>, the farewell discourse of Jesus. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16);">Joh 14:16</a> Jesus says, "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter" (parakletos; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=PARACLETE">PARACLETE</A>). Next Jesus describes this Comforter as one whom the world cannot receive. Disciples know Him because He abides in them. The truth of Christianity is spiritually discerned, i.e. it is discerned by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In the name of "reality," science sometimes repudiates these inner experiences as "mystical." But Christians cling to them as most real, data of experience as true and reliable as any other forms of human experience. To repudiate them would be for them to repudiate reality itself. The Father and Son shall make their abode in Christians (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,23);">Joh 14:23</a>). This is probably another form of assertion of the Spirit\'s presence, and not a distinct line of mystical teaching. (Compare Woods, The Spirit of God in Biblical Literature, 243.) For in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,26);">Joh 14:26</a> the promise of the Spirit is repeated. The Father is to send the Spirit in the name of Christ, and He is to teach the disciples all things, quickening also their memories. In the New Testament generally, and especially in John\'s and Paul\'s writings, there is no sense of conflict between Father, Son and Spirit in their work in the Christian. All proceeds from the Father, through the Son, and is accomplished in the Christian by the Holy Spirit. As will appear, Christ in the believer is represented as being practically all that the Spirit does without identifying Christ with the Spirit. So far there are several notes suggesting the personality of the Holy Spirit. The designation "another Comforter," taken in connection with the description of his work, is one. The fact that He is sent or given is another. And another is seen in the specific work which the Spirit is to do. Another is the masculine pronoun employed here (ekeinos). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,26);">Joh 14:26</a> the function of the Spirit is indicated. He is to bring to "remembrance all that I said unto you." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,26);">15:26</a> this is made even more comprehensive: "He shall bear witness of me," and yet more emphatically in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,14);">Joh 16:14</a>, "He shall glorify me: for he shall take of mine, and shall declare it unto you." The sphere of the Spirit\'s activity is the heart of the individual believer and of the church. His chief function is to illumine the teaching and glorify the person of Jesus. <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,26);">Joh 15:26</a> is the passage which has been used in support of the doctrine of the procession of the Spirit. Jesus says, "I will send" (pempso), future tense, referring to the "Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father" (ekporeuetai); present tense. The present tense here suggests timeless action and has been taken to indicate an essential relation of the Spirit to God the Father (compare Godet, Commentary on John, in the place cited.). The hazard of such an interpretation lies chiefly in the absence of other corroborative Scriptures and in the possibility of another and simpler meaning of the word. However, the language is unusual, and the change of tense in the course of the sentence is suggestive. Perhaps it is one of the many instances where we must admit we do not know the precise import of the language of Scripture.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'7-15\');">Joh 16:7-15</a> we have a very important passage. Jesus declares to the anxious disciples that it is expedient for Him to go away, because otherwise the Spirit will not come. "He, when he is come, will convict the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,8);">Joh 16:8</a>). The term translated "convict" (elegksei) involves a cognitive along with a moral process. The Spirit who deals in truth, and makes His appeal through the truth, shall convict, shall bring the mind on which He is working into a sense of self-condemnation on account of sin. The word means more than reprove, or refute, or convince. It signifies up to a certain point a moral conquest of the mind: "of sin, because they believe not on me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,9);">16:9</a>). Unbelief is the root sin. The revelation of God in Christ is, broadly speaking, His condemnation of all sin. The Spirit may convict of particular sins, but they will all be shown to consist essentially in the rejection of God\'s love and righteousness in Christ, i.e. in unbelief. "Of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye behold me no more" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,10);">Joh 16:10</a>). What does this mean? Does Jesus mean that His going to the Father will be the proof of His righteousness to those who put Him to death, or that this going to the Father will be the consummating or crowning act of His righteousness which the Spirit is to carry home to the hearts of men? Or does He mean that because He goes away the Spirit will take His place in convicting men of righteousness? The latter meaning seems implied in the words, "and ye behold me no more." Probably, however, the meanings are not mutually exclusive. "Of judgment because the prince of this world hath been judged" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,11);">16:11</a>). In His incarnation and death the prince of this world, the usurper, is conquered and cast out.<P>We may sum up the teachings as to the Spirit in these four chapters as follows: He is the Spirit of truth; He guides into all truth; He brings to memory Christ\'s teachings; He shows things to come; He glorifies Christ; He speaks not of Himself but of Christ; He, like believers, bears witness to Christ; He enables Christians to do greater works than those of Christ; He convicts the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment; He comes because Christ goes away; He is "another Comforter"; He is to abide with disciples forever.<P>These teachings cover a very wide range of needs. The Holy Spirit is the subject of the entire discourse. In a sense it is the counterpart of the Sermon on the Mount. There the laws of the kingdom are expounded. Here the means of realization of all the ends of that kingdom are presented. The kingdom now becomes the kingdom of the Spirit. The historical revelation of truth in the life, death, resurrection and glorification of Jesus being completed, the Spirit of truth comes in fullness. The gospel as history is now to become the gospel as experience. The Messiah as a fact is now to become the Messiah as a life through the Spirit\'s action. All the elements of the Spirit\'s action are embraced: the charismatic for mighty works; the intellectual for guidance into truth; the moral and spiritual for producing holy lives. This discourse transfers the kingdom, so to speak, from the shoulders of the Master to those of the disciples, but the latter are empowered for their tasks by the might of the indwelling and abiding Spirit. The method of the kingdom\'s growth and advance is clearly indicated as spiritual, conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment, and obedient and holy lives of Christ\'s disciples.<P>Before passing to the next topic, one remark should be made as to the Trinitarian suggestions of these chapters in John. The personality of the Spirit is clearly implied in much of the language here. It is true we have no formal teaching on the metaphysical side, no ontology in the strict sense of the word. This fact is made much of by writers who are slow to recognize the personality of the Holy Spirit in the light of the teachings of John and Paul. These writers have no difficulty, however, in asserting that the New Testament writers hold that God is a personal being (see I. F. Woods, The Spirit of God in Biblical Literature, 256, 268). It must be insisted, however, that in the New Testament, as in the Old Testament, there is little metaphysics, little ontological teaching as to God. His personality is deduced from the same kind of sayings as those relating to the Spirit. From the ontological point of view, therefore, we should also have to reject the personality of God on the basis of the Biblical teachings. The Trinitarian formulations may not be correct at all points, but the New Testament warrants the Trinitarian doctrine, just as it warrants belief in the personality of God. We are not insisting on finding metaphysics in Scripture where it is absent, but we do insist upon consistency in construing the popular and practical language of Scripture as to the second and third as well as the first Person of the Trinity.<P>We add a few lines as to John\'s teachings in the Epistles and Revelation. In general they are in close harmony with the teachings in his Gospel and do not require extended treatment. The Spirit imparts assurance (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,24);">1Joh 3:24</a>); incites to confession of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,2);">1Joh 4:2</a>); bears witness to Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,6);">1Joh 5:6</a>ff). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,4);">Re 1:4</a> the "seven Spirits" is an expression for the completeness of the Spirit. The Spirit speaks to the churches (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,7,11);">1Joh 2:7, 11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,6);">3:6</a>). The seer is "in the Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,2);">1Joh 4:2</a>). The Spirit joins the church in the invitation of the gospel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,17);">1Joh 2:17</a>).<P>(3) In Acts.<P>The Book of Acts contains the record of the beginning of the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit. There is at the outset the closest connection with the recorded predictions of the Holy Spirit in the Gospels. Particularly does Luke make clear the continuity of his own thought regarding the Spirit in his earlier and later writing. Jesus in the first chapter of Acts gives commandment through the Holy Spirit and predicts the reception of power as the result of the baptism in the Holy Spirit which the disciples are soon to receive.<P>The form of the Spirit\'s activities in Acts is chiefly charismatic, that is, the miraculous endowment of disciples with power or wisdom for their work in extending the Messianic kingdom. As yet the work of the Spirit within disciples as the chief sanctifying agency is not fully developed, and is later described with great fullness in Paul\'s writings. Some recent writers have overemphasized the contrast between the earlier and the more developed view of the Spirit with regard to the moral life. In Acts the ethical import of the Spirit\'s action appears at several points (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,3,9);">Ac 5:3, 9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,51);">7:51</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,18);">8:18</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,9);">13:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,28);">15:28</a>). The chief interest in Acts is naturally the Spirit\'s agency in founding the Messianic kingdom, since here is recorded the early history of the expansion of that kingdom. The phenomenal rather than the inner moral aspects of that great movement naturally come chiefly into view. But everywhere the ethical implications are present. Gunkel is no doubt correct in the statement that Paul\'s conception of the Spirit as inward and moral and acting in the daily life of the Christian opens the way for the activity of the Spirit as a historical principle in subsequent ages. After all, this is the fundamental and universal import of the Spirit (see Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, etc., 76; compare Pfleiderer, Paulinismus, 200).<P>We now proceed to give a brief summary of the Holy Spirit\'s activities as recorded in Acts, and follow this with a discussion of one or two special points. The great event is of course the outpouring or baptism of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost followed by the completion of the baptism in the Holy Spirit by the baptism of the household of Cornelius (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,1);">Ac 2:1</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,\'17-48\');">Ac 10:17-48</a>). Speaking with tongues, and other striking manifestations attended this baptism, as also witnessing to the gospel with power by the apostles. See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BAPTISM+OF+THE+HOLY+SPIRIT">BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT</A>. This outpouring is declared to be in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, and the assertion is also made that it is the gift of the exalted Lord Jesus Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,17,33);">Ac 2:17, 33</a>). Following this baptism of the Holy Spirit the disciples are endued with miraculous power for their work. Miracles are wrought (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,43);">Ac 2:43</a>), and all necessary gifts of wisdom and Divine guidance are bestowed. A frequent form of expression describing the actors in the history is, "filled with the Holy Spirit." It is applied to Peter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,8);">Ac 4:8</a>); to disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,31);">Ac 4:31</a>); to the seven deacons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,3);">Ac 6:3</a>); to Stephen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,5);">Ac 6:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,55);">Ac 7:55</a>); to Saul who becomes Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,9);">Ac 13:9</a>).<P>The presence of the Spirit and His immediate and direct superintendence of affairs are seen in the fact that Ananias and Sapphira are represented as lying to the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,3,9);">Ac 5:3, 9</a>); the Jews are charged by Stephen with resisting the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,51);">Ac 7:51</a>); and Simon Magus is rebuked for attempting to purchase the Spirit with money (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,18);">Ac 8:18</a>f).<P>The Holy Spirit is connected with the act of baptism, but there does not seem to be any fixed order as between the two. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,17);">Ac 9:17</a> the Spirit comes before baptism; and after baptism in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,17);">8:17</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,6);">19:6</a>. In these cases the coming of the Spirit was in connection with the laying on of hands also. But in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,44);">Ac 10:44</a> the Holy Spirit falls upon the hearers while Peter is speaking prior to baptism and with no laying on of hands. These instances in which the order of baptism, the laying on of hands and the gift of the Spirit seem to be a matter of indifference, are a striking indication of the non-sacramentarian character of the teaching of the Book of Acts, and indeed in the New Testament generally. Certainly no particular efficacy seems to be attached to the laying on of hands or baptism except as symbolic representations of spiritual facts. Gunkel, in his excellent work on the Holy Spirit, claims <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,38);">Ac 2:38</a> as an instance when the Spirit is bestowed during baptism (Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, etc., 7). The words of Peter, however, may refer to a reception of the Spirit subsequent to baptism, although evidently in immediate connection with it. The baptism of the Holy Spirit clearly then was not meant to supplant water baptism. Moreover, in the strict sense the baptism of the Holy Spirit was a historical event or events completed at the outset when the extension of the kingdom of God, beginning at Pentecost, began to reach out to the Gentile world.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BAPTISM+OF+THE+HOLY+SPIRIT">BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT</a>.<P>In Acts the entire historical movement is represented by Luke as being under the direction of the Spirit. He guides Philip to the Ethiopian and then "catches away" Philip (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,29,39);">Ac 8:29,39</a>). He guides Peter at Joppa through the vision and then leads him to Cornelius at Caesarea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,19);">Ac 10:19</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,12);">Ac 11:12</a>f). The Spirit commands the church at Antioch to separate Saul and Barnabas for missionary work (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,2);">Ac 13:2</a>ff). He guides the church at Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,28);">Ac 15:28</a>). He forbids the apostle to go to Asia (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,6);">Ac 16:6</a>f). The Spirit enables Agabus to prophesy that Paul will be bound by the Jews at Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,11);">Ac 21:11</a>; compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,23);">Ac 20:23</a>). The Spirit appointed the elders at Ephesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,28);">Ac 20:28</a>).<P>One or two points require notice before passing from Acts. The impression we get of the Spirit\'s action here very strongly suggests a Divine purpose moving on the stage of history in a large and comprehensive way. In Jesus that purpose was individualized. Here the supplementary thought of a vast historic movement is powerfully suggested. Gunkel asserts that usually the Spirit\'s action is not conceived by the subjects of it in terms of means (Mittel) and end (Zweck), but rather as cause (Ursache) and activity (Wirkung) (see Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, etc., 20). There is an element of truth in this, but the idea of purpose is by no means confined to the historian who later recorded the Spirit\'s action. The actors in the spiritual drama were everywhere conscious of the great movement of which they as individuals were a part. In some passages the existence of purpose in the Spirit\'s action is clearly recognized, as in His restraining of Paul at certain points and in the appointment of Saul and Barnabas as missionaries. Divine purpose is indeed implied at all points, and while the particular end in view was not always clear in a given instance, the subjects of the Spirit\'s working were scarcely so naive in their apprehension of the matter as to think of their experiences merely as so many extraordinary phenomena caused in a particular way.<P>We note next the glossolalia, or speaking with tongues, recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'1-\');">Ac 2</a>, as well as in later chapters and in Paul\'s Epistles. The prevailing view at present is that "speaking with tongues" does not mean speaking actual intelligible words in a foreign language, but rather the utterance of meaningless sounds, as was customary among the heathen and as is sometimes witnessed today where religious life becomes highly emotional in its manifestation. To support this view the account in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'1-\');">Acts 2</a> is questioned, and Paul\'s instructions in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,\'1-\');">1 Corinthians 14</a> are cited. Of course a man\'s world-view will be likely to influence his interpretation in this as in other matters. Philosophically an antisupernatural world-view makes it easy to question the glossolalia of the New Testament. Candid exegesis, however, rather requires the recognition of the presence in the apostolic church of a speaking in foreign tongues, even if alongside of it there existed (which is open to serious doubt) the other phenomenon mentioned above. <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,3);">Ac 2:3</a>ff is absolutely conclusive taken by itself, and no valid critical grounds have been found for rejecting the passage. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,\'1-\');">1Co 14</a> confirms this view when its most natural meaning is sought. Paul is here insisting upon the orderly conduct of worship and upon edification as the important thing. To this end he insists that they who speak with tongues pray that they may also interpret (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,5);">1Co 14:5</a>; chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,\'-\');">13</a>). It is difficult to conceive what he means by "interpret" if the speaking with tongues was a meaningless jargon of sounds uttered under emotional excitement, and nothing more. Paul\'s whole exposition in this chapter implies that "tongues" may be used for edification. He ranks it below prophecy simply because without an interpreter "tongues" would not edify the hearer. Paul himself spoke with tongues more than they all (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,18);">1Co 14:18</a>). It seems scarcely in keeping with Paul\'s character to suppose that he refers here to a merely emotional volubility in meaningless and disconnected sounds.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TONGUES,+GIFT+OF">TONGUES, GIFT OF</A>.<P>(4) In Paul\'s Writings.<P>The teachings of Paul on the Holy Spirit are so rich and abundant that space forbids an exhaustive presentation. In his writings the Biblical representations reach their climax. Mr. Wood says correctly that Paul grasped the idea of the unity of the Christian life. All the parts exist in a living whole and the Holy Spirit constitutes and maintains it (Wood, The Spirit of God in Biblical Literature, 268). In fact a careful study of Paul\'s teachings discloses three parallel lines, one relating to faith, another to Christ, and the third to the Holy Spirit. That is to say, his teachings coalesce, as it were, point by point, in reference to these three subjects. Faith is the human side of the Divine activity carried on by the Holy Spirit. Faith is therefore implied in the Spirit\'s action and is the result of or response to it in its various forms. But faith is primarily and essentially faith in Jesus Christ. Hence, we find in Paul that Christ is represented as doing substantially everything that the Spirit does. Now we are not to see in this any conflicting conceptions as to Christ and the Spirit, but rather Paul\'s intense feeling of the unity of the work of Christ and the Spirit. The "law" of the Spirit\'s action is the revelation and glorification of Christ. In his Gospel, which came later, John, as we have seen, defined the Spirit\'s function in precisely these terms. Whether or not John was influenced by Paul in the matter we need not here consider.<P>(a) The Spirit and Jesus<P>We begin with a brief reference to the connection in Paul\'s thought between the Spirit and Jesus. The Holy Spirit is described as the Spirit of God\'s Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,14);">Ro 8:14</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,6);">Ga 4:6</a>), as the Spirit of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,9);">Ro 8:9</a>). He who confesses Jesus does so by the Holy Spirit, and no one can say that Jesus is anathema in the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,3);">1Co 12:3</a>). Christ is called a life-giving Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,45);">1Co 15:45</a>); and in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,17);">2Co 3:17</a> the statement appears, "Now the Lord is the Spirit." All of this shows how completely one Paul regarded the work of Christ and the Spirit, not because they were identical in the sense in which Beyschlag has contended, but because their task and aim being identical, there was no sense of discord in Paul\'s mind in explaining their activities in similar terms.<P>(b) In Bestowing Charismatic Gifts<P>The Spirit appears in Paul as in Acts imparting all kinds of charismatic gifts for the ends of the Messianic kingdom. He enumerates a long list of spiritual gifts which cannot receive separate treatment here, such as prophecy (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',5,19);">1Th 5:19</a>f); tongues (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,\'1-\');">1Co 12-14</a>); wisdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,6);">1Co 2:6</a>); knowledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,8);">1Co 12:8</a>); power to work miracles (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,9);">1Co 12:9</a>f); discerning of spirits (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,10);">1Co 12:10</a>); interpretation of tongues (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,10);">1Co 12:10</a>); faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,9);">1Co 12:9</a>); boldness in Christian testimony (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,17);">2Co 3:17</a>f); charismata generally (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,5);">1Th 1:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,8);">4:8</a>, etc.). See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=SPIRITUAL+GIFTS">SPIRITUAL GIFTS</a>. In addition to the above list, Paul especially emphasizes the Spirit\'s action in revealing to himself and to Christians the mind of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,\'10-12\');">1Co 2:10-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,5);">Eph 3:5</a>). He speaks in words taught by the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,13);">1Co 2:13</a>). He preaches in demonstration of the Spirit and of power (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,4);">1Co 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,5);">1Th 1:5</a>).<P>In the above manifestations of the Spirit, as enumerated in Paul\'s writings, we have presented in very large measure what we have already seen in Acts, but with some additions. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,\'1-\');">1 Corinthians 14</a> and elsewhere Paul gives a new view as to the charismatic gifts which was greatly needed in view of the tendency to extravagant and intemperate indulgence in emotional excitement, due to the mighty action of God\'s Spirit in the Corinthian church. He insists that all things be done unto edification, that spiritual growth is the true aim of all spiritual endowments. This may be regarded as the connecting link between the earlier and later New Testament teaching as to the Holy Spirit, between the charismatic and moral-religious significance of the Spirit. To the latter we now direct attention.<P>(c) In the Beginnings of the Christian Life<P>We note the Spirit in the beginnings of the Christian life. From beginning to end the Christian life is regarded by Paul as under the power of the Holy Spirit, in its inner moral and religious aspects as well as in its charismatic forms. It is a singular fact that Paul does not anywhere expressly declare that the Holy Spirit originates the Christian life. Gunkel is correct in this so far as specific and direct teaching is concerned. But Wood who asserts the contrary is also right, if regard is had to clear implications and legitimate inferences from Paul\'s statements (op. cit., 202). <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,2);">Ro 8:2</a> does not perhaps refer to the act of regeneration, and yet it is hard to conceive of the Christian life as thus constituted by the "law of the Spirit of life" apart from its origin through the Spirit. There are other passages which seem to imply very clearly, if they do not directly assert, that the Christian life is originated by the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,6);">1Th 1:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,5);">Ro 5:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,9);">8:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,4);">1Co 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',6,11);">6:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,5);">Tit 3:5</a>).<P>The Holy Spirit in the beginnings of the Christian life itself is set forth in many forms of statement. They who have the Spirit belong to Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,9);">Ro 8:9</a>). We received not the Spirit of bondage but of adoption, "whereby we cry, Abba, Father" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,15);">Ro 8:15</a>). "The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,16);">Ro 8:16</a>). The Spirit is received by the hearing of faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,2);">Ga 3:2</a>). See also <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,5);">Ro 5:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,2);">8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,11);">1Co 16:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,3,14);">Ga 3:3, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,18);">Eph 2:18</a>. There are two or three expressions employed by Paul which express some particular aspect of the Spirit\'s work in believers. One of these is "first-fruits" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,23);">Ro 8:23</a>, aparche), which means that the present possession of the Spirit by the believer is the guarantee of the full redemption which is to come, as the first-fruits were the guarantee of the full harvest. Another of these words is "earnest" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,22);">2Co 1:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,5);">5:5</a>, arrabon), which also means a pledge or guarantee. Paul also speaks of the "sealing" of the Christians with the Holy Spirit of promise, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,13);">Eph 1:13</a> (esphragisthete, "ye were sealed"). This refers to the seal by which a king stamped his mark of authorization or ownership upon a document.<P>(d) In the Religious and Moral Life<P>Paul gives a great variety of expressions indicating the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit in the religious and moral life of the Christian. In fact at every point that life is under the guidance and sustaining energy of the Spirit. If we live after the flesh, we die; if after the Spirit, we live (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,6);">Ro 8:6</a>). The Spirit helps the Christian to pray (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,26);">Ro 8:26</a>f). The kingdom of God is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',14,17);">Ro 14:17</a>). Christians are to abound in hope through the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,13);">Ro 15:13</a>). "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,22);">Ga 5:22</a>). Christians are warned to grieve not the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,30);">Eph 4:30</a>), and are urged to take the sword of the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,17);">Eph 6:17</a>). The flesh is contrasted with the Spirit at a number of points in Paul\'s writings (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,5);">Ro 8:5</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,17);">Ga 5:17</a>ff). The Spirit in these passages probably means either the Spirit of God or man\'s spirit as under the influence of the Spirit of God. Flesh is a difficult word to define, as it seems to be used in several somewhat different senses. When the flesh is represented as lusting against the Spirit, however, it seems equivalent to the "carnal mind," i.e. the mind of the sinful natural man as distinct from the mind of the spiritual man. This carnal or fleshly mind is thus described because the flesh is thought of as the sphere in which the sinful impulses in large part, though not altogether (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,19);">Ga 5:19</a>), take their rise.<P>Paul contrasts the Spirit with the letter (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,6);">2Co 3:6</a>) and puts strong emphasis on the Spirit as the source of Christian liberty. As Gunkel points out, spirit and freedom with Paul are correlatives, like spirit and life. Freedom must needs come of the Spirit\'s presence because He is superior to all other authorities and powers (Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, etc., 95). See also an excellent passage on the freedom of the Christian from statutory religious requirements in DCG, article "Holy Spirit" by Dr. James Denney, I, 739.<P>(e) In the Church.<P>Toward the end of his ministry and in his later group of epistles, Paul devoted much thought to the subject of the church, and one of his favorite figures was of the church as the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit is represented as animating this body, as communicating to it life, and directing all its affairs. As in the case of the individual believer, so also in the body of believers the Spirit is the sovereign energy which rules completely. By one Spirit all are baptized into one body and made to drink of one Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,13);">1Co 12:13</a>). All the gifts of the church, charismatic and otherwise, are from the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,4);">1Co 12:4</a>,<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,\'8-11\');">8-11</a>). All spiritual gifts in the church are for edification (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,12);">1Co 14:12</a>). Prayer is to be in the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,15);">1Co 14:15</a>). The church is to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,3);">Eph 4:3</a>). Love (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,8);">Col 1:8</a>); fellowship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,1);">Php 2:1</a>); worship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,3);">Php 3:3</a>) are in the Spirit. The church is the habitation of the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,22);">Eph 2:22</a>). The church is an epistle of Christ written by the Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,3);">2Co 3:3</a>). Thus the whole life of the church falls under the operation of the Holy Spirit.<P>(f) In the Resurrection of Believers<P>The Spirit also carries on His work in believers in raising the body from the dead. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,11);">Ro 8:11</a> Paul asserts that the present indwelling in believers of the Spirit that raised up Jesus from the dead is the guarantee of the quickening of their mortal bodies by the power of the same Spirit. See also <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,44);">1Co 15:44</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,5);">Ga 5:5</a>.<P>We have thus exhibited Paul\'s teachings as to the Holy Spirit in some detail in order to make clear their scope and comprehensiveness. And we have not exhausted the material supplied by his writings. It will be observed that Paul nowhere elaborates a doctrine of the Spirit, as he does in a number of instances his doctrine of the person of Christ. The references to the Spirit are in connection with other subjects usually. This, however, only serves to indicate how very fundamental the work of the Spirit was in Paul\'s assumptions as to the Christian life. The Spirit is the Christian life, just as Christ is that life.<P>The personality of the Spirit appears in Paul as in John. The benediction in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,14);">2Co 13:14</a> distinguishes clearly Father, Son and Spirit (compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,4);">Eph 4:4</a>). In many connections the Spirit is distinguished from the Son and Father, and the work of the Spirit is set forth in personal terms. It is true, references are often made to the Holy Spirit by Paul as if the Spirit were an impersonal influence, or at least without clearly personal attributes. This distinguishes his usage as to the Spirit from that as to Christ and God, who are always personal. It is a natural explanation of this fact if we hold that in the case of the impersonal references we have a survival of the current Old Testament conception of the Spirit, while in those which are personal we have the developed conception as found in both Paul and John. Personal attributes are ascribed to the Spirit in so many instances, it would seem unwarranted in us to make the earlier and lower conception determinative of the later and higher.<P>In Paul\'s writings we have the crowning factor in the Biblical doctrine of the Holy Spirit. He gathers up most of the preceding elements, and adds to them his own distinctive teaching or emphasis. Some of the earlier Old Testament elements are lacking, but all those which came earlier in the New Testament are found in Paul. The three points which Paul especially brought into full expression were first, the law of edification in the use of spiritual gifts, second, the Holy Spirit in the moral life of the believer, and third, the Holy Spirit in the church. Thus Paul enables us to make an important distinction as to the work of the Spirit in founding the kingdom of God, namely, the distinction between means and ends. Charismatic gifts of the Spirit were, after all, means to ethical ends. God\'s kingdom is moral in its purpose, "righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Christianity is, according to Paul, inherently and essentially supernatural. But its permanent and abiding significance is to be found, not in extraordinary phenomena in the form of "mighty works," "wonders," "tongues" and other miracles in the ordinary sense, but in the creation of a new moral order in time and eternity. The supernatural is to become normal and "natural" in human history, therefore, in the building up of this ethical kingdom on the basis of a redemption that is in and through Jesus Christ, and wrought out in all its details by the power of the Holy Spirit.<P>(5) The Holy Spirit in Other New Testament Writings.<P>There is little to add to the New Testament teaching as to the Holy Spirit. Paul and John practically cover all the aspects of His work which are presented. There are a few passages, however, we may note in concluding Our general survey. In He the Holy Spirit is referred to a number of times as inspiring the Old Testament Scriptures (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,7);">Heb 3:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,8);">9:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,15);">10:15</a>). We have already referred to the remarkable statement in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">Heb 9:14</a> to the effect that the blood of Christ was offered through the eternal Spirit. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,29);">Heb 10:29</a> doing "despite unto the Spirit of grace" seems to be closely akin to the sin against the Holy Spirit in the Gospels. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,12);">Heb 4:12</a> there is a very remarkable description of the "word of God" in personal terms, as having all the energy and activity of an actual personal presence of the Spirit, and recalls Paul\'s language in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,17);">Eph 6:17</a>. In 1 Peter we need only refer to <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,11);">1Pe 1:11</a> in which Peter declares that the "Spirit of Christ" was in the Old Testament prophets, pointing forward to the sufferings and glories of Christ.<P>LITERATURE.<P>I. F. Wood, The Spirit of God in Biblical Literature; article "Spiritual Gifts" in EB; Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des heiligen Gelstea; Gloel, Der heilige Geist in der Heilsverkundigung des Paulus; Wendt, Die Begriffe Fleisch und Geist im biblischen Sprachgebrauch; Weinel, Die Wirkungen des Geistes und der Geister; Dickson, Paul\'s Use of the Terms Flesh and Spirit; Smeaton, Doctrine of the Holy Spirit; Walker, The Spirit and the Incarnation; Denio, The Supreme Leader; Moberly, Administration of the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ; Hutchings, Person and Work of the Holy Spirit; Owen, Pneumatologia; Webb, Person and Office of the Holy Spirit; Hare, The Mission of the Comforter; Candlish, The Work of the Holy Spirit; Wirgman, The Sevenfold Gifts; Heber, Personality and Offices of the Holy Spirit; Swete, The Holy Spirit in the New Testament; Moule, Veni Creator; Johnson, The Holy Spirit Then and Now; Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit; Biblical Theologies of Schultz, Davidson, Weiss, Beyschlag, Stevens; list appended to the article on "Holy Spirit" in HDB and DCG; extensive bibliography in Denio\'s The Supreme Leader, 239ff.``127';
isbe[4404]='Holyday`ho\'-li-da: This word occurs twice in the King James Version, namely, <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,4);">Ps 42:4</a>, "a multitude that kept (the Revised Version (British and American) "keeping") holyday," and <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',2,16);">Col 2:16</a>. In the latter case it is a rendering of the Greek word heorte, the ordinary term for a religious festival. the Revised Version (British and American) translates "feast day." In the former instance "keeping holyday" renders choghegh. The verb means to "make a pilgrimage," or "keep a religious festival." Occasionally the idea of merrymaking prevails, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,16);">1Sa 30:16</a>—"eating and drinking," and enjoying themselves merrily. The Psalmist (who was perhaps an exiled priest) remembers with poignant regret how he used to lead religious processions on festival occasions.``103';
isbe[4405]='Homam`ho\'-mam (chomam, "destruction"): A Horite descendant of Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,39);">1Ch 1:39</a>). The name appears in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,22);">Ge 36:22</a> as "Heman."``1';
isbe[4406]='Home`hom (bayith, "house," maqom, "place," \'ohel, "tent" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',19,9);">Jud 19:9</a>), shubh, "to cause to turn back," tawekh, tokh, "middle," "midst" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,12);">De 21:12</a>); oikos, "house," "household," endemeo, "to be among one\'s people," oikos idios, "one\'s own proper (house)"): This term in Scripture does not stand for a single specific word of the original, but for a variety of phrases. Most commonly it is a translation of the Hebrew bayith, Greek oikos "house," which means either the building or the persons occupying it. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',43,26);">Ge 43:26</a> "home" and "into the house" represent the same phase, "to the house" (ha-bayethah). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',1,21);">Ru 1:21</a>, "hath brought me home again" means "has caused me to return." In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',25,10);">2Ch 25:10</a> "home again" means "to their place." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,5);">Ec 12:5</a> "long home," the Revised Version (British and American) "everlasting home," means "eternal house." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,27);">Joh 19:27</a> "unto his own home" means "unto his own things" (so <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,11);">Joh 1:11</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,6);">2Co 5:6</a> (and the Revised Version (British and American) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,8,9);">5:8,9</A>) "be at home" is a translation of endemeo, "to be among one\'s own people," as opposed to ekdemeo, "to be or live abroad."``44';
isbe[4407]='Home-Born`hom\'-born (\'ezrach): A native-born Hebrew, as contrasted with a foreigner of different blood. The same Hebrew word is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,29);">Le 16:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',18,26);">18:26</a> and elsewhere, but is translated differently. Home-born in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,14);">Jer 2:14</a> is a translation of the phrase yelidh bayith, where it means a person free-born as contrasted with a slave.``1';
isbe[4408]='Homer`ho\'-mer (chomer): A dry measure containing about 11 bushels. It was equal to 10 ephas.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WEIGHTS+AND+MEASURES">WEIGHTS AND MEASURES</a>`1';
isbe[4409]='Homicide`hom\'-i-sid (rotseach): Hebrew has no word for killing or murder; rotseach is the word for manslayer. The Greek for murder is phonos. Homicide was every conscious violent action against a human being with the immediate result of death. It was always to be punished by death, being considered a crime against the image of God. Killing is definitely forbidden in the sixth commandment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',9,5);">Ge 9:5</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,13);">Ex 20:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,12);">21:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',24,17,21);">Le 24:17, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,\'16-21\');">Nu 35:16-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,\'11-13\');">De 19:11-13</a>). The penalty of death was not inflicted when the killing was unintentional or unpremeditated (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,13);">Ex 21:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,\'22-25\');">Nu 35:22-25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',20,\'3-5\');">Jos 20:3-5</a>; compare Mishna, Makkoth, xi. 5). Cities of Refuge were founded to which the manslayer could escape from the "avenger of blood." There he had to abide till after the death of the officiating high priest. If he left the city before that event, the avenger who should kill him was free from punishment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,13);">Ex 21:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,\'10-15\',\'25-28\',32);">Nu 35:10-15, 25-28, 32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,\'1-13\');">De 19:1-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',20,2);">Jos 20:2</a>). See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=REFUGE,+CITIES+OF">CITIES OF REFUGE</A>. Killing a thief who broke in during the night was not accounted murder (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,2);">Ex 22:2</a>). Unintentional killing of the pregnant woman in a fray was punished according to the lexicon talionis, i.e. the husband of the woman killed could kill the wife of the man who committed the offense without being punished (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,22);">Ex 21:22</a>f). This was not usually carried out, but it gave the judge a standard by which to fine the offender. If a man failed to build a battlement to his house, and anyone fell over and was killed, blood-guiltiness came upon that man\'s house (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',22,8);">Dt 22:8</A>). He who killed a thief in the daytime was guilty in the same way (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,3);">Ex 22:3</a>; compare the King James Version). Where a body was found, but the murderer was unknown, the elders of the city nearest to the place where it was found were ordered by a prescribed ceremony to declare that they were not guilty of neglecting their duties, and were therefore innocent of the man\'s blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-9\');">Dt 21:1-9</a>). Two witnesses were necessary for a conviction of murder (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,30);">Nu 35:30</a>). If a slave died under chastisement, the master was to be punished according to the principle that "he that smiteth a man, so that he dieth, shall surely be put to death" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,20);">Ex 21:20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,12);">Ex 21:12</a>). According to the rabbis the master was to be killed by the sword. Since in this passage the phrase "he shall die" is not used, some have supposed that punishment by death is not indicated. If the slave punished by the master died after one or two days, the master was not liable to punishment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,21);">Ex 21:21</a>). Because of the words, "for he is his money," the rabbis held that non-Israelite slaves were meant. In ancient times the avenger of blood was himself to be the executioner of the murderer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,19,21);">Nu 35:19, 21</a>). According to Sanhedhrin <span class="noTag">9:1</a> the murderer was to be beheaded. Nothing is said in the law about suicide.``98';
isbe[4410]='Honest; Honesty`on\'-est, on\'-es-ti: The word "honest" in the New Testament in the King James Version generally represents the adjective kalos, "good," "excellent," "honorable," and, with the exception of <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,15);">Lu 8:15</a>, "honest and good heart," is changed in the Revised Version (British and American) into the more correct "honorable" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,17);">Ro 12:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,21);">2Co 8:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,7);">13:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,8);">Php 4:8</a>); in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,12);">1Pe 2:12</a>, into "seemly." In the American Standard Revised Version "honestly" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a> is rendered "honorably," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,12);">1Th 4:12</a> (here euschemonos) is rendered "becomingly." The noun "honesty" occurs but once in the King James Version as the translation of semnotes (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',2,2);">1Ti 2:2</a>), and in the Revised Version (British and American) is more appropriately rendered "gravity."``132';
isbe[4411]='Honey`hun\'-i (debhash; meli): One familiar with life in Palestine will recognize in debhash the Arabic dibs, which is the usual term for a sweet syrup made by boiling down the juice of grapes, raisins, carob beans, or dates. Dibs is seldom, if ever, used as a name for honey (compare Arabic \'asal), whereas in the Old Testament debhash probably had only that meaning. The honey referred to was in most cases wild honey (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,13);">De 32:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',14,8,9);">Jud 14:8-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,25,26,29,43);">1Sa 14:25-26, 29, 43</a>), although the offering of honey with the first-fruits would seem to indicate that the bees were also domesticated (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,5);">2Ch 31:5</a>). The bees constructed their honeycomb and deposited their honey in holes in the ground (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,25);">1Sa 14:25</a>); under rocks or in crevices between the rocks (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,13);">De 32:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',81,16);">Ps 81:16</a>). They do the same today. When domesticated they are kept in cylindrical basket hives which are plastered on the outside with mud. The Syrian bee is an especially hardy type and a good honey producer. It is carried to Europe and America for breeding purposes.<P>In Old Testament times, as at present, honey was rare enough to be considered a luxury (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',43,11);">Ge 43:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,3);">1Ki 14:3</a>). Honey was used in baking sweets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',16,31);">Ex 16:31</a>). It was forbidden to be offered with the meal offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',2,11);">Le 2:11</a>), perhaps because it was fermentable, but was presented with the fruit offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,5);">2Ch 31:5</a>). Honey was offered to David\'s army (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',17,29);">2Sa 17:29</a>). It was sometimes stored in the fields (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',41,8);">Jer 41:8</a>). It was also exchanged as merchandise (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,17);">Eze 27:17</a>). In New Testament times wild honey was an article of food among the lowly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,4);">Mt 3:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,6);">Mr 1:6</a>).<P>Figurative: "A land flowing with milk and honey" suggested a land filled with abundance of good things (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,8,17);">Ex 3:8, 17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',20,24);">Le 20:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,27);">Nu 13:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,3);">De 6:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',5,6);">Jos 5:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',11,5);">Jer 11:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',20,6,15);">Eze 20:6, 15</a>). "A land of olive trees and honey" had the same meaning (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,8);">De 8:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,32);">2Ki 18:32</a>), and similarly "streams of honey and butter" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',20,17);">Job 20:17</a>). Honey was a standard of sweetness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',4,11);">So 4:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',3,3);">Eze 3:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',10,9,10);">Re 10:9-10</a>). It typified sumptuous fare (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',5,1);">So 5:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,15,22);">Isa 7:15, 22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,13,19);">Eze 16:13, 19</a>). The ordinances of Yahweh were "sweeter than honey and the droppings of the honeycomb" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,10);">Ps 19:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,103);">119:103</a>). "Thou didst eat...honey" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,13);">Eze 16:13</a>) expressed Yahweh\'s goodness to Jerusalem.``133';
isbe[4412]='Honorable`on\'-er-a-b\'-l (kabhedh; euschemon): In the Old Testament "honorable" is for the most part the translation of kabhedh, properly, "to be heavy," "weighty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',34,19);">Ge 34:19</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "honored"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',22,15);">Nu 22:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',9,6);">1Sa 9:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,5);">Isa 3:5</a>, etc.); kabhodh, "weight," "heaviness," etc., occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',5,13);">Isa 5:13</a>; hodh, "beauty," "majesty," "honor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',111,3);">Ps 111:3</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "honor"); \'adhar, "to make honorable," "illustrious" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,21);">Isa 42:21</a>, "magnify the law, and make it honorable," the Revised Version margin "make the teaching great and glorious"); yaqar}, "precious" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',45,9);">Ps 45:9</a>); nasa\' panim, "lifted up of face" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',5,1);">2Ki 5:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,3);">Isa 3:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,15);">9:15</a>); nesu phanim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,8);">Job 22:8</a>, the Revised Version margin "he whose person is accepted"); euschemon, literally, "well fashioned," is translated <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,43);">Mr 15:43</a>, the King James Version "honorable," the Revised Version (British and American) "of honorable estate"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,50);">Ac 13:50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',17,12);">17:12</a>; endoxos, "in glory," occurs <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,10);">1Co 4:10</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "glory"; timios, "weighty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,4);">Heb 13:4</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "had in honor"); atimos, "without weight or honor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,23);">1Co 12:23</a>, "less honorable"); entimos, "in honor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,8);">Lu 14:8</a>), "more honorable."<P>The Revised Version (British and American) gives for "honorable" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',9,6);">1Sa 9:6</a>), "held in honor"; for "Yet shall I be glorious" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,5);">Isa 49:5</a>), "I am honorable"; "honorable" for "honest" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,17);">Ro 12:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,7);">2Co 13:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,8);">Php 4:8</a>, margin "reverend"); for "honestly" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>) the American Standard Revised Version has "honorably."<P>In Apocrypha we have endoxos translated "honorable" (Tobit 12:7, the Revised Version (British and American) "gloriously"); endoxos (Judith 16:21), timios (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 4:8</span>), doxazo (Ecclesiasticus 24:12, the Revised Version (British and American) "glorified"), doxa (<span class="noTag">29:27</span>, the Revised Version (British and American) "honor"), etc.``185';
isbe[4413]='Hood`hood (zeniphoth): The ladies\' "hoods" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,23);">Isa 3:23</a> the King James Version appear as "turbans" the Revised Version (British and American); and "mitre" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,5);">Zec 3:5</a> is "turban, or diadem" the English Revised Version, margin. The word is from the verb zanaph, "to wrap round." It connotes a head-covering, not a permanent article of dress.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DRESS">DRESS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HAT">HAT</a>`1';
isbe[4414]='Hoof`hoof.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHEW;+CUD">CHEW</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CLOVEN">CLOVEN</a>`1';
isbe[4415]='Hook`hook:<P>(1) chakkah, is rendered "fishhook" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,1);">Job 41:1</a> the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "hook"). the Revised Version (British and American) is correct here and should have used the same translation for the same word in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,8);">Isa 19:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',1,15);">Hab 1:15</a>, instead Of retaining AV\'s "angle." Similarly in <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',4,2);">Am 4:2</a>, tsinnah, and ciroth dughah, appear to be synonyms for "fishhook," although the former may mean the barb of a fisher\'s spear. In the New Testament "fishhook" occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,27);">Mt 17:27</a> (agkistron).<P>(2) The "flesh-hook." (mazlegh, mizlaghah) of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,3);">Ex 27:3</a>, etc., was probably a small pitchfork, with two or three tines.<P>(3) The "pruning-hook" (mazmerah), used in the culture of the vine (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',18,5);">Isa 18:5</a>), was a sickle-shaped knife, small enough to be made from the metal of a spear-point (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,4);">Isa 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,10);">Joe 3:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',4,3);">Mic 4:3</a>).<P>(4) waw, is the name given the supports of certain hangings of the tabernacle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,32);">Ex 26:32</a>, etc.). Their form is entirely obscure.<P>(5) chach, is rendered "hook" in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,28);">2Ki 19:28</a> = <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,29);">Isa 37:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',29,4);">Eze 29:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',38,4);">38:4</a>, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,4,9);">Eze 19:4, 9</a> the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "chain"). A ring (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,22);">Ex 35:22</a>), put in the nose of a tamed beast and through which a rope is passed to lead him, is probably meant.<P>(6) \'aghmon, is rendered "hook" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,2);">Job 41:2</a> the King James Version, but should be "a rope" of rushes or rush-fiber as in the Revised Version (British and American), or, simply, "a rush" (on which small fish are strung).<P>(7) choach, is "hook" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,2);">Job 41:2</a> the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "thorn," perhaps right) and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,11);">2Ch 33:11</a> the Revised Version margin (text chains," Ay "thorns,"). On both verses see the commentaries<P>(8) shephattayim, is "hooks" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,43);">Eze 40:43</a> (the Revised Version margin "ledges"), but the meaning of this word is completely unknown, and "hook" is a mere guess.``48';
isbe[4416]='Hoopoe`hoo\'-po; -poo (dukhiphath; epops; Latin Upupa epops): One of the peculiar and famous birds of Palestine, having a curved bill and beautiful plumage. It is about the size of a thrush. Its back is a rich cinnamon color, its head golden buff with a crest of feathers of gold, banded with white and tipped with black, that gradually lengthen as they cover the head until, when folded, they lie in lines of black and white, and, when erect, each feather shows its exquisite marking. Its wings and tail are black banded with white and buff. It nests in holes and hollow trees. All ornithologists agree that it is a "nasty, filthy bird" in its feeding and breeding habits. The nest, being paid no attention by the elders, soon becomes soiled and evil smelling. The bird is mentioned only in the lists of abomination (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',11,19);">Le 11:19</a>; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,18);">De 14:18</a>). One reason why Moses thought it unfit for food was on account of its habits. Quite as strong a one lay in the fact that it was one of the sacred birds of Egypt. There the belief was prevalent that it could detect water and indicate where to dig a well; that it could hear secrets and cure diseases. Its head was a part of the charms used by witches. The hoopoe was believed to have wonderful medicinal powers and was called the "Doctor Bird" by the arabs. Because it is almost the size of a hoopoe and somewhat suggestive of it in its golden plumage, the lapwing was used in the early translations of the Bible instead of hoopoe. But when it was remembered that the lapwing is a plover, its flesh and eggs especially dainty food, that it was eaten everywhere it was known, modern commentators rightly decided that the hoopoe was the bird intended by the Mosaic law. It must be put on record, however, that where no superstition attaches to the hoopoe and where its nesting habits are unknown and its feeding propensities little understood, as it passes in migration it is killed, eaten and considered delicious, especially by residents of Southern Europe.``167';
isbe[4417]='Hope`hop:<P>1. In the Old Testament:<P>In the Revised Version (British and American) the New Testament "hope" represents the noun elpis (52 times), and the verb elpizo (31 times). King James Version, however, renders the noun in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,23);">Heb 10:23</a> by "faith," and for the verb gives "trust" in 18 cases (apparently without much system, e.g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,\'1-\');">Php 2</a> compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,19);">2:19</A> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,23);">23</A>; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TRUST,+BREACH+OF">TRUST</a>), while in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,35);">Lu 6:35</a> it translates apelpizo, by "hoping for nothing again" (the Revised Version (British and American) "never despairing"). But in the Old Testament there is no Hebrew word that has the exact force of "expectation of some good thing," so that in the King James Version "hope" (noun and vb.) stands for some 15 Hebrew words, nearly all of which in other places are given other translation (e.g. mibhtach, is rendered "hope" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,17);">Jer 17:17</a>, "trust" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,4);">Ps 40:4</a>, "confidence" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',65,5);">Ps 65:5</a>). the Revised Version (British and American) has attempted to be more systematic and has, for the most part, kept "hope" for the noun tiqwah, and the verb yachal, but complete consistency was not possible (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,28);">Pr 10:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,23);">11:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,18);">23:18</a>). This lack of a specific word for hope has nothing to do with any undervaluation of the virtue among the Hebrews. For the religion of the Old Testament is of all things a religion of hope, centered in God, from whom all deliverance and blessings are confidently expected (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,17);">Jer 17:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,16);">Joe 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',31,24);">Ps 31:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',33,18,22);">33:18, 22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',39,7);">39:7</a>, etc.). The varieties of this hope arc countless (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ISRAEL,+RELIGION+OF,+1">ISRAEL, RELIGION OF</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=SALVATION">SALVATION</a>, etc.), but the form most perfected and with fundamental significance for the New Testament is the firm trust that at a time appointed God, in person or through His representative (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MESSIAH">MESSIAH</a>), will establish a kingdom of righteousness.<P>2. In the New Testament:<P>(1) The proclamation of this coming kingdom of God was the central element in the teaching of Jesus, and the message of its near advent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,15);">Mr 1:15</a>, etc.), with the certainty of admission to it for those who accepted His teaching (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,32);">Lu 12:32</a>, etc.), is the substance of His teaching as to hope. This teaching, though, is delivered in the language of One to whom the realities of the next world and of the future are perfectly familiar; the tone is not that of prediction so much as it is that of the statement of obvious facts. In other words, "hope" to Christ is "certainty," and the word "hope" is never on His lips (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,34);">Lu 6:34</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,45);">Joh 5:45</a> are naturally not exceptions). For the details see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=KINGDOM+OF+GOD">KINGDOM OF GOD</A>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=FAITH">FAITH</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=FORGIVENESS">FORGIVENESS</a>, etc. And however far He may have taught that the kingdom was present in His lifetime, none the less the full consummation of that kingdom, with Himself as Messiah, was made by Him a matter of the future (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ESCHATOLOGY+OF+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT,+I-V">ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=PAROUSIA">PAROUSIA</a>).<P>(2) Hence, after the ascension the early church was left with an eschatological expectation that was primarily and almost technically the "hope" of the New Testament—"looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',2,13);">Tit 2:13</a>), "unto a living hope ...., unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled,...reserved in heaven for you, who by the power of God are guarded through faith unto a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',13,\'1-\');">1Pe 13-5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,2);">Ro 5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,\'20-24\');">8:20-24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',3,12);">2Co 3:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,\'18-21\');">Eph 1:18-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,5,,23,27);">Col 1:5, 23, 27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,2);">Tit 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,7);">3:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,2,3);">1Joh 3:2-3</a>). The foundations of this hope were many:<P>(a) Primarily, of course, the promises of the Old Testament, which were the basis of Christ\'s teaching. Such are often quoted at length (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,16);">Ac 2:16</a>, etc.), while they underlie countless other passages. These promises are the "anchor of hope" that holds the soul fast (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,\'18-20\');">Heb 6:18-20</a>). In part, then, the earliest Christian expectations coincided with the Jewish, and the "hope of Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,20);">Ac 28:20</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,6,7);">26:6,7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,12);">Eph 2:12</a>, and especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,\'25-32\');">Ro 11:25-32</a>) was a common ground on which Jew and Christian might meet. Still, through the confidence of forgiveness and purification given in the atonement (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">Heb 9:14</a>, etc.), the Christian felt himself to have a "better hope" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,19);">Heb 7:19</a>), which the Jew could not know.<P>(b) Specifically Christian, however, was the pledge given in the resurrection of Christ. This sealed His Messiahship and proved His lordship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,4);">Ro 1:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,\'18-20\');">Eph 1:18-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,21);">1Pe 3:21</a>, etc.), so sending forth His followers with the certainty of victory. In addition, Christ\'s resurrection was felt to be the first step in the general resurrection, and hence, a proof that the consummation of all things had begun (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,23);">1Co 15:23</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,6);">Ac 23:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,15);">24:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,6,7);">26:6-7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,13,14);">1Th 4:13-14</a>, etc.).<P>(c) But more than all, devotion to Christ produced a religious experience that gave certainty to hope. "Hope putteth not to shame; because the love of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,5);">Ro 5:5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,16,17);">8:16,17</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,22);">2Co 1:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,5);">5:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,14);">Eph 1:14</a>, etc., and see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HOLY+SPIRIT,+1">HOLY SPIRIT</a>). Even visible miracles were wrought by the Spirit that were signs of the end (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,17);">Ac 2:17</a>) as well as of the individual\'s certainty of partaking in the final happiness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,47);">Ac 10:47</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,6);">19:6</a>, etc.).<P>(3) Yet, certain though the hope might be, it was not yet attained, and the interim was an opportunity to develop faith, "the substance of the things hoped for" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,1);">Heb 11:1</a>). Indeed, hope is simply faith directed toward the future, and no sharp distinction between faith and hope is attainable. It is easy enough to see how the King James Version felt "confession of our faith" clearer than "confession of our hope" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,23);">Heb 10:23</a>, although the rendition of elpis by "faith" was arbitrary. So in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,\'20-24\');">Ro 8:20-24</a>, "hope" is scarcely more than "faith" in this specialized aspect. In particular, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,24);">8:24</a> we have as the most natural translation (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,5,8);">Eph 2:5, 8</a>), "By hope we were saved" (so the King James Version, the English Revised Version, the American Revised Version margin), only a pedantic insistence on words can find in this any departure from the strictest Pauline theology (compare the essential outlook on the future of the classic example of "saving faith" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,\'18-22\');">Ro 4:18-22</a>, especially verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,18);">18</a>). Still, the combination is unusual, and the Greek may be rendered equally well "For hope we were saved" ("in hope" of the American Standard Revised Version is not so good); i.e. our salvation, in so far as it is past, is but to prepare us for what is to come (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,4);">Eph 4:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,3);">1Pe 1:3</a>). But this postponement of the full attainment, through developing faith, gives stedfastness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,25);">Ro 8:25</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,3);">1Th 1:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',5,8);">5:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,6);">Heb 3:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,11);">6:11</a>), which could be gained in no other way. On the other hand this stedfastness, produced by hope, reacts again on hope and increases it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,4);">Ro 5:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,4);">15:4</a>). and so on. But no attempt is made in the New Testament to give a catalogue of the "fruits of hope," and, indeed, such lists are inevitably artificial.<P>(4) One passage that deserves special attention is <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,13);">1Co 13:13</a>, "Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three." "Abideth" is in contrast to "shall be done away" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,8,9);">13:8,9</a>, and the time of the abiding is consequently after the Parousia; i.e. while many gifts are for the present world only, faith, hope and love are eternal and endure in the next world. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,\'1-\');">1Co 13</a> is evidently a very carefully written section, and the permanence of faith and hope cannot be set down to any mere carelessness on Paul\'s part, but the meaning is not very clear. Probably he felt that the triad of virtues was so essentially a part of the Christian\'s character that the existence of the individual without them was unthinkable, without trying to define what the object of faith and hope would be in the glorified state. If any answer is to be given, it must be found in the doctrine that even in heaven life will not be static but will have opportunities of unlimited growth. Never will the finite soul be able to dispense entirely with faith, while at each stage the growth into the next can be anticipated through hope.<P>3. Practical:<P>Only adventist bodies can use all the New Testament promises literally, and the translation of the eschatological language into modern practical terms is not always easy. The simplest method is that already well developed in the Fourth Gospel, where the phrase "kingdom of God" is usually replaced by the words "eternal life," i.e. for a temporal relation between this world and the next is substituted a local, so that the accent is laid on the hope that awaits the individual beyond the grave. On the other hand, the cataclysmic imagery of the New Testament may be interpreted in evolutionary form. God, by sending into the world the supernatural power seen in the Christian church, is working for the race as well as for the individual, and has for His whole creation, as well as for individual souls, a goal in store. The individual has for his support the motives of the early church and, in particular, learns through the cross that even his own sins shall not disappoint him of his hope. But both of the above interpretations are needed if religion is fairly to represent the spirit of the New Testament. A pure individualism that looks only beyond the grave for its hope empties the phrase "kingdom of God" of its meaning and tends inevitably to asceticism. And, in contrast, the religion of Jesus cannot be reduced to a mere hope of ethical advance for the present world. A Christianity that loses a transcendent, eschatological hope ceases to be Christianity.``48';
isbe[4418]='Hophni And Phinehas`hof\'-ni, fin\'-e-as, -az (chophni, "pugilist" (?), pinechac, probably "face of brass"): Sons of Eli, priests of the sanctuary at Shiloh. Their character was wicked enough to merit the double designation "sons of Eli" and (the King James Version) "sons of Belial" (the Revised Version, margin "base men," <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,12);">1Sa 2:12</a>). Their evil practices are described (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'12-17\');">1Sa 2:12-17</a>). Twice is Eli warned concerning them, once by an unknown prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,27);">1Sa 2:27</a>) and again by the lips of the young Samuel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',3,\'11-18\');">1Sa 3:11-18</a>). The curse fell at the battle of Aphek (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',4,\'1-18\');">1Sa 4:1-18</a>) at which the brothers were slain, the ark was taken and the disaster occurred which caused Eli\'s death. Phinehas was father of the posthumous Ichabod, whose name marks the calamity (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ICHABOD">ICHABOD</a>). A remoter sequel to the prophetic warnings is seen in the deposition of Abiathar, of the house of Eli, from the priestly office (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,26,27,35);">1Ki 2:26-27, 35</a>).``186';
isbe[4419]='Hophra`hof\'-ra.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PHARAOH+HOPHRA">PHARAOH HOPHRA</a>`1';
isbe[4420]='Hor, Mount`hor (hor ha-har; literally, "Hor, the mountain"):<P>1. Not Jebel Neby Harun:<P>(1) a tradition identifying this mountain with Jebel Neby Harun may be traced from the time of Josephus (Ant., IV, iv, 7) downward. Eusebius, Onomasticon (s.v. Hor) favors this identification, which has been accepted by many travelers and scholars. In HDB, while noting the fact that it has been questioned, Professor Hull devotes all the space at his disposal to a description of Jebel Neby Harun. It is now recognized, however, that this identification is impossible. Niebuhr (Reise nach Arabic, 238), Pocoke (Description of the East, I, 157), Robinson (BR, I, 185), Ewald (Hist. of Israel, II, 201, note), and others had pointed out difficulties in the way, but the careful discussion of Dr. H. Clay Trumbull (Kadesh Barnea, 127ff) finally disposed of the claims of Jebel Neby Harun.<P>2. Suggested Identification:<P>From <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',20,22);">Nu 20:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',33,37);">33:37</a> we may perhaps infer that Mt. Hor, "in the edge of the land of Edom," was about a day\'s journey from Kadesh. The name "Hor the mountain" suggests a prominent feature of the landscape. Aaron was buried there (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',20,28);">Nu 20:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,50);">De 32:50</a>). It was therefore not in Mt. Seir (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',2,5);">De 2:5</a>), of which not even a foot-breadth was given to Israel. Jebel Neby Harun is certainly a prominent feature of the landscape, towering over the tumbled hills that form the western edges of the Edom plateau to a height of 4,800 ft. But it is much more than a day\'s journey from Kadesh, while it is well within the boundary of Mt. Seir. The king of Arad was alarmed at the march to Mt. Hor. Had Israel marched toward Jebel Neby Harun, away to the southeast, it could have caused him no anxiety, as he dwelt in the north.<P>3. Jebel Maderah:<P>This points to some eminence to the north or northeast of Kadesh. A hill meeting sufficiently all these conditions is Jebel Maderah (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HALAK,+MOUNT">HALAK, MOUNT</a>), which rises to the northeast of \'Ain qadis (Kadeshbarnea). It stands at the extreme northwest boundary of the land of Edom, yet not within that boundary. Above the barrenness of the surrounding plain this "large, singular-looking, isolated chalk hill" rises "alone like a lofty citadel," "steep-sided" and "quite naked." Here the solemn transactions described in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',20,22);">Nu 20:22</a>ff could have been carried out literally, "in the sight of all the congregation." While certainty is impossible, no more likely suggestion has been made.<P>(2) A mountain named only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',34,7);">Nu 34:7</a>f as on the north boundary of the land of Israel. No success has attended the various attempts made to identify this particular height. Some would make it Mt. Hermon (Hull, HDB, under the word); others Jebel Akkar, an outrunner on the northeast of Lebanon (Furrer, ZDPV, VIII, 27), and others the mountain at the "knee of" Nahr el-Qasimiyeh (van Kasteren, Rev. Biblical,1895,30f). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',47,15);">Eze 47:15</a> ha-derekh, should certainly be amended to chadhrakh, a proper name, instead of "the way." Possibly then Mt. Hor should disappear from <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',34,7);">Nu 34:7</a>f; and we should read, with slight emendation, "From the great sea ye shall draw a line for you as far as Hadrach, and from Hadrach ...."``54';
isbe[4421]='Hor-Haggidgad`hor-ha-gid\'-gad (chor ha-gidhgadh): A desert camp of the Israelites between Beeroth Bene-jaakan and Jotbathah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',33,32);">Nu 33:32</a>f). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,7);">De 10:7</a> it is called Gudgodah.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WANDERINGS+OF+ISRAEL">WANDERINGS OF ISRAEL</a>`1';
isbe[4422]='Horam`ho\'-ram (horam, "height"): a king of Gezer defeated by Joshua when he came to the help of Lachish, which Joshua was besieging (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,33);">Jos 10:33</a>).``1';
isbe[4423]='Horeb`ho\'-reb.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SINAI">SINAI</a>`1';
isbe[4424]='Horem`ho\'-rem (chorem, "consecrated"): One of the fenced cities in the territory of Naphtali (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,38);">Jos 19:38</a>), named with Iron and Migdal-el. It may possibly be identified with the modern Hurah, which lies on a mound at the south end of Wady el-\'Ain, to the west of Qedes.``1';
isbe[4425]='Horesh`ho\'-resh (choreshah, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,15,18);">1Sa 23:15, 18</a>, margin only; Septuagint en Te Kaine, "in the New"; English Versions of the Bible "in the wood" (ba-choreshdh), the particle "in" being combined with the article): Choresh in other passages is translated "forest" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',27,4);">2Ch 27:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',17,9);">Isa 17:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',31,3);">Eze 31:3</a>) and it is most probable that it should be so translated here.``1';
isbe[4426]='Hori`ho\'-ri (chori, "cave-dweller"):<P>(1) A Horite descendant of Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,22);">Ge 36:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,39);">1Ch 1:39</a>).<P>(2) A Simonite, father of Shaphat, one of the twelve spies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,5);">Nu 13:5</a>).``1';
isbe[4427]='Horite; Horim`ho\'-rit, ho\'-rim (chori, chorim; Chorraioi): Denoted the inhabitants of Mt. Seir before its occupation by the Edomites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',2,12);">De 2:12</a>). Seir is accordingly called Horite in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,20,30);">Ge 36:20, 30</a>, where a list of his descendants is given, who afterward mixed with the invading Edomites. Esau himself married the daughter of the Horite chieftain Anah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,25);">Ge 36:25</a>; see <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,2);">36:2</A>, where "Hivite" must be corrected into "Horite"). The "Horites" in their "Mt. Seir" were among the nations defeated by the army of Chedorlaomer in the age of Abraham (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,6);">Ge 14:6</a>). The Hebrew Horitc, however, is the Khar of the Egyptian inscriptions, a name given to the whole of Southern Palestine and Edom as well as to the adjacent sea. In accordance with this we find in the Old Testament also traces of the existence of the Horites in other parts of the country besides Mt. Seir. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',34,2);">Ge 34:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',9,7);">Jos 9:7</a>, the Septuagint (Cod. A) more correctly reads "Horite" instead of "Hivite" for the inhabitants of Shechem and Gibeon, and Caleb is said to be "the son of Hur, the first-born of Ephratah" or Bethlehem (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,50);">1Ch 2:50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,4);">4:4</a>). Hor or Horite has sometimes been explained to mean "cave-dweller"; it more probably, however, denotes the "white" race. The Horites were Semites, and consequently are distinguished in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',2,12);">De 2:12</a> from the tall race of Rephaim.``157';
isbe[4428]='Hormah`hor\'-ma (chormah): A city first mentioned in connection with the defeat of the Israelites by the Amalekites and the Canaanites, when, after the ten spies who brought an evil report of the land had died of plague, the people persisted, against the will of Moses, in going "up unto the place which Yahweh hath promised" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',14,45);">Nu 14:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,44);">De 1:44</a>). after the injury done them by the king of Arad, Israel took the city, utterly destroyed it, and called it Hormah, i, e. "accursed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,3);">Nu 21:3</a>). To this event probably the reference is in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,17);">Jud 1:17</a>; where Judah and Simeon are credited with the work. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',12,14);">Jos 12:14</a> it is named between Geder and Arad; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,30);">Jos 15:30</a> between Chesil and Ziklag, among the uttermost cities toward the border of Edom in the south; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,4);">Jos 19:4</a> between Bethul and Ziklag (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,30);">1Ch 4:30</a>). To it David sent a share of the spoil taken from the Amalekites who had raided Ziklag (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,30);">1Sa 30:30</a>). The city must have lain not far from Kadesh, probably to the northeast. No name resembling Hormah has been recovered in that district. The ancient name was Zephath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,17);">Jud 1:17</a>). It is not unlikely that in popular use this name outlived Hormah: and in some form it may survive to this day. In that case it may be represented by the modern ec-Cabaita between el-Khalaca in the north and \'Ain Qadis in the south, about 23 miles from the latter. If we may identify Ziklag with \'Asluj, about 14 miles north of ec-Cabaita, the probability is heightened. Robinson (BR, III, 150) compares the name Zephath with that of Naqb ec-Cafa, to the north of Wady el-Fiqrah; but this appears to be too far—about 40 miles—from Kadesh.``54';
isbe[4429]='Horn`horn (Hebrew and Aramaic qeren; keras; for the "ram\'s horn" (yobhel) of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',6,\'1-\');">Jos 6</a> see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MUSIC">MUSIC</a>, and for the "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=INK-HORN">inkhorn</a>" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',9,\'1-\');">Ezekiel 9</a> (qeceth) see separate article):<P>(1) Qeren and keras represent the English "horn" exactly, whether on the animal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,13);">Ge 22:13</a>), or used for musical purposes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',6,5);">Jos 6:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',25,5);">1Ch 25:5</a>), or for containing a liquid (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,1,13);">1Sa 16:1, 13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,39);">1Ki 1:39</a>), but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,15);">Eze 27:15</a> the horns of ivory are of course tusks and the "horns" of ebony are small (pointed?) logs. Consequently most of the usages require no explanation.<P>(2) Both the altar of burnt offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,2);">Ex 27:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',38,2);">38:2</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',43,15);">Eze 43:15</a>) and the incense altar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,2);">Ex 30:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',37,25,26);">37:25-26</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',9,13);">Re 9:13</a>) had "horns," which are explained to be projections "of one piece with" the wooden framework and covered with the brass (or gold) that covered the altar. They formed the most sacred part of the altar and were anointed with the blood of the most solemn sacrifices (only) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,10);">Ex 30:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,7,18,25,30,34);">Le 4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,18);">16:18</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',43,20);">Eze 43:20</a>), and according to <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',8,15);">Le 8:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',9,9);">9:9</a>, the first official sacrifices began by anointing them. Consequently cutting off the horns effectually desecrated the altar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',3,14);">Am 3:14</a>), while "sin graven on them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,1);">Jer 17:1</a>) took all efficacy from the sacrifice. On the other hand they offered the highest sanctuary (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,50,51);">1Ki 1:50-51</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,28);">2:28</a>). Of their symbolism nothing whatever is said, and the eventual origin is quite obscure. "Remnants of a bull-cult" and "miniature sacred towers" have been suggested, but are wholly uncertain. A more likely origin is from an old custom of draping the altar with skins of sacrificed animals (RS, 436). That, however, the "horns" were mere conveniences for binding the sacrificial animals (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,27);">Ps 118:27</a>, a custom referred to nowhere else in the Old Testament), is most unlikely.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ALTAR">ALTAR</a>.<P>(3) The common figurative use of "horn" is taken from the image of battling animals (literal use in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,7);">Da 8:7</a>, etc.) to denote aggressive strength. So Zedekiah ben Chenaanah illustrates the predicted defeat of the enemies by pushing with iron horns (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,11);">1Ki 22:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',18,10);">2Ch 18:10</a>), while "horns of the wild ox" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,17);">De 33:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,21);">Ps 22:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',92,10);">92:10</a>, the King James Version "unicorn") represent the magnitude of power, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',1,\'18-21\');">Zec 1:18-21</a> "horns" stand for power in general. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',3,4);">Hab 3:4</a> the "horns coming out of his hand" denote the potency of Yahweh\'s gesture (the Revised Version (British and American) "rays" may be smoother, but is weak). So to "exalt the horn" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,1,10);">1Sa 2:1, 10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',75,4);">Ps 75:4</a>, etc.) is to clothe with strength, and to "cut off the horn" (not to be explained by <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',3,14);">Am 3:14</a>) is to rob of power (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',75,10);">Ps 75:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,25);">Jer 48:25</a>). Hence, the "horn of salvation" in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',22,3);">2Sa 22:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',18,2);">Ps 18:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,69);">Lu 1:69</a> is a means of active defense and not a place of sanctuary as in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,50);">1Ki 1:50</a>. When, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,\'7-24\');">Da 7:7-24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,3,8,9,20,21);">8:3, 8-9, 20-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',13,1);">Re 13:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',17,3,7,12,16);">17:3, 7, 12, 16</a>, many horns are given to the same animal, they figure successive nations or rulers. But the seven horns in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,6);">Re 5:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',12,3);">12:3</a> denote the completeness of the malevolent or righteous power. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',13,11);">Re 13:11</a>, however, the two horns point only to the external imitation of the harmless lamb, the "horns" being mere stubs.``48';
isbe[4430]='Hornet`hor\'-net (tsir\'ah; compare tsor\'ah, "Zorah" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',13,2);">Jud 13:2</a>, etc.); also compare tsara\'ath, "leprosy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',13,2);">Le 13:2</a>, etc.); from tsara\', "to smite"; Septuagint sphekia, literally, "wasp\'s nest"): Hornets are mentioned only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,28);">Ex 23:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',7,20);">De 7:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',24,12);">Jos 24:12</a>. All three references are to the miraculous interposition of God in driving out before the Israelites the original inhabitants of the promised land. There has been much speculation as to whether hornets are literally meant. The following seems to throw some light on this question (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,20,27,28);">Ex 23:20, 27-28</a>): "Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared....I will send my terror before thee, and will discomfit all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee. And I will send the hornet before thee, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee." The "terror" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,27);">Ex 23:27</a> may well be considered to be typified by the "hornet" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,28);">23:28</a>, the care for the Israelites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,20);">23:20</A>) being thrown into marked contrast with the confusion of their enemies. Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,18);">Isa 7:18</a>, where the fly and the bee symbolize the military forces of Egypt and Assyria: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that Yahweh will hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria."<P>Hornets and wasps belong to the family Vespidae of the order Hymenoptera. Both belong to the genus Vespa, the hornets being distinguished by their large size. Both hornets and wasps are abundant in Palestine (compare Zorah, which may mean "town of hornets"). a large kind is called in Arabic debbur, which recalls the Hebrew debhorah, "bee." They sting fiercely, but not unless molested.``37';
isbe[4431]='Horns of the Altar`(qare-noth ha-mizbeach):<P>1. The Brazen Altar:<P>These projections at the four corners of the altar of burnt offering were of one piece with the altar, and were made of acacia wood overlaid with brass (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,2);">Ex 27:2</a>, "bronze"). In Ezekiel\'s altar-specifications their position is described as being on a level with the altar hearth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',43,15);">Eze 43:15</a>). Fugitives seeking asylum might cling to the horns of the altar, as did Adonijah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,50);">1Ki 1:50</a>), which is one proof among many that worshippers had at all times access to the neighborhood of the altar. On certain occasions, as at the consecration of Aaron and his sons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,12);">Ex 29:12</a>), and a sin offering for one of the people of the land (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,30);">Le 4:30</a>), the horns were touched with sacrificial blood.<P>2. The Golden Altar:<P>The altar of incense, standing in the outer chamber of the sanctuary, had also four horns, which were covered with gold (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',37,25);">Ex 37:25</a>). These were touched with blood in the case of a sin offering for a high priest, or for the whole congregation, if they had sinned unwittingly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,7,18);">Le 4:7, 18</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ALTAR">ALTAR</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HORN">HORN</a>`17';
isbe[4432]='Horns, Rams\'``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MUSIC">MUSIC</a>`1';
isbe[4433]='Horonaim`hor-o-na\'-im [choronayim]; Aronieim; in Jeremiah Oronaim, "the two hollows"): an unidentified place in the south of Moab. It is named in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,5);">Jer 48:5</a>. Isaiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',15,5);">15:5</A>) and Jeremiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,3);">48:3</A>) speak of "the way to Horanaim"; and Jeremiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,5);">48:5</A>) of the, "descent," or "going down" of Horonaim. Mesha (MS) says he was bidden by Chemosh to "go down" and fight against Choronem. Probably, therefore, it lay on one of the roads leading down from the Moabite plateau to the Arabah. It is mentioned by Josephus as having been taken by Alexander Janneus (Ant., XIII, xv, 4). Hyrcanus promised to restore it and the rest to Aretas (XIV, i, 4). There is no indication that in early times it was ever possessed by Israel. Buhl (GAP 272f) thinks it may be represented by some significant ruins near Wady ed-Dera\'a (Wady Kerak).``54';
isbe[4434]='Horonite`hor\'-o-nit, ho\'-ro-nit (ha-choroni): an appellation of Sanballat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,10,19);">Ne 2:10, 19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,28);">13:28</a>), as an inhabitant of <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BETH-HORON">BETH-HORON</a> (which see).``1';
isbe[4435]='Horrible`hor\'-i-b\'-l (sha\'arur, sha\'aruri): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',5,30);">Jer 5:30</a> sha\'arur, "vile," "horrible," is translated "horrible," "a wonderful and horrible thing" the Revised Version margin "astonishment and horror"; also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',23,14);">Jer 23:14</a>; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',18,13);">18:13</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,10);">Ho 6:10</a> it is sha\'aruri; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',11,6);">Ps 11:6</a> we have zil\'aphah, "heat," the Revised Version (British and American) "burning wind"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,2);">Ps 40:2</a> sha\'on, "noise," "tumult," "He brought me up...out of a horrible pit," the Revised Version margin "a pit of tumult" (or destruction). Horribly is the translation of sa\'ar, "to shudder," "to be whirled away," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,12);">Jer 2:12</a>, and of sa\'ar, "fear," "trembling," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',32,10);">Eze 32:10</a>; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,35);">Eze 27:35</a> the Revised Version (British and American) has "horribly afraid" (sa\'ar) for "sore afraid." "Horrible" occurs frequently in Apocrypha (2Esdras 11:45; 15:28,34; The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 3:19</span>, "For horrible (chalepos) is the end of the unrighteous generation" the Revised Version (British and American) "grievous" etc.).``185';
isbe[4436]='Horror`hor\'-er (\'emah, pallatsuth): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,12);">Ge 15:12</a> \'emah (often rendered "terror") is translated "horror," "a horror of great darkness"; pallatsuth, "trembling," "horror" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',55,5);">Ps 55:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',7,18);">Eze 7:18</a>); zal\'aphah, "glow," "heat" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,53);">Ps 119:53</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "hot indignation," margin "horror"); compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',11,6);">Ps 11:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',5,10);">La 5:10</a>. For "trembling" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,6);">Job 21:6</a>) and for "fearfulness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',21,4);">Isa 21:4</a>) the Revised Version (British and American) has "horror." "Horror" does not occur in the New Testament, but in 2Macc 3:17 we have "The man was so compassed with horror" (phrikasmos), the Revised Version (British and American) "shuddering."``1';
isbe[4437]='Horse`hors:<P>1. Names:<P>The common names are (1) cuc, and (2) hippos.<P>(3) The word parash, "horseman," occurs often, and in several cases is translated "horse" or "warhorse" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,28);">Isa 28:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,14);">Eze 27:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',2,4);">Joe 2:4</a> the Revised Version, margin); also in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,\'1-\');">2Sa 16</a>, where the "horsemen" of English Versions of the Bible is ba\'ale ha-parashim, "owners of horses"; compare Arabic faris, "horseman," and faras, "horse".<P>(4) The feminine form cucah, occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',1,9);">So 1:9</a>, and is rendered as follows: Septuagint he hippos; Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) equitatum; the King James Version "company of horses," the Revised Version (British and American) "steed." It is not clear why English Versions of the Bible does not have "mare."<P>(5) The word \'abbirim, "strong ones," is used for horses in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,22);">Jud 5:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,16);">Jer 8:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',47,3);">47:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,11);">50:11</a> (the King James Version "bulls"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,12);">Ps 22:12</a> the same word is translated "strong bulls" (of Bashan).<P>(6) For rekhesh (compare Arabic rakad, "to run"), in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,28);">1Ki 4:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',8,10,14);">Es 8:10, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,13);">Mic 1:13</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) has "swift steeds," while the King James Version gives "dromedaries" in 1Ki and "mules" in Est.<P>(7) For kirkaroth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,20);">Isa 66:20</a>), the King James Version and the English Revised Version have "swift beasts"; the English Revised Version margin and the American Standard Revised Version "dromedaries"; Septuagint skiddia, perhaps "covered carriages." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',8,10,14);">Es 8:10, 14</a> we find the doubtful words<P>(8) \'achashteranim, and<P>(9) bene ha-rammakim, which have been variously translated. the King James Version has respectively "camels" and "young dromedaries," the Revised Version (British and American) "used in the king\'s service" and "bred of the stud," the Revised Version margin "mules" and "young dromedaries."<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=CAMEL">CAMEL</a>.<P>2. Origin:<P>The Hebrew and Egyptian names for the horse are alike akin to the Assyrian. The Jews may have obtained horses from Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,16);">De 17:16</a>), but the Canaanites before them had horses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,16);">Jos 17:16</a>), and in looking toward the northeast for the origin of the horse, philologists are in agreement with zoologists who consider that the plains of Central Asia, and also of Europe, were the original home of the horse. At least one species of wild horse is still found in Central Asia.<P>3. Uses:<P>The horses of the Bible are almost exclusively war-horses, or at least the property of kings and not of the common people. A doubtful reference to the use of horses in threshing grain is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,28);">Isa 28:28</a>. Horses are among the property which the Egyptians gave to Joseph in exchange for grain (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',47,17);">Ge 47:17</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,16);">De 17:16</a> it is enjoined that the king "shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he may multiply horses." This and other injunctions failed to prevent the Jews from borrowing from the neighboring civilizations their customs, idolatries, and vices. Solomon\'s horses are enumerated in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,\'1-\');">1Ki 4</a>, and the se\'irim and tebhen of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,28);">1Ki 4:28 (Hebrew 5:8</a>) are identical with the sha\'ir ("barley") and tibn ("straw") with which the Arab feeds his horse today. In war, horses were ridden and were driven in chariots (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',14,9);">Ex 14:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',11,4);">Jos 11:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,1);">2Sa 15:1</a>, etc.).<P>4. Figurative and Descriptive:<P>The horse is referred to figuratively chiefly in Zechariah and Revelation. A chariot and horses of fire take Elijah up to heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',2,11);">2Ki 2:11</a>f). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',20,7);">Ps 20:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',33,17);">33:17</a>; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',76,6);">76:6</a>, the great strength of the horse is recalled as a reminder of the greater strength of God. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',3,3);">Jas 3:3</a>, the small bridle by which the horse can be managed is compared to the tongue (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',32,9);">Ps 32:9</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',39,\'19-25\');">Job 39:19-25</a> we have a magnificent description of a spirited war-horse.``37';
isbe[4438]='Horse Gate``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JERUSALEM,+1">JERUSALEM</a>`1';
isbe[4439]='Horse, Black`(hippos melas): Symbolic of famine ("balance...measure of wheat for a shilling," etc., <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',6,5,6);">Re 6:5-6</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,2,6);">Zec 6:2, 6</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=REVELATION+OF+JOHN">REVELATION OF JOHN</a>`1';
isbe[4440]='Horse, Red`(hippos purros): Symbolic of war, bloodshed ("slay one another," etc., <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',6,4);">Re 6:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',18,\'1-\');">Zec 18</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,2);">6:2</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=REVELATION+OF+JOHN">REVELATION OF JOHN</a>`1';
isbe[4441]='Horse, White`(hippos leukos): Symbolic of victory, conquest ("bow...conquering and to conquer," <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',6,2);">Re 6:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',19,11,14);">19:11, 14</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',1,8);">Zec 1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,3,6);">6:3, 6</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=REVELATION+OF+JOHN">REVELATION OF JOHN</a>`1';
isbe[4442]='Horseleach`hors\'-lech (\'aluqah; compare Arabic \'aluqah, "ghoul," and \'alaqah, "leech," from root \'aliq, "to cling"; Septuagint bdella, "leech"): The word occurs only once, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,15);">Pr 30:15</a>, the Revised Version margin "vampire." In Arabic \'alaqah is a leech of any kind, not only a horse-leech. The Arabic \'aluqah, which, it may be noted, is almost identical with the Hebrew form, is a ghoul (Arabic ghul), an evil spirit which seeks to injure men and which preys upon the dead. The mythical vampire is similar to the ghoul. In zoology the name "vampire" is applied to a family of bats inhabiting tropical America, some, but not all, of which suck blood. In the passage cited the Arabic Bible has \'aluqah, "ghoul." If leech is meant, there can be no good reason for specifying "horseleach." At least six species of leech are known in Palestine and Syria, and doubtless others exist. They are common in streams, pools, and fountains where animals drink. They enter the mouth, attach themselves to the interior of the mouth or pharynx, and are removed only with difficulty.``37';
isbe[4443]='Horseman`hors\'-man.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARMY">ARMY</a>`1';
isbe[4444]='Horses of the Sun`(<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,11);">2Ki 23:11</a>): In connection with the sun-worship practiced by idolatrous kings in the temple at Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,5);">2Ki 23:5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,16);">Eze 8:16</a>), horses dedicated to the sun, with chariots, had been placed at the entrance of the sacred edifice. These Josiah, in his great reformation, "took away," and burned the chariots with fire. Horses sacred to the sun were common among oriental peoples (Bochart, Heiroz., I,2,10).``1';
isbe[4445]='Hosah`ho\'-sa (chocah): A city on the border of Asher, in the neighborhood of Tyre (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,29);">Jos 19:29</a>). Septuagint reads Iaseiph, which might suggest identification with Kefr Yasif, to the northeast of Acre. Possibly, however, as Sayce (HCM, 429) and Moore (Judges, 51) suggest, Hosah may represent the Assyrian Usu. Some scholars think that Usu was the Assyrian name for Palaetyrus. If "the fenced city of Tyre" were that on the island, while the city on the mainland lay at Ras el-\'Ain, 30 stadia to the south (Strabo xvi.758), this identification is not improbable.``1';
isbe[4446]='Hosanna`ho-zan\'-a (hosanna): This Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word occurs 6 times in the Gospels as the cry of the people when our Lord entered Jerusalem as the Messiah represented by Zec (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',9,9);">9:9</a>), and of "the children" when He cleansed the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,9);">Mt 21:9</a> bis, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,15);">15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,9);">Mr 11:9</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,13);">Joh 12:13</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,9);">Mt 21:9</a> it is "Hosanna to the son of David!" followed by "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest!"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,15);">21:15</a> it is also "Hosanna to the Son of David!"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,9);">Mr 11:9</a>f it is "Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Blessed is the kingdom that cometh, the kingdom of our father David: Hosanna in the highest"; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,13);">Joh 12:13</a> it is "Hosanna: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel." Thus in all the evangelists it is an acclamation or ascription of praise. This has raised the question whether the supposed derivation from <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,25);">Ps 118:25</a>, beginning with \'annah YHWH hoshi\'ah nna\', "Save now, pray" (which is followed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,26);">118:26</a>) by "Blessed be he that cometh (the Revised Version margin "or entereth") in the name of Yahweh") is correct. (See Thayer, HDB; Cheyne, EB; Dalman, Words of Jesus.) Various other explanations have been suggested. Thayer remarks, "It is most natural to regard the word Hosanna, as respects its form, as neither syncopated nor contracted, but the shorter Hiphil imperative with the appended enclitic" (hosha\'na\'; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',86,2);">Ps 86:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,7);">Jer 31:7</a>), for which there is Talmudic warrant. "As respects its force, we must for...contextual reasons, assume that it had already lost its primary supplicatory sense and become an ejaculation of joy or shout of welcome." It is said to have been so used in this sense at the joyous Feast of Tabernacles, the 7th day of which came to be called "the Great Hosanna," or "Hosanna Day." But, while the word is certainly an ejaculation of praise and not one of supplication, the idea of salvation need not be excluded. As in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,10);">Re 7:10</a> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',19,1);">19:1</a>), we have the acclamation, "Salvation unto God...and unto the Lamb," so we might have the cry, "Salvation to the son of David"; and "Hosanna in the Highest," might be the equivalent of "Salvation unto our God!" He who was "coming in the name of the Lord" was the king who was bringing salvation from God to the people.``185';
isbe[4447]='Hosea`ho-ze\'-a:<P><b>I. THE PROPHET</b><P class="in15">1. Name<P class="in15">2. Native Place<P class="in15">3. Date<P class="in15">4. Personal History (Marriage)<P class="in30">(1) Allegorical View<<P class="in30">(2) Literal View<P><b>II. THE BOOK</b><P class="in15">1. Style and Scope<P class="in15">2. Historical Background<P class="in15">3. Contents and Divisions<P class="in30">(1) <span class="noTag">Hosea 1-3</span><P class="in30">(2) <span class="noTag">Hosea 4-14</span><P class="in15">4. Testimony to Earlier History<P class="in15">5. Testimony to Law<P class="in15">6. Affinity with Deuteronomy<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. The Prophet.<P>1. Name:<P>The name (hoshea Septuagint Osee-; for other forms see note in DB), probably meaning "help," seems to have been not uncommon, being derived from the auspicious verb from which we have the frequently recurring word "salvation." It may be a contraction of a larger form of which the Divine name or its abbreviation formed a part, so as to signify "God is help," or "Help, God." according to <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,8,16);">Nu 13:8, 16</a> that was the original name of Joshua son of Nun, till Moses gave him the longer name (compounded with the name of Yahweh) which he continued to bear (yehoshua\'), "Yahweh is salvation." The last king of the Northern Kingdom was also named Hosea (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,30);">2Ki 15:30</a>), and we find the same name borne by a chief of the tribe of Ephraim under David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,20);">1Ch 27:20</a>) and by a chief under Nehemiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,23);">Ne 10:23</a>).<P>2. Native Place:<P>Although it is not directly stated in the book, there can be little doubt that he exercised his ministry in the kingdom of the Ten Tribes. Whereas his references to Judah are of a general kind, Ephraim or Samaria being sometimes mentioned in the same connection or more frequently alone, the situation implied throughout and the whole tone of the addresses agree with what we know of the Northern Kingdom at the time, and his references to places and events in that kingdom are so numerous and minute as to lead to the conclusion that he not only prophesied there, but that he was a native of that part of the country. Gilead, e.g. a district little named in the prophets, is twice mentioned in Ho (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,8);">6:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,11);">12:11</a>) and in such a manner as to suggest that he knew it by personal observation; and Mizpah (mentioned in a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,1);">5:1</a>) is no doubt the Mizpah in Gilead (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',10,17);">Jud 10:17</a>). Then we find Tabor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,1);">Ho 5:1</a>), Shechem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,9);">Ho 6:9</a> the Revised Version (British and American)), Gilgal and Bethel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,15);">Ho 4:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,15);">9:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,5,8,15);">10:5, 8, 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,11);">12:11</a>). Even Lebanon in the distant north is spoken of with a minuteness of detail which could be expected only from one very familiar with Northern Palestine (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,\'5-8\');">Ho 14:5-8</a>). In a stricter sense, therefore, than amos who, though a native of Tekoah, had a prophetic mission to the north, Hosea may be called the prophet of Northern Israel, and his book, as Ewald has said, is the prophetic voice wrung from the bosom of the kingdom itself.<P>3. Date:<P>All that we are told directly as to the time when Hosea prophesied is the statement in the first verse that the word of the Lord came to him "in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel." It is quite evident that his ministry did not extend over the combined reigns of all these kings; for, from the beginning of the reign of Uzziah to the beginning of that of Hezekiah, according to the now usually received chronology (Kautzsch, Literature of the Old Testament, English Translation), there is a period of 52 years, and Jeroboam came to his throne a few years before the accession of Uzziah.<P>When we examine the book itself for more precise indications of date, we find that the prophet threatens in God\'s name that in "a little while" He will "avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu." Now Jeroboam was the great-grandson of Jehu, and his son Zechariah, who succeeded him, reigned only six months and was the last of the line of Jehu. We may, therefore, place the beginning of Hosea\'s ministry a short time before the death of Jeroboam which took place 743 BC. as to the other limit, it is to be observed that, though the downfall of "the kingdom of the house of Israel" is threatened (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,4);">Ho 1:4</a>), the catastrophe had not occurred when the prophet ceased his ministry. The date of that event is fixed in the year 722 BC, and it is said to have happened in the 6th year of King Hezekiah. This does not give too long a time for Hosea\'s activity, and it leaves the accuracy of the superscription unchallenged, whoever may have written it. If it is the work of a later editor, it may be that Hosea\'s ministry ceased before the reign of Hezekiah, though he may have lived on into that king\'s reign. It should be added, however, that there seems to be no reference to another event which might have been expected to find an echo in the book, namely, the conspiracy in the reign of Ahaz (735 BC) by Pekah of Israel and Rezin of Damascus against the kingdom of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,5);">2Ki 16:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,1);">Isa 7:1</a>).<P>Briefly we may say that, though there is uncertainty as to the precise dates of the beginning and end of his activity, he began his work before the middle of the 8th century, and that he saw the rise and fall of several kings. He would thus be a younger contemporary of amos whose activity seems to have been confined to the reign of Jeroboam.<P>4. Personal History (Marriage):<P>Hosea is described as the son of Beeri, who is otherwise unknown. Of his personal history we are told either absolutely nothing or else a very great deal, according as we interpret chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">1</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">3</a> of his book. In ancient and in modern times, opinions have been divided as to whether in these chapters we have a recital of actual facts, or the presentation of prophetic teaching in the form of parable or allegory.<P>(1) Allegorical View.<P>The Jewish interpreters as a rule took the allegorical view, and Jerome, in the early Christian church, no doubt following Origen the great allegorizer, states it at length, and sees an intimation of the view in the closing words of Hosea\'s book: "Who is wise, that he may understand these things? prudent, that he may know them?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,9);">Ho 14:9</a>).<P>It is a mystery, he says; for it is a scandal to think of Hosea being commanded to take an unchaste wife and without any reluctance obeying the command. It is a figure, like that of Jeremiah going to the Euphrates (when Jerusalem was closely besieged) and hiding a girdle in the bed of the river (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',13,\'1-\');">Jer 13</a>). So Ezekiel is commanded to represent, by means of a tile, the siege of Jerusalem, and to lie 390 days on his side to indicate the years of their iniquity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',4,\'1-\');">Eze 4</a>); and there are other symbolical acts. Jerome then proceeds to apply the allegory first to Israel, which is the Gomer of chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">1</a>, and then to Judah, the wife in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">3</a>, and finally to Christ and the church, the representations being types from beginning to end.<P>Calvin took the same view. Among modern commentators we find holding the allegorical view not only Hengstenberg, Havernick and Keil, but also Eichhorn, Rosenmuller and Hitzig. Reuss also (Das Altes Testament, II, 88ff) protests against the literal interpretation as impossible, and that on no moral or reverential considerations, but entirely on exegetical grounds. He thinks it enough to say that, when the prophet calls his children "children of whoredom," he indicates quite clearly that he uses the words in a figurative sense; and he explains the allegory as follows: The prophet is the representative of Yahweh; Israel is the wife of Yahweh, but faithless to her husband, going after other gods; the children are the Israelites, who are therefore called children of whoredoms because they practice the idolatry of the nation. So they receive names which denote the consequences of their sin. In accordance with the allegory, the children are called the children of the prophet (for Israel is God\'s own) but this is not the main point; the essential thing is the naming of the children as they are named. In the third chapter, according to this interpretation, allegory again appears, but with a modification and for another purpose. Idolatrous Israel is again the unfaithful wife of the prophet as the representative of Yahweh. This relation can again be understood only as figurative; for, if the prophet stands for Yahweh, the marriage of Israel to the prophet cannot indicate infidelity to Yahweh. The sense is evident: the marriage still subsists; God does not give His people up, but they are for the present divorced "from bed and board"; it is a prophecy of the time when Yahweh will leave the people to their fate, till the day of reconciliation comes.<P>(2) Literal View.<P>The literal interpretation, adopted by Theodore of Mopsucstia in the ancient church, was followed, after the Reformation, by the chief theologians of the Lutheran church, and has been held, in modern times, by many leading expositors, including Delitzsch, Kurtz, Hofmann, Wellhausen, Cheyne, Robertson Smith, G. A. Smith and others. In this view, as generally held, chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">1</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">3</A> go together and refer to the same person. The idea is that Hosea married a woman named Gomer, who had the three children here named. Whether it was that she was known to be a worthless woman before the marriage and that the prophet hoped to reclaim her, or that she proved faithless after the marriage, she finally left him and sank deeper and deeper into sin, until, at some future time, the prophet bought her from her paramour and brought her to his own house, keeping her secluded, however, and deprived of all the privileges of a wife. In support of this view it is urged that the details are related in so matter-of-fact a manner that they must be matters of fact. Though the children receive symbolical names (as Isaiah gave such names to his children), the meanings of these are clear and are explained, whereas the name of the wife cannot thus be explained. Then there are details, such as the weaning of one child before the conception of another (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,8);">Ho 1:8</a>) and the precise price paid for the erring wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,2);">Ho 3:2</a>), which are not needed to keep up the allegory, and are not invested with symbolical meaning by the prophet. What is considered a still stronger argument is relied on by modern advocates of this view, the psychological argument that there is always a proportion between a revelation vouchsafed and the mental state of the person receiving it. Hosea dates the beginning of his prophetic work from the time of his marriage; it was the unfaithfulness of his wife that brought home to him the apostasy of Israel; and, as his heart went after his wayward wife, so the Divine love was stronger than Israel\'s sin; and thus through his own domestic experience he was prepared to be a prophet to his people.<P>The great difficulty in the way of accepting the literal interpretation lies, as Reuss has pointed out, in the statement at the beginning, that the prophet was commanded to take a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms. And the advocates of the view meet the difficulties in some way like this: The narrative as it stands is manifestly later than the events. On looking back, the prophet describes his wife as she turned out to be, not as she was at the beginning of the history. It is urged with some force that it was necessary to the analogy (even if the story is only a parable) that the wife should have been first of all chaste; for, in Hosea\'s representation, Israel at the time of its election in the wilderness was faithful and fell away only afterward (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,15);">Ho 2:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,10);">9:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1);">11:1</a>). The narrative does not require us to assume that Gomer was an immoral person or that she was the mother of children before her marriage. The children receive symbolic names, but these names do not reflect upon Gomer but upon Israel. Why, then, is she described as a woman of whoredoms? It is answered that the expression \'esheth zenunim is a class-descriptive, and is different from the expression "a woman who is a harlot" (\'ishshdh zonah). A Jewish interpreter quoted by Aben Ezra says: "Hosea was commanded to take a wife of whoredoms because an honest woman was not to be had. The whole people had gone astray—was an \'adulterous generation\'; and she as one of them was a typical example, and the children were involved in the common declension (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,1);">Ho 4:1</a>f) ." The comment of Umbreit is worthy of notice: "as the covenant of Yahweh with Israel is viewed as a marriage bond, so is the prophetic bond with Israel a marriage, for he is the messenger and mediator. Therefore, if he feels an irresistible impulse to enter into the marriage-bond with Israel, he is bound to unite himself with a bride of an unchaste character. Yea, his own wife Gomer is involved in the universal guilt" (Prak. Commentary uber die Propheten, Hamburg, 1844). It is considered, then, on this view, that Gomer, after her marriage, being in heart addicted to the prevailing idolatry, which we know was often associated with gross immorality (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,13);">Ho 4:13</a>), felt the irksomeness of restraint in the prophet\'s house, left him and sank into open profligacy, from which (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">Ho 3</a>) the prophet reclaimed her so far as to bring her back and keep her secluded in his own house.<P>Quite recently this view has been advocated by Riedel (Alttest. Untersuchungen, Leipzig, 1902), who endeavors to enforce it by giving a symbolic meaning to Gomer\'s name, Bath-Diblaim. The word is the dual (or might be pointed as a plural) of a word, debhelah, meaning a fruitcake, i.e. raisins or figs pressed together. It is the word used in the story of Hezekiah\'s illness (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',20,7);">2Ki 20:7</a>), and is found in the list of things furnished by abigail to David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,18);">1Sa 25:18</a>). See also <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,12);">1Sa 30:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',12,40);">1Ch 12:40</a>. Another name for the same thing, ashishah, occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,1);">Ho 3:1</a>, rendered in the King James Version "flagons of wine," but in the Revised Version (British and American) "cakes of raisins." It seems clear that this word, at least here, denotes fruit-cakes offered to the heathen deities, as was the custom in Jeremiah\'s time (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',7,18);">Jer 7:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',44,17);">44:17</a>). So Riedel argues that Gomer may have been described as a "daughter of fruit-cakes" according to the Hebrew idiom in such expressions as "daughters of song," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,4);">Ec 12:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,2);">Pr 31:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',7,10);">2Sa 7:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',37,3);">Ge 37:3</a>, etc.).<P>It will be perceived that the literal interpretation as thus stated does not involve the supposition that Hosea became aware of his wife\'s infidelity before the birth of the second child, as Robertson Smith and G. A. Smith suppose. The names given to the children all refer to the infidelity of Israel as a people; and the renderings of Lo\'-ruchamah, "she that never knew a father\'s love," and of Lo-\'ammi, "no kin of mine," are too violent in this connection. Nor does the interpretation demand that it was first through his marriage and subsequent experience that the prophet received his call; although no doubt the experience through which he passed deepened the conviction of Israel\'s apostasy in his mind.<P>II. The Book.<P>1. Style and Scope:<P>Scarcely any book in the Old Testament is more difficult of exposition than the Book of Hosea. This does not seem to be owing to any exceptional defect in the transmitted text, but rather to the peculiarity of the style; and partly also, no doubt, to the fact that the historical situation of the prophet was one of bewildering and sudden change of a violent kind, which seems to reflect itself in the book. The style here is preeminently the man. Whatever view we may take of his personal history, it is evident that he is deeply affected by the situation in which he is placed. He is controlled by his subject, instead of controlling it. It is his heart that speaks; he is not careful to concentrate his thoughts or to mark his transitions; the sentences fall from him like the sobs of a broken heart. Mournful as Jeremiah, he does not indulge in the pleasure of melancholy as that prophet seems to do. Jeremiah broods over his sorrow, nurses it, and tells us he is weeping. Hosea does not say he is weeping, but we hear it in his broken utterances. Instead of laying out his plaint in measured form, he ejaculates it in short, sharp sentences, as the stabs of his people\'s sin pierce his heart.<P>The result is the absence of that rhythmic flow and studied parallelism which are such common features of Hebrew oratory, and are often so helpful to the expositor. His imagery, while highly poetical, is not elaborated; his figures are not so much carried out as thrown out; nor does he dwell long on the same figure. His sentences are like utterances of an oracle, and he forgets himself in identifying himself with the God in whose name he speaks—a feature which is not without significance in its bearing on the question of his personal history. The standing expression "Thus saith the Lord" ("It is the utterance of Yahweh" the Revised Version (British and American)), so characteristic of the prophetic style, very rarely occurs (only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,13,16,21);">Ho 2:13, 16, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,11);">11:11</a>); whereas the words that he speaks are the very words of the Lord; and without any formal indication of the fact, he passes from speaking in his own name to speaking in the name of Yahweh (see, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,4);">Ho 6:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,12);">7:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,13);">8:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,9,10,\'14-17\');">9:9-10, 14-17</a>, etc.). Never was speaker so absorbed in his theme, or more identified with Him for whom he speaks. He seems to be oblivious of his hearers, if indeed his chapters are the transcript or summary of spoken addresses. They certainly want to a great extent the directness and point which are so marked a feature of prophetic diction, so much so that some (e.g. Reuss and Marti) suppose they are the production of one who had readers and not hearers in view.<P>But, though the style appears in this abrupt form, there is one clear note on divers strings sounding through the whole. The theme is twofold: the love of Yahweh, and the indifference of Israel to that love; and it would be hard to say which of the two is more vividly conceived and more forcibly expressed. Under the figures of the tenderest affection, sometimes that of the pitying, solicitous care of the parent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1,3,8);">Ho 11:1, 3, 8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,3);">14:3</a>), but more prominently as the affection of the husband (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">Ho 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">3</a>), the Divine love is represented as ever enduring in spite of all indifference and opposition; and, on the other hand, the waywardness, unblushing faithlessness of the loved one is painted in colors so repulsive as almost to shock the moral sense, but giving thereby evidence of the painful abhorrence it had produced on the prophet\'s mind. Thus early does he take the sacred bond of husband and wife as the type of the Divine electing love—a similitude found elsewhere in prophetic literature, and most fully elaborated by Ezekiel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,\'1-\');">Eze 16</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',3,\'1-\');">Jer 3</a>). Hosea is the prophet of love, and not without propriety has been called the John of the Old Testament.<P>2. Historical Background:<P>For the reasons just stated, it is very difficult to give a systematic analysis of the Book of Hos. It may, however, be helpful to that end to recall the situation of the time as furnishing a historical setting for the several sections of the book.<P>At the commencement of the prophet\'s ministry, the Northern Kingdom was enjoying the prosperity and running into the excesses consequent on the victories of Jeroboam II. The glaring social corruptions of the times are exhibited and castigated by Amos, as they would most impress a stranger from the south; but Hosea, a native, as we are led suppose, of the Northern Kingdom, saw more deeply into the malady, and traced all the crime and vice of the nation to the fundamental evil of idolatry and apostasy from the true God. What he describes under the repulsive figure of whoredom was the rampant Worship of the be\'alim, which had practically obscured the recognition of the sole claims to worship of the national Yahweh. This worship of the be\'alim is to be distinguished from that of which we read at the earlier time of Elijah. Ahab\'s Tyrian wife Jezebel had introduced the worship of her native country, that of the Sidonian Baal, which amounted to the setting up of a foreign deity; and Elijah\'s contention that it must be a choice between Yahweh and Baal appealed to the sense of patriotism and the sentiment of national existence. The worship of the ba\'als, however, was an older and more insidious form of idolatry. The worship of the Canaanite tribes, among whom the Israelites found themselves on the occupation of Palestine, was a reverence of local divinities, known by the names of the places where each had his shrine or influence. The generic name of ba\'al or "lord" was applied naturally as a common word to each of these, with the addition of the name of place or potency to distinguish them. Thus we have Baal-hermon, Baal-gad, Baal-berith, etc. The insidiousness of this kind of worship is proved by its wide prevalence, especially among people at a low stage of intelligence, when the untutored mind is brought face to face with the mysterious and unseen forces of Nature. And the tenacity of the feeling is proved by the prevalence of such worship, even among people whose professed religion condemns idolatry of every kind. The veneration of local shrines among Christians of the East and in many parts of Europe is well known; and Mohammedans make pilgrimages to the tombs of saints who, though not formally worshipped as deities, are believed to have the power to confer such benefits as the Canaanites expected from the ba\'als. The very name ba\'al, originally meaning simply lord and master, as in such expressions as "master of a house," "lord of a wife," "owner of an ox," would be misleading; for the Israelites could quite innocently call Yahweh their ba\'al or Lord, as we can see they did in the formation of proper names. We can, without much difficulty, conceive what would happen among a people like the Israelite tribes, of no high grade of religious intelligence, and with the prevailing superstitions in their blood, when they found themselves in Palestine. From a nomad and pastoral people they became, and had to become, agriculturists; the natives of the land would be their instructors, in many or in most cases the actual labor would be done by them. The Book of Judges tells us emphatically that several of the Israelite tribes "did not drive out" the native inhabitants; the northern tribes in particular, where the land was most fertile, tolerated a large native admixture. We are also told (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',2,7);">Jud 2:7</a>) that the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua and of the elders who outlived Joshua; and this hint of a gradual declension no doubt points to what actually took place. For a time they remembered and thought of Yahweh as the God who had done for them great things in Egypt and in the wilderness; and then, as time went on, they had to think of Him as the giver of the land in which they found themselves, with all its varied produce. But this was the very thing the Canaanites ascribed to their ba\'als. And so, imperceptibly, by naming places as the natives named them, by observing the customs which the natives followed, and celebrating the festivals of the agricultural year, they were gliding into conformity with the religion of their neighbors; for, in such a state of society, custom is more or less based on religion and passes for religion. Almost before they were aware, they were doing homage to the various ba\'als in celebrating their festival days and offering to them the produce of the ground.<P>Such was the condition which Hosea describes as an absence of the knowledge of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,1);">Ho 4:1</a>). And the consequence cannot be better described than in the words of Paul: "As they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,28);">Ro 1:28</a>). Both Hosea and Amos tell us in no ambiguous terms how the devotees of the impure worship gave themselves up "to work all uncleanness with greediness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',4,19);">Eph 4:19</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',2,7);">Am 2:7</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,14);">Ho 4:14</a>); and how deeply the canker had worked into the body politic is proved by the rapid collapse and irretrievable ruin which followed soon after the strong hand of Jeroboam was removed. The 21 years that followed his death in 743 BC saw no fewer than six successive occupants of the throne, and the final disappearance of the kingdom of the ten tribes. Zechariah, his son, had reigned only six months when "Shallum the son of Jabesh conspired against him...and slew him, and reigned in his stead" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,10);">2Ki 15:10</a>). Shallum himself reigned only a month when he was in the same bloody manner removed by Menahem. After a reign of 10 years, according to <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,17);">2Ki 15:17</a> (although the chronology here is uncertain), he was succeeded by his son Pekahiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,22);">2Ki 15:22</a>), and after two years Pekah "his captain" conspired against him and reigned in his stead (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,25);">2Ki 15:25</a>). This king also was assassinated, and was succeeded by Hoshea (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,30);">2Ki 15:30</a>), the last king of the ten tribes, for the kingdom came to an end in 722 BC. Hosea must have lived during a great part of those troubled times; and we may expect to hear echoes of the events in his book.<P>3. Contents and Divisions:<P>(1) <span class="noTag">Hosea 1-3</span>.<P>We should naturally expect that the order of the chapters would correspond in the main with the progress of events; and there is at least a general agreement among expositors that <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">Hosea 1-3</a> refer to an earlier period than those that follow. In favor of this is the reference in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,2);">1:2</A> to the commencement of the prophet\'s ministry, as also the threatening of the impending extirpation of the house of Jehu (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,4);">1:4</A>), implying that it was still in existence; and finally the hints of the abundance amounting to luxury which marked the prosperous time of Jeroboam\'s reign. These three chapters are to be regarded as going together; and, however they may be viewed as reflecting the prophet\'s personal experience, they leave no room for doubt in regard to the national apostasy that weighed so heavily on his heart. And this, in effect, is what he says: Just as the wife, espoused to a loving husband, enjoys the protection of home and owes all her provision to her husband, so Israel, chosen by Yahweh and brought by Him into a fertile land, has received all she has from Him alone. The giving of recognition to the ba\'als for material prosperity was tantamount to a wife\'s bestowing her affection on another; the accepting of these blessings as bestowed on condition of homage rendered to the ba\'als was tantamount to the receiving of hire by an abandoned woman. This being so, the prophet, speaking in God\'s name, declares what He will do, in a series of a thrice repeated "therefore" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,6,9,14);">2:6,9,14</A>), marking three stages of His discipline. First of all, changing the metaphor to that of a straying heifer, the prophet in God\'s name declares (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,6);">2:6</A>ff) that He will hedge up her way with thorns, so that she will not be able to reach her lovers—meaning, no doubt, that whether by drought or blight, or some national misfortune, there would be such a disturbance of the processes of Nature that the usual rites of homage to the ba\'als would prove ineffectual. The people would fail to find the "law of the god of the land" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,26);">2Ki 17:26</a>). In their perplexity they would bethink themselves, begin to doubt the power of the ba\'als, and resolve to pay to Yahweh the homage they had been giving to the local gods. But this is still the same low conception of Yahweh that had led them astray. To exchange one God for another simply in the hope of enjoying material prosperity is not the service which He requires. And then comes the second "therefore" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,9);">Ho 2:9</a>). Instead of allowing them to enjoy their corn and wine and oil on the terms of a mere lip allegiance or ritual service, Yahweh will take these away, will reduce Israel to her original poverty, causing all the mirth of her festival days to cease, and giving garments of mourning for festal attire. Her lovers will no longer own her, her own husband\'s hand is heavy upon her, and what remains? The third "therefore" tells us (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,14);">Ho 2:14</a>). Israel, now bereft of all, helpless, homeless, is at last convinced that, as her God could take away all, so it was from Him she had received all: she is shut up to His love and His mercy alone. And here the prophet\'s thoughts clothe themselves in language referring to the early betrothal period of national life. A new beginning will be made, she will again lead the wilderness life of daily dependence on God, cheerfully and joyfully she will begin a new journey, out of trouble will come a new hope, and the very recollection of the past will be a pain to her. As all the associations of the name ba\'al have been degrading, she shall think of her Lord in a different relation, not as the mere giver of material blessing, but as the husband and desire of her heart, the One Source of all good, as distinguished from one of many benefactors. In all this Hosea does not make it clear how he expected these changes to be brought about, nor do we detect any references to the political history of the time. He mentions no foreign enemy at this stage, or, at most, hints at war in a vague manner (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,14);">Ho 2:14</a>f). In the second chapter the thing that is emphasized is the heavy hand of God laid on the things through which Israel had been led astray, the paralyzing of Nature\'s operations, so as to cut at the root of Nature-worship; but the closing stage of the Divine discipline (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">Hosea 3</a>), when Israel, like the wife kept in seclusion, neither enjoying the privileges of the lawful spouse nor able to follow after idols, seems to point to, and certainly was not reached till, the captivity when the people, on a foreign soil, could not exercise their ancestral worship, but yet were finally cured of idolatry.<P>The references to Judah in these chapters are not to be overlooked. Having said (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,6);">Ho 1:6</a>) that Israel would be utterly taken away (which seems to point to exile), the prophet adds that Judah would be saved from that fate, though not by warlike means. Farther down (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,11);">Ho 1:11</a>) he predicts the union of Israel and Judah under one head, and finally in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,\'1-\');">Ho 3</a> it is said that in the latter day the children of Israel would seek the Lord their God and David their king. Many critics suppose that <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,10);">1:10</A>f are out of place (though they cannot find a better place for them); and not a few declare that all the references to Judah must be taken as from a later hand, the usual reason for this conclusion being that the words "disturb the connection." In the case of a writer like Hosea, however, whose transitions are so sharp and sudden, we are not safe in speaking of disturbing the connection: what may to us appear abrupt, because we are not expecting it, may have flashed across the mind of the original writer; and Hosea, in forecasting the future of his people, can scarcely be debarred from having thought of the whole nation. It was Israel as a whole that was the original bride of Yahweh, and surely therefore the united Israel would be the partaker of the final glory. As a matter of fact, Judah was at the time in better case than Israel, and the old promise to the Davidic house (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',7,16);">2Sa 7:16</a>) was deeply cherished to the end.<P>(2) <span class="noTag">Hosea 4-14</span>.<P>If it is admissible to consider <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\');">Hosea 1-3</a> as one related piece (though possibly the written deposit of several addresses) it is quite otherwise with <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\');">Ho 4-14</a>. These are, in a manner, a counterpart of the history. When the strong hand of Jeroboam was relaxed, the kingdom rapidly fell to pieces; a series of military usurpers follows with bewildering rapidity; but who can tell how much political disorder and social disintegration lie behind those brief and grim notices: So and So "conspired against him and slew him and reigned in his stead"? So with these chapters. The wail of grief, the echo of violence and excess, is heard through all, but it is very difficult to assign each lament, each reproof, each denunciation to the primary occasion that called it forth. The chapters seem like the recital of the confused, hideous dream through which the nation passed till its rude awakening by the sharp shock of the Assyrian invasion and the exile that followed. The political condition of the time was one of party strife and national impotence. Sometimes Assyria or Egypt is mentioned alone (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,13);">5:13</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,9,13);">8:9,13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,6);">9:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,6);">10:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,3);">14:3</A>), at other times Assyria and Egypt together (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,11);">7:11</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,3);">9:3</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,5,11);">11:5,11</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,1);">12:1</a>); but in such a way as to show too plainly that the spirit of self-reliance—not to speak of reliance on Yahweh—had departed from a race that was worm-eaten with social sins and rendered selfish and callous by the indulgence of every vice. These foreign powers, which figure as false refuges, are also in the view of the prophet destined to be future scourges (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,13);">5:13</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,9);">8:9</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,11);">7:11</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,1);">12:1</A>); and we know, from the Book of Kings and also from the Assyrian monuments, how much the kings of Israel at this time were at the mercy of the great conquering empires of the East. Such passages as speak of Assyria and Egypt in the same breath may point to the rival policies which were in vogue in the Northern Kingdom (as they appeared also somewhat later in Judah) of making alliances with one or other of these great rival powers. It was in fact the Egyptianizing policy of Hoshea that finally occasioned the ruin of the kingdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,4);">2Ki 17:4</a>). Thus it is that, in the last chapter, when the prophet indulges in hope no more mixed with boding fear, he puts into the mouth of repentant Ephraim the words: "Assyria shall not save us; we will not ride upon horses" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,3);">Ho 14:3</a>), thus alluding to the two foreign powers between which Israel had lost its independence.<P>It is not possible to give a satisfactory analysis of the chapters under consideration. They are not marked off, as certain sections of other prophetical books are, by headings or refrains, nor are the references to current events sufficiently clear to enable us to assign different parts to different times, nor, in fine, is the matter so distinctly laid out that we can arrange the book under subjects treated. Most expositors accordingly content themselves with indicating the chief topics or lines of thought, and arranging the chapters according to the tone pervading them.<P>Keil, e.g., would divide all these chapters into three great sections, each forming a kind of prophetical cycle, in which the three great prophetic tones of reproof, threatening, and promise, are heard in succession. His first section embraces <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">Hosea 4 to 6:3</a>, ending with the gracious promise: "Come, and let us return unto Yahweh," etc. The second section, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,\'4-\);">6:4 to 11:11</A>, ends with the promise: "They shall come trembling as a bird...and I will make them to dwell in their houses, saith Yahweh." The third section, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,\'12-\);">11:12 to 14:9</A>, ends: "Take with you words, and return unto Yahweh," etc. Ewald\'s arrangement proceeds on the idea that the whole book consists of one narrative piece (chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,\'1-\);">1-3</A>) and one long address (chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4-14</A>), which, however, is marked off by resting points into smaller sections or addresses. The progress of thought is marked by the three great items of arraignment, punishment, and consolation. Thus: from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4:1-6:11</A> there is arraignment; from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,\'11-\);">6:11 to 9:9</A> punishment, and from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,\'10-\);">9:10-14:10</A> exhortation and comfort. Driver says of chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4-14</A>: "These chapters consist of a series of discourses, a summary arranged probably by the prophet himself at the close of his ministry, of the prophecies delivered by him in the years following the death of Jeroboam II. Though the argument is not continuous, or systematically developed, they may be divided into three sections:<P>(a) chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4-8</A> in which the thought of Israel\'s guilt predominates;<P>(b) chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,\'1-\);">9-11:11</A>, in which the prevailing thought is that of Israel\'s punishment;<P>(c) <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,\'12-\);">11:12 through Ho 14</a> in which these two lines of thought are both continued (chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,\'1-\);">12</A>, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,\'1-\);">13</A>), but are followed (in chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,\'1-\);">14</a>) by a glance at the brighter future which may ensue provided Israel repents."<P>A. B. Davidson, after mentioning the proposed analyses of Ewald and Driver, adds: "But in truth the passage is scarcely divisible; it consists of multitude of variations all executed on one theme, Israel\'s apostasy or unfaithfulness to her God. This unfaithfulness is a condition of the mind, a \'spirit of whoredoms,\' and is revealed in all the aspects of Israel\'s life, though particularly in three things:<P>(1) the cult, which, though ostensibly service of Yahweh, is in truth worship of a being altogether different from Him;<P>(2) the internal political disorders, the changes of dynasty, all of which have been effected with no thought of Yahweh in the people\'s minds; and<P>(3) the foreign politics, the making of covenants with Egypt and Assyria, in the hope that they might heal the internal hurt of the people, instead of relying on Yahweh their God.<P>The three things," he adds, "are not independent; the one leads to the other. The fundamental evil is that there is no knowledge of God in the land, no true conception of Deity. He is thought of as a Nature-god, and His conception exercises no restraint on the passions or life of the people: hence, the social immoralities, and the furious struggles of rival factions, and these again lead to the appeal for foreign intervention."<P>Some expositors, however (e.g. Maurer, Hitzig, Delitzsch and Volck), recognizing what they consider as direct references or brief allusions to certain outstanding events in the history, perceive a chronological order in the chapters. Volck, who has tempted a full analysis on this line (PRE2) thinks that chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4-14</a> arrange themselves into 6 consecutive sections as follows:<P>(1) chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\);">4</A> constitutes a section by itself, determined by the introductory words "Hear the word of Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,1);">4:1</A>), and a similar call at the beginning of chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,\'1-\);">5</A>. He assigns this chapter to the reign of Zechariah, as a description of the low condition to which the nation had fallen, the priests, the leaders, being involved in the guilt and reproof (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,6);">Ho 5:6</a>).<P>(2) The second section extends from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,\'1-\');">Ho 5:1</a> to <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,\'1-3\');">6:3</a>, and is addressed directly to the priests and the royal house, who ought to have been guides but were snares. The prophet in the spirit sees Divine judgment already breaking over the devoted land (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,8);">5:8</A>). This prophecy, which Hitzig referred to the time of Zechariah, and Maurer to the reign of Pekah, is assigned by Volck to the one month\'s reign of Shallum, on the ground of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,7);">Ho 5:7</a>: "Now shall a month (the King James Version and the Revised Version margin, but the Revised Version (British and American) "the new moon") devour them." It is by inference from this that Volck puts <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-\');">Ho 4</a> in the preceding reign of Zechariah.<P>(3) The third section, <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,\'4-\');">Ho 6:4</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,\'1-16\');">7:16</a>, is marked off by the new beginning made at <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,\'1-\);">8:1</A>: "Set the trumpet to thy mouth." The passage which determines its date <span class="noTag">is</span> <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,7);">7:7</a>: "All their kings are fallen," which, agreeing with Hitzig, he thinks could not have been said after the fall of one king, Zechariah, and so he assigns it to the beginning of the reign of Menahem who killed Shallum.<P>(4) The next halting place, giving a fourth section, is at <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,9);">Ho 9:9</a>, at the end of which there is a break in the Massoretic Text, and a new subject begins. Accordingly, the section embraces <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,\'1-\);">8:1</A> to <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,\'1-9\');">9:9</A>, and Volck, agreeing with Hitzig, assigns it to the reign of Menahem, on the ground of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,4);">8:4</A>: "They have set up kings, but not by me," referring to the support given to Menahem by the king of Assyria (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,19);">2Ki 15:19</a>).<P>(5) The fifth section extends from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,\'10-\');">9:10 to 11:11</A>, and is marked by the peculiarity that the prophet three times refers to the early history of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,10);">9:10</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,1);">10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1);">11:1</A>). Identifying Shalman in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,14);">10:14</a> with Shalmaneser, Volck refers the section to the opening years of the reign of Hoshea, against whom (as stated in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,3);">2Ki 17:3</a>) Shalmaneser came up and Hoshea became his servant.<P>(6) Lastly there is a sixth section, extending from <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,\'1-\');">Ho 12:1</a> to the end, which looks to the future recovery of the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,14);">13:14</A>) and closes with words of gracious promise. This portion also Volck assigns to the reign of Hoshea, just as the ruin of Samaria was impending, and there was no prospect of any earthly hope. In this way Volck thinks that the statement in the superscription of the Book of Hosea is confirmed, and that we have before us, in chronological order if not in precisely their original oral form, the utterances of the prophet during his ministry. Ewald also was strongly of opinion that the book (in its second part at least) has come down to us substantially in the form in which the prophet himself left it.<P>The impression one receives from this whole section is one of sadness, for the prevailing tone is one of denunciation and doom. And yet Hosea is not a prophet of despair; and, in fact, he bursts forth into hope just at the point where, humanly speaking, there is no ground of hope. But this hope is produced, not by what he sees in the condition of the people: it is enkindled and sustained by his confident faith in the unfailing love of Yahweh. And so he ends on theme on which he began, the love of God prevailing over man\'s sin.<P>4. Testimony to Earlier History:<P>The references in Hosea to the earlier period of history are valuable, seeing that we know his date, and that the dates of the books recording that history are so much in dispute. These references are particularly valuable from the way in which they occur; for it is the manner of the prophet to introduce them indirectly, and allusively, without dwelling on particulars. Thus every single reference can be understood only by assuming its implications; and, taken together, they do not merely amount to a number of isolated testimonies to single events, but are rather dissevered links of a continuous chain of history. For they do not occur by way of rhetorical illustration of some theme that may be in hand, they are of the very essence of the prophet\'s address. The events of the past are, in the prophet\'s view, so many elements in the arraignment or threatening, or whatever it may be that is the subject of address for the moment: in a word, the whole history is regarded by him, not as a series of episodes, strung together in a collection of popular stories, but a course of Divine discipline with a moral and religious significance, and recorded or referred to for a high purpose. There is this also to be remembered: that, in referring briefly and by way of allusion to past events, the prophet is taking for granted that his hearers understand what he is referring to, and will not call in question the facts to which he alludes. This implies that the mass of the people, even in degenerate Israel, were well acquainted with such incidents or episodes as the prophet introduces into his discourses, as well as the links which were necessary to bind them into a connected whole. It is necessary to bear all this in mind in forming an estimate of the historical value of other books. It seems to be taken by many modern writers as certain that those parts of the Pentateuch (JE) which deal with the earlier history were not written till a comparatively short time before Hosea. It is plain, however, that the accounts must be of much earlier date, before they could have become, in an age when books could not have been numerous, the general possession of the national consciousness. Further, the homiletic manner in which Hosea handles these ancient stories makes one suspicious of the modern theory that a number of popular stories were supplied with didactic "frameworks" by later Deuteronomic or other "redactors," and makes it more probable that these accounts were invested with a moral and religious meaning from the beginning. With these considerations in mind, and particularly in view of the use he makes of his references, it is interesting to note the wide range of the prophet\'s historical survey. If we read with the Revised Version (British and American) "Adam" for "men" (the King James Version <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,7);">Ho 6:7</a>), we have a clear allusion to the Fall, implying in its connection the view which, as all admit, Hosea held of the religious history of his people as a declension and not an upward evolution. This view is more clearly brought out in the reference to the period of the exodus and the desert life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,15);">2:15</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,10);">9:10</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1);">11:1</A>). Equally suggestive are the allusions to the patriarchal history, as the references to Admah and\' Zeboiim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,8);">11:8</A>), and the repeated references to the weak and the strong points in the character of Jacob (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,3,12);">12:3,12</A>). Repeatedly he declares that Yahweh is the God of Israel "from the land of Egypt" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,9);">12:9</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,4);">13:4</A>), alludes to the sin of Achan and the valley of Achor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,15);">2:15</A>), asserts that God had in time past "spoken unto the prophets" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,10);">12:10</A>), "hewed" His people by prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,5);">6:5</a>), and by a prophet brought His people out of Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,13);">12:13</a>). There are also references to incidents nearer to the prophet\'s time, some of them not very clear (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',1,4);">1:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,1);">5:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,5,15);">9:5,15</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,9);">10:9</a>); and if, as seems probable, "the sin of Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,8);">10:8</a>) refers to the schism of the ten tribes, the prominence given to the Davidic kingship, which, along with the references to Judah, some critics reject on merely subjective grounds, is quite intelligible (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',3,5);">3:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,15);">4:15</a>).<P>5. Testimony to the Law:<P>We do not expect to find in a prophetic writing the same frequency of reference to the law as to the history; for it is of the essence of prophecy to appeal to history and to interpret it. Of course, the moral and social aspects of the law are as much the province of the prophet as of the priest; but the ceremonial part of the law, which was under the care of the priests, though it was designed to be the expression of the same ideas that lay at the foundation of prophecy, is mainly touched upon by the prophets when, as was too frequently the case, it ceased to express those ideas and became an offense. The words of the prophets on this subject, when fairly interpreted, are not opposed to law in any of its authorized forms, but only to its abuses; and there are expressions and allusions in Hosea, although he spoke to the Northern Kingdom, where from the time of the schism there had been a wide departure from the authorized law, which recognize its ancient existence and its Divine sanction. The much-debated passage in Ho (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,12);">8:12</a>), "Though I write for him my law in ten thousand precepts" (the Revised Version (British and American) or the Revised Version margin "I wrote for him the ten thousand things of my law"), on any understanding of the words or with any reasonable emendation of the text (for which see the comm.), points to written law, and that of considerable compass, and seems hardly consistent with the supposition that in the prophet\'s time the whole of the written law was confined to a few chapters in Exodus, the so-called Book of the Covenant. And the very next verse (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,13);">Ho 8:13</a>), "As for the sacrifices of mine offerings, they sacrifice flesh and eat it; but Yahweh accepteth them not," is at once an acknowledgment of the Divine institution of sacrifice, and an illustration of the kind of opposition the prophets entertained to sacrificial service as it was practiced. So when it is said, "I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feasts, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn assemblies" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,11);">Ho 2:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,5);">9:5</A>), the reference, as the context shows, is to a deprivation of what were national distinctive privileges; and the allusions to transgressions and trespasses against the law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',8,1);">Ho 8:1</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,2);">De 17:2</a>) point in the same direction. We have a plain reference to the Feast of Tabernacles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,9);">Ho 12:9</a>): "I will yet again make thee to dwell in tents, as in the days of the solemn feast" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',23,\'39-43\');">Le 23:39-43</a>); and there are phrases which are either in the express language of the law-books or evident allusions to them, as "Thy people are as they that strive with the priest" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,4);">Ho 4:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,12);">De 17:12</a>); "The princes of Judah are like them that remove the landmark" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,10);">Ho 5:10</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,14);">De 19:14</a>); "Their sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of mourners" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,4);">Ho 9:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,14);">De 26:14</a>); "They (the priests) feed on the sin of my people" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,8);">Ho 4:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,25);">Le 6:25</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,17);">10:17</A>). In one verse the prophet combines the fundamental fact in the nation\'s history and the fundamental principle of the law: "I am Yahweh thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt know no god but me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,4);">Ho 13:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,3);">Ex 20:3</a>).<P>6. Affinity with Deuteronomy:<P>It is, however, with the Book of Deuteronomy more than with any other portion of the Pentateuch that the Book of Hosea shows affinity; and the resemblances here are so striking, that the critics who hold to the late date of Deuteronomy speak of the author of that book as "the spiritual heir of Hosea" (Driver, Commentary on Deuteronomy, Intro, xxvii), or of Hosea as "the great spiritual predecessor of the Deuteronomist" (Cheyne, Jeremiah, His Life and Times, 66). The resemblance is seen, not only in the homiletical manner in which historical events are treated, but chiefly in the great underlying principles implied or insisted upon in both books. The choice of Israel to be a peculiar people is the fundamental note in both (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',4,37);">De 4:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',7,6);">7:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,15);">10:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,2);">14:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,18);">26:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,9);">Ho 12:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,4);">13:4</a>). God\'s tender care and fatherly discipline are central ideas in both (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,2,3,5,16);">De 8:2-3, 5, 16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',9,15);">Ho 9:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,\'1-4\');">11:1-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,4);">14:4</a>); and, conversely, the supreme duty of love to God, or reproof of the want of it, is everywhere emphasized (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,5);">De 6:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,12);">10:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,1,13,22);">11:1, 13, 22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',13,3);">13:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,9);">19:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',30,6,16,20);">30:6, 16, 20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,1);">Ho 4:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,4,6);">6:4, 6</a>). Now, when points of resemblance are found in two different books, it is not always easy to say on merely literary grounds which has the claim to priority. But it does seem remarkable, on the one hand, that a writer so late as the time of Josiah should take his keynote from one of the very earliest of the writing prophets two centuries before him; and, on the other hand, that these so-called "prophetic ideas," so suitable to the time of \'the kindness of youth and love of espousals\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,2);">Jer 2:2</a>), should have found no place in the mind of that "prophet" by whom the Lord brought Israel out of Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,13);">Ho 12:13</a>). The ministry of Moses was to enforce the duty of whole-hearted allegiance to the God who had made special choice of Israel and claimed them as His own. Nor was Hosea the first, as it is sometimes alleged, to represent the religious history of Israel as a defection. Moses had experience of their apostasy under the very shadow of Sinai, and all his life long had to bear with a stiff-necked and rebellious people. Then, again, if these "Deuteronomic" ideas are found so clearly expressed in Hosea, why should it be necessary to postulate a late Deuteronomist going back upon older books, and editing and supplementing them with Deuteronomic matter? If Moses sustained anything like the function which all tradition assigned to him, and if, as all confess, he was the instrument of molding the tribes into one people, those addresses contained in the Book of Deuteronomy are precisely in the tone which would be adopted by a great leader in taking farewell of the people. And, if he did so, it is quite conceivable that his words would be treasured by the God-fearing men among his followers and successors, in that unbroken line of prophetic men to whose existence both Amos and Hosea appealed, and that they should be found coming to expression at the very dawn of written prophecy. Undoubtedly these two prophets took such a view, and regarded Moses as the first and greatest Deuteronomist.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Harper, "Minor Prophets," in ICC; Keil, "Minor Prophets," in Clark\'s For. Theol. Library; Huxtable, "Hosea," in Speaker\'s Comm.; Cheyne, "Hosea," in Cambridge Bible; Pusey, Minor Prophets; Robertson Smith, Prophets of Israel; G. A. Smith, "The Book of the Twelve," in Expositor\'s Bible; Horton, "\'Hosea," in Century Bible; Farrar, "Minor Prophets," in Men of the Bible; A. B. Davidson, article "Hosea" in HDB; Cornill, The Prophets of Israel, English translation, Chicago, 1897; Valeton, Amos en Hosea; Nowack, "Die kleinen Propheten," in Hand-Comm. z. Altes Testament; Marti, Dodekapropheton in Kurz. Hand-Comm.``151';
isbe[4448]='Hosen`ho\'-z\'-n.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BREECHES">BREECHES</a>`1';
isbe[4449]='Hoshaiah`ho-sha\'-ya (hosha\'yah, "whom Yahweh helpeth"):<P>(1) Father of Jezaniah (probably = Azariah, so the Septuagint; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',42,1);">Jer 42:1</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',43,2);">43:2</A> with <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,23);">2Ki 25:23</a> and note similar letters in names in Hebrew), who with other leaders antagonized the policy and counsel of Jeremiah after the fall of Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',42,\'1-\');">Jer 42:1</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',43,\'1-7\');">43:7</a>).<P>(2) A man, probably of Judah, who led half of the princes of Judah in procession at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,32);">Ne 12:32</a>).``1';
isbe[4450]='Hoshama`hosh\'-a-ma, ho-sha\'-ma (hoshama\', abbreviated from yehoshama\', "whom Yahweh heareth"): One of the sons or descendants of Jeconiah, the captive king of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',3,18);">1Ch 3:18</a>).``1';
isbe[4451]='Hoshea`ho-she\'-a (hoshea\', "salvation"; Hosee, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,\'1-9\');">2Ki 17:1-9</a>):<P>1. A Satrap of Assyria:<P>Son of Elah, the 19th and last king of Israel. The time was one of social revolution and dynastic change. Of the last five kings of Israel, four had met their deaths by violence. Hoshea himself was one of these assassins (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,30);">2Ki 15:30</a>), and the nominee of Tiglath-pileser III, whose annals read, "Pekah I slew, Hoshea I appointed over them." Though called king, Hoshea was thus really a satrap of Assyria and held his appointment only during good behavior. The realm which he administered was but the shadow of its former self. Tiglath-pileser had already carried into captivity the northern tribes of Zebulun, Naphtali, Asher and Dan; as also the two and a half tribes east of the Jordan (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,29);">2Ki 15:29</a>). Apart from those forming the kingdom of Judah, there remained only Ephraim, Issachar, and the half-tribe of Manasseh.<P>2. The Reduced Kingdom of Israel:<P>Isaiah refers to the fall of Syria in the words, "Damascus is taken away from being a city" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',17,1);">Isa 17:1</a>), and to the foreign occupations of Northern Israel in the words, "He brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali...by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,1);">Isa 9:1</a>).<P>3. Hosea and Ephraim:<P>But Hosea is the prophet in whose writings we see most clearly the reflection of the politics of the day, and the altered condition of things in Israel. In the 2nd division of his and book, chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',42,\'1-\');">4-14</A>, Hosea deals with a state of things which can only be subsequent to the first great deportation of Israelites, and therefore belongs to the reigns of Pekah and Hoshea. The larger part of the nation being removed, he addresses his utterances no longer to all Israel, but to Ephraim, the chief of the remaining tribes. This name he uses no less than 35 times, though not to the total exclusion of the term "Israel," as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',11,1);">11:1</A>, "When Israel was a child, then I loved him," the whole nation in such cases being meant. Of the 35 uses of "Ephraim," the first is, "Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,17);">4:17</A>), and the last, "Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',14,8);">14:8</A>), showing that, in the prophet\'s estimation, the idolatrous worship of Yahweh, as associated with the golden calves of Dan and Bethel, lay at the root of the nation\'s calamities.<P>4. Hosea\'s Dependent Position:<P>Over this shrunken and weakened kingdom—corresponding generally with the Samaritan district of the New Testament—Hoshea was placed as the viceroy of a foreign power. The first official year of his governorship was 729, though he may have been appointed a few months earlier. Tiglath-pileser III died in 727, so that three years\' tribute was probably paid to Nineveh. There was, however, a political party in Samaria, which, ground down by cruel exactions, was for making an alliance with Egypt, hoping that, in the jealousy and antipathies of the two world-powers, it might find some relief or even a measure of independence. Hosea, himself a prophet of the north, allows us to see beneath the surface of court life in Samaria. "They call unto Egypt, they go to Assyria" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',7,11);">Ho 7:11</a>), and again, "They make a covenant with Assyria, and oil is carried into Egypt" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,1);">Ho 12:1</a>). This political duplicity from which it was the king\'s prime duty to save his people, probably took its origin about the time of Tiglath-pileser\'s death in 727.<P>5. His Treasonable Action:<P>That event either caused or promoted the treasonable action, and the passage of large quantities of oil on the southward road was an object-lesson to be read of all men. On the accession of Shalmaneser IV—who is the Shalmaneser of the Bible (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,3);">2Ki 17:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,9);">18:9</a>)—Hoshea would seem to have carried, or sent, the annual tribute for 726 to the treasury at Nineveh (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,3);">2Ki 17:3</a>). The text is not clear as to who was the bearer of this tribute, but from the statement that Shalmaneser came up against him, and Hoshea became his servant, it may be presumed that the tribute for the first year after Tiglath-pileser\'s death was at first refused, then, when a military demonstration took place, was paid, and obedience promised. In such a case Hoshea would be required to attend at his suzerain\'s court and do homage to the sovereign.<P>6. His Final Arrest:<P>This is what probably took place, not without inquiry into the past. Grave suspicions were thus aroused as to the loyalty of Hoshea, and on these being confirmed by the confession or discovery that messengers had passed to "So king of Egypt," and the further withholding of the tribute (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,4);">2Ki 17:4</a>), Hoshea was arrested and shut up in prison. Here he disappears from history. Such was the ignominious end of a line of kings, not one of whom had, in all the vicissitudes of two and a quarter centuries, been in harmony with theocratic spirit, or realized that the true welfare and dignity of the state lay in the unalloyed worship of Yahweh.<P>7. Battle of Beth-arbel:<P>With Hoshea in his hands, Shalmaneser\'s troops marched, in the spring or summer of 725, to the completion of Assyria\'s work in Palestine. Isaiah has much to say in his <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',10,\'1-\');">10th</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,\'1-\');">11th</a> chapters on the divinely sanctioned mission of "the Assyrian" and of the ultimate fate that should befall him for his pride and cruelty in carrying out his mission. The campaign was not a bloodless one. At Beth-arbel—at present unidentified—the hostile forces met, with the result that might have been expected. "Shalman spoiled Beth-arbel in the day of battle" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,14);">Ho 10:14</a>). The defeated army took refuge behind the walls of Samaria, and the siege began. The city was well placed for purposes of defense, being built on the summit of a lonely hill, which was Omri\'s reason for moving the capital from Tirzah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',16,24);">1Ki 16:24</a>). It was probably during the continuance of the siege that Isaiah wrote his prophecy, "Woe to the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,\'1-\');">Isa 28</a>), in which the hill of Samaria with its coronet of walls is compared to a diadem of flowers worn in a scene of revelry, which should fade and die. Micah\'s elegy on the fall of Samaria (chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,\'1-\');">1</A>) has the same topographical note, "I will pour down the stones thereof into the valley, and I will uncover the foundations thereof" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,6);">1:6</A>).<P>8. Fall of Samaria in 721:<P>Shalmaneser\'s reign was one of exactly five years, December, 727 to December, 722, and the city fell in the 1st month of his successor\'s reign. The history of its fall is summarized in Sargon\'s great Khorsabad inscription in these words, "Samaria I besieged, I captured. 27,290 of her inhabitants I carried away. 50 chariots I collected from their midst. The rest of their property I caused to be taken."<P>9. Hoshea\'s Character:<P>Hoshea\'s character is summed up in the qualified phrase, "He did evil in the sight of the Lord, yet not as the kings of Israel that were before him." The meaning may be that, while not a high-principled man or of irreproachable life, he did not give to the idolatry of Bethel the official sanction and prominence which each of his 18 predecessors had done. According to <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,6);">Ho 10:6</a> the golden calf of Samaria was to be taken to Assyria, to the shame of its erstwhile worshippers.``17';
isbe[4452]='Hospitality; Host`hos-pi-tal\'-i-ti, host (philoxenia, "love of strangers," xenos, "guest," "friend"; pandocheus, "innkeeper"):<P>1. Among Nomads:<P>When the civilization of a people has advanced so far that some traveling has become necessary, but not yet so far that traveling by individuals is a usual thing, then hospitality is a virtue indispensable to the life of the people. This stage of culture was that represented in ancient Palestine and the stage whose customs are still preserved among the present-day Arabs of the desert. Hospitality is regarded as a right by the traveler, to whom it never occurs to thank his host as if for a favor. And hospitality is granted as a duty by the host, who himself may very soon be dependent on some one else\'s hospitality. But none the less, both in Old Testament times and today, the granting of that right is surrounded by an etiquette that has made Arabian hospitality so justly celebrated. The traveler is made the literal master of the house during his stay; his host will perform for him the most servile offices, and will not even sit in his presence without express request. To the use of the guest is given over all that his host possesses, stopping not even short of the honor of wife or daughter. "\' Be we not all,\' say the poor nomads, \'guests of Ullah? Has God given unto them, God\'s guest shall partake with them thereof: if they will not for God render his own, it should not go well with them\'" (Doughty, Arabia Deserta, I, 228). The host is in duty bound to defend his guest against all comers and to lay aside any personal hatred—the murderer of father is safe as the guest of the son.<P>2. In the Old Testament:<P>An exquisite example of the etiquette of hospitality is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,\'1-8\');">Ge 18:1-8</a>. The very fact that the three strangers have passed by Abraham\'s door gives him the privilege of entertaining them. When he sees them approaching he runs to beg the honor of their turning in to him, with oriental courtesy depreciates the feast that he is about to lay before them as "a morsel of bread," and stands by them while they eat. Manoah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',13,15);">Jud 13:15</a>) is equally pressing although more matter-of-fact, while Jethro (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,20);">Ex 2:20</a>) sends out that the stranger may be brought in. And Job (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,32);">31:32</A>) repels the very thought that he could let the sojourner be unprovided for. The one case where a breach of hospitality receives praise is that of Jael (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,\'1-\');">Jud 4</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,\'1-\');">5</a>), perhaps to be referred to degeneration of customs in the conflicts with the Canaanites or (perhaps more plausibly) to literary-critical considerations, according to which in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,\'1-\');">Jud 5</a> Sisera is not represented as entering Jael\'s tent or possibly not as actually tasting the food, a state of affairs misunderstood in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,\'1-\');">Jud 4</a>, written under later circumstances of city life. (For contrasting opinions see "Jael" in Encyclopedia Biblica and HDB.)<P>3. The Table-Bond:<P>It is well to understand that to secure the right to hospitality it is not necessary, even in modern times, for the guest to eat with his host, still less to eat salt specifically. Indeed, guests arriving after sunset and departing the next morning do not, as a rule, eat at all in the tent of the host. It is sufficient to enter the tent, to grasp a tent-pin, or even, under certain circumstances, to invoke the name of a man as host. On the other hand, the bond of hospitality is certainly strengthened by eating with one\'s host, or the bond may actually be created by eating food belonging to him, even by stealth or in an act of theft. Here a quite different set of motives is at work. The idea here is that of kinship arising from participation in a common sacrificial meal, and the modern Arab still terms the animal killed for his guest the dhabichah or "sacrifice" (compare HDB, II, 428). This concept finds its rather materialistic expression in theory that after the processes of digestion are completed (a time estimated as two nights and the included day), the bond lapses if it is not renewed. There seem to be various references in the Bible to some such idea of a "table-bond" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',41,9);">Ps 41:9</a>, e.g.), but hardly in connection directly with hospitality. For a discussion of them see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BREAD">BREAD</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GUEST">GUEST</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a>.<P>4. In the City:<P>In the city, naturally, the exercise of hospitality was more restricted. Where travel was great, doubtless commercial provision for the travelers was made from a very early day (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,34);">Lu 10:34</a> and see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=INN">INN</A>), and at all events free hospitality to all comers would have been unbearably abused. Lot in Sodom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',19,\'1-\');">Ge 19</a>) is the nomad who has preserved his old ideas, although settled in the city, and who thinks of the "shadow of his roof" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',19,8);">19:8</A>) as his tent. The same is true of the old man in Gibeah of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',19,16);">Jud 19:16</a>ff. And the sin of Sodom and of Gibeah is not that wanderers cannot find hospitality so much as it is that they are unsafe in the streets at night. Both Lot and "the old man," however, are firm in their duty and willing to sacrifice their daughters for the safety of their guests. (Later ideas as to the position of woman should not be read back into these narratives.) However, when the city-dweller Rahab refuses to surrender her guests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,\'1-\');">Jos 2</a>), her reason is not the breach of hospitality involved but her fear of Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,9);">Jos 2:9</a>). When Abraham\'s old slave is in Nahor, and begs a night\'s lodging for himself and his camels, he accompanies the request with a substantial present, evidently conceived of as pay for the same (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',24,22);">Ge 24:22</a>f). Such also are the modern conditions; compare Benzinger-Socin in Baedeker\'s Palestine(3), xxxv, who observe that "inmates" of private houses "are aware that Franks always pay, and therefore receive them gladly." None the less, in New Testament times, if not earlier, and even at present, a room was set apart in each village for the use of strangers, whose expenses were borne by the entire community. Most interpreters consider that the kataluma of <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,7);">Lu 2:7</a> was a room of this sort, but this opinion cannot be regarded as quite certain. But many of the wealthier city-dwellers still strive to attain a reputation for hospitality, a zeal that naturally was found in the ancient world as well.<P>5. Christ and Hospitality:<P>Christ\'s directions to the apostles to "take nothing for their journey" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,8);">Mr 6:8</a>, etc.) presupposes that they were sure of always finding hospitality. Indeed, it is assumed that they may even make their own choice of hosts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,11);">Mt 10:11</a>) and may stay as long as they choose (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,7);">Lu 10:7</a>). In this case, however, the claims of the travelers to hospitality are accentuated by the fact that they are bearers of good tidings for the people, and it is in view of this latter fact that hospitality to them becomes so great a virtue—the "cup of cold water" becomes so highly meritorious because it is given "in the name of a disciple" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,42);">Mt 10:42</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,41);">10:41</A>, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,41);">Mr 9:41</a>). Rejection of hospitality to one of Christ\'s "least brethren" (almost certainly to be understood as disciples) is equivalent to the rejection of Christ Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,43);">Mt 25:43</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,35);">25:35</a>). It is not quite clear whether in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,14);">Mt 10:14</a> and parallels, simple refusal of hospitality is the sin in point or refusal to hear the message or both.<P>6. First Missionaries:<P>In the Dispersion, the Jew who was traveling seemed always to be sure of finding entertainment from the Jews resident in whatever city he might happen to be passing through. The importance of this fact for the spread of early Christianity is incalculable. To be sure, some of the first missionaries may have been men who were able to bear their own traveling expenses or who were merchants that taught the new religion when on business tours. In the case of soldiers or slaves their opportunity to carry the gospel into new fields came often through the movements of the army or of their masters. And it was by an "infiltration" of this sort, probably, rather than by any specific missionary effort that the church of Rome, at least, was rounded. See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ROMANS,+EPISTLE+TO+THE">ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE</A>. But the ordinary missionary, whether apostle (in any sense of the word) or evangelist, would have been helpless if it had not been that he could count so confidently on the hospitality everywhere. From this fact comes one reason why Paul, for instance, could plan tours of such magnitude with such assurance: he knew that he would not have to face any problem of sustenance in a strange city (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,23);">Ro 16:23</a>).<P>7. In the Churches:<P>As the first Christian churches were founded, the exercise of hospitality took on a new aspect, especially after the breach with the Jews had begun. Not only did the traveling Christian look naturally to his brethren for hospitality, but the individual churches looked to the traveler for fostering the sense of the unity of the church throughout the world. Hospitality became a virtue indispensable to the well-being of the church—one reason for the emphasis laid on it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,13);">Ro 12:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,1);">16:1</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,2);">Heb 13:2</a>). As the organization of the churches became more perfected, the exercise of hospitality grew to be an official duty of the ministry and a reputation for hospitality was a prerequisite in some cases (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',3,2);">1Ti 3:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,10);">5:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,8);">Tit 1:8</a>). The exercise of such hospitality must have become burdensome at times (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',4,9);">1Pe 4:9</a>), and as false teachers began to appear in the church a new set of problems was created in discriminating among applicants for hospitality. 2 and 3 John reflect some of the difficulties. For the later history of hospitality in the church interesting matter will be found in the Didache, chapters xi, xii, Apology of Aristides, chapter xv, and Lucian\'s Death of Peregrinus, chapter xvi. The church certainly preferred to err by excess of the virtue.<P>An evaluation of the Biblical directions regarding hospitality for modern times is extremely difficult on account of the utterly changed conditions. Be it said at once, especially, that certain well-meant criticism of modern missionary methods, with their boards, organized finance, etc., on the basis of Christ\'s directions to the Twelve, is a woeful misapplication of Biblical teaching. The hospitality that an apostle could count on in his own day is something that the modern missionary simply cannot expect and something that it would be arrant folly for him to expect (Weinel, Die urchristliche und die heutige Mission, should be read by everyone desiring to compare modern missions with the apostolic). In general, the basis for hospitality has become so altered that the special virtue has become merged in the larger field of charitable enterprise of various sorts. The modern problem nearest related to the old virtue is the question of providing for the necessities of the indigent traveler, a distinctly minor problem, although a very real one, in the general field of social problems that the modern church has to study. In so far as the New Testament exhortations are based on missionary motives there has been again a merging into general appeals for missions, perhaps specialized occasionally as appeals for traveling expense. The "hospitality" of today, by which is meant the entertainment of friends or relatives, hardly comes within the Biblical use of the term as denoting a special virtue.<P>LITERATURE.<P>For hospitality in the church, Harnack, Mission and Expansion of Christianity, II, chapter iv (10).``48';
isbe[4453]='Host of Heaven`(tsebha\' hashamayim): The expression is employed in the Old Testament to denote<P>(1) the stars, frequently as objects of idolatry (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',4,19);">De 4:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,3);">17:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,16);">2Ki 17:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',21,3,5);">21:3, 5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,4);">23:4</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,2);">Jer 8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,13);">19:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',1,5);">Ze 1:5</a>), but also as witnesses in their number, order and splendor, to the majesty and providential rule and care of Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,4);">Isa 34:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',40,26);">40:26</a>, "calleth them all by name"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',45,12);">45:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,22);">Jer 33:22</a>); and<P>(2) the angels (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,19);">1Ki 22:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',18,18);">2Ch 18:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,6);">Ne 9:6</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,21);">Ps 103:21</a>).<P>(1) Star-worship seems to have been an enticement to Israel from the first (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',4,19);">De 4:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,3);">17:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,26);">Am 5:26</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,42,43);">Ac 7:42-43</a>), but attained special prominence in the days of the later kings of Judah. The name of Manasseh is particularly connected with it. This king built altars for "all the host of heaven" in the courts of the temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',21,3,5);">2Ki 21:3, 5</a>). Josiah destroyed these altars, and cleansed the temple from the idolatry by putting down the priests and burning the vessels associated with it (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,4,5,12);">2Ki 23:4-5, 12</a>).<P>(2) In the other meaning of the expression, the angels are regarded as forming Yahweh\'s "host" or army, and He himself is the leader of them—"Yahweh of hosts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',31,4);">Isa 31:4</a>, etc.)—though this designation has a much wider reference.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ANGEL">ANGEL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY,+I">ASTRONOMY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD+OF+HOSTS">LORD OF HOSTS</a>`132';
isbe[4454]='Hostage`hos\'-taj.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WAR;+WARFARE">WAR</a>`1';
isbe[4455]='Hosts, Lord of`hosts.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD+OF+HOSTS">LORD OF HOSTS</a>`1';
isbe[4456]='Hotham; Hothan`ho\'-tham, ho\'-than (chotham, "seal"):<P>(1) An Asherite, son of Heber, family of Beriah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,32);">1Ch 7:32</a>).<P>(2) An Aroerite, father of two of the mighty men of David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,44);">1Ch 11:44</a>). the King James Version, following Septuagint Chothan, has, incorrectly, Hothan.``1';
isbe[4457]='Hothir`ho\'-thir (hothir, "abundance"): Mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',25,4,28);">1Ch 25:4, 28</a> among the sons of Heman, and one of those set apart by David for the musical service of the house of God (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',25,6);">25:6</A>).``1';
isbe[4458]='Hough`hok.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOCK">HOCK</a>`1';
isbe[4459]='Hour`our (sha\'atha\', she\'a\'; hora): Hour as a division of the day does not occur in the Old Testament; the term she\'a\' (sha\'atha\') found in Daniel, is Aramaic, and as used there denotes a short period or point of time of no definite length (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',3,6,15);">Da 3:6, 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',4,33);">4:33 (Hebrew 30)</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',5,5);">5:5</A>). The Greek hora is commonly used in the New Testament in the same way, as "that same hour," "from that hour," etc., but it also occurs as a division of the day, as, "the third hour," "the ninth hour," etc. The Hebrews would seem to have become acquainted with this division of time through the Babylonians, but whether before the captivity we are not certain. The mention of the sun dial of Ahaz would seem to indicate some such reckoning of time during the monarchy.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TIME">TIME</a>`138';
isbe[4460]='Hours of Prayer`The Mosaic law did not regulate the offering of prayer, but fully recognized its spontaneous character. In what manner or how far back in Jewish history the sacrificial prayer, mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,10);">Lu 1:10</a>, originated no one knows. In the days of Christ it had evidently become an institution. But ages before that, stated hours of prayer were known and religiously observed by all devout Jews. It evidently belonged to the evolutionary process of Jewish worship, in connection with the temple-ritual. Devout Jews, living at Jerusalem, went to the temple to pray (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,10);">Lu 18:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,1);">Ac 3:1</a>). The pious Jews of the Diaspora opened their windows "toward Jerus" and prayed "toward" the place of God\'s presence (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,48);">1Ki 8:48</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,10);">Da 6:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',5,7);">Ps 5:7</a>). The regular hours of prayer, as we may infer from <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',55,17);">Ps 55:17</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,10);">Da 6:10</a>, were three in number. The first coincided with the morning sacrifice, at the 3rd hour of the morning, at 9 AM therefore (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,15);">Ac 2:15</a>). The second was at the 6th hour, or at noon, and may have coincided with the thanksgiving for the chief meal of the day, a religious custom apparently universally observed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,36);">Mt 15:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,35);">Ac 27:35</a>). The 3rd hour of prayer coincided with the evening sacrifice, at the ninth hour (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,1);">Ac 3:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,30);">10:30</a>). Thus every day, as belonging to God, was religiously subdivided, and regular seasons of prayer were assigned to the devout believer. Its influence on the development of the religious spirit must have been incalculable, and it undoubtedly is, at least in part, the solution of the riddle of the preservation of the Jewish faith in the cruel centuries of its bitter persecution. Mohammedanism borrowed this feature of worship from the Jews and early Christians, and made it one of the chief pillars of its faith.``42';
isbe[4461]='House`hous (bayith; oikos, in classical Greek generally "an estate," oikia, oikema (literally, "habitation"), in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',12,1);">Ac 12:1</a>, "prison"):<P><b>I. CAVE DWELLINGS</b><P><b>II. STONE-BUILT AND MUD/BRICK-BUILT HOUSES</b><p class="in15">1. Details of Plan and Construction<p class="in30">(1) Corner-Stone<p class="in30">(2) Floor<p class="in30">(3) Gutter<p class="in30">(4) Door<p class="in30">(5) Hinge<p class="in30">(6) Lock and Key<p class="in30">(7) Threshold<p class="in30">(8) Hearth<p class="in30">(9) Window<p class="in30">(10) Roof<p class="in15">2. Houses of More than One Story<p class="in30">(1) Upper Chambers and Stairs<p class="in30">(2) Palaces and Castles<p class="in15">3. Internal Appearance<P><b>III. OTHER MEANINGS</b><P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Cave Dwellings.<P>The earliest permanent habitations of the prehistoric inhabitants of Palestine were the natural caves which abound throughout the country. As the people increased and grouped themselves into communities, these abodes were supplemented by systems of artificial caves which, in some cases, developed into extensive burrowings of many adjoining compartments, having in each system several entrances. These entrances were usually cut through the roof down a few steps, or simply dropped to the floor from the rock surface. The sinking was shallow and the headroom low but sufficient for the undersized troglodites who were the occupiers.<P>II. Stone-built and Mud/Brick-built Houses.<P>There are many references to the use of caves as dwellings in the Old Testament. Lot dwelt with his two daughters in cave (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',19,30);">Ge 19:30</a>). Elijah, fleeing from Jezebel, lodged in a cave (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,9);">1Ki 19:9</a>). The natural successor to the cave was the stone-built hut, and just as the loose field-bowlders and the stones, quarried from the caves, served their first and most vital uses in the building of defense walls, so did they later become material for the first hut. Caves, during the rainy season, were faulty dwellings, as at the time when protection was most needed, they were being flooded through the surface openings which formed their entrances. The rudest cell built of rough stones in mud and covered a with roof of brushwood and mud was at first sufficient. More elaborate plans of several apartments, entering from what may be called a living-room, followed as a matter of course, and these, huddled together, constituted the homes of the people. Mud-brick buildings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,19);">Job 4:19</a>) of similar plan occur, and to protect this friable material from the weather, the walls were sometimes covered with a casing of stone slabs, as at Lachish. (See Bliss, A Mound of Many Cities.) Generally speaking, this rude type of building prevailed, although, in some of the larger buildings, square dressed and jointed stones were used. There is little or no sign of improvement until the period of the Hellenistic influence, and even then the improvement was slight, so far as the homes of the common people were concerned.<P>1. Details of Plan and Construction:<P>One should observe an isometric sketch and plan showing construction of a typical small house from Gezer. The house is protected and approached from the street by an open court, on one side of which is a covered way. The doors enter into a living-room from which the two very small inner private rooms, bedchambers, are reached. Builders varied the plan to suit requirements, but in the main, this plan may be taken as typical. When members of a family married, extra accommodation was required. Additions were made as well as could be arranged on the cramped site, and in consequence, plans often became such a meaningless jumble that it is impossible to identify the respective limits of adjoining houses. The forecourt was absorbed and crushed out of existence, so that in many of the plans recovered the arrangement is lost.<P>(1) Corner-stone:<P>Corner-stone (pinnah, <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,16);">Isa 28:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,26);">Jer 51:26</a>; lithos akrogoniaios, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,6);">1Pe 2:6</a>).—In the construction of rude boulder walls, more especially on a sloping site, as can be seen today in the highlands of Scotland and Wales, a large projecting boulder was built into the lower angle-course. It tied together the return angles and was one of the few bond-stones used in the building. This most necessary support claimed chief importance and as such assumed a figurative meaning frequently used (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,16);">Isa 28:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,6);">1Pe 2:6</a>; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=CORNER-STONE">CORNER-STONE</a>). The importance given to the laying of a sure foundation is further emphasized by the dedication rites in common practice, evidence of which has been found on various sites in Palestine (see Excavations of Gezer). The discovery of human remains placed diagonally below the foundations of the returning angle of the house gives proof of the exercise of dedication rites both before and after the Conquest. Hiel sacrificed his firstborn to the foundations of Jericho and his youngest son to the gates thereof (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',16,34);">1Ki 16:34</a>). But this was in a great cause compared with a similar sacrifice to a private dwelling. The latter manifests a respect scarcely borne out by the miserable nature of the houses so dedicated. At the same time, it gives proof of the frequent collapse of structures which the winter rains made inevitable and at which superstition trembled. The fear of pending disaster to the man who failed to make his sacrifice is recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',20,5);">De 20:5</a>: "What man is there that hath built a new house, and hath not dedicated it? let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle." <!-- See illustration, p. 550.--><P>(2) Floor:<P>Floor (qarqa\').—When houses were built on the rock outcrop, the floor was roughly leveled on the rock surface, but it is more common to find floors of beaten clay similar to the native floor of the present day. Stone slabs were sparingly used, and only appear in the houses of the great. It is unlikely that wood was much used as a flooring to houses, although Solomon used it for his temple floor (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,15);">1Ki 6:15</a>).<P>(3) Gutter:<P>Gutter (tsinnor).—The "gutter" in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,8);">2Sa 5:8</a> the King James Version is obviously difficult to associate with the gutter of a house, except in so far as it may have a similar meaning to the water duct or "water course" (Revised Version (British and American)) leading to the private cistern, which formed part of the plan. Remains of open channels for this purpose have been found of rough stones set in clay, sometimes leading through a silt pit into the cistern.<P>(4) Door:<P>Door (deleth, pethach; thura).—Doorways were simple, square, entering openings in the wall with a stone or wood lintel (mashqoph, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,22,23);">Ex 12:22-23</a>; \'ayil, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,31);">1Ki 6:31</a>) and a stone threshold raised slightly above the floor. It is easy to imagine the earliest wooden door as a simple movable boarded cover with back bars, fixed vertically by a movable bar slipped into sockets in the stone jambs. Doorposts (caph, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',41,16);">Eze 41:16</a>) appear to have been in use, but, until locks were introduced, it is difficult to imagine a reason for them. Posts, when introduced, were probably let into the stone at top and bottom, and, unlike our present door frame, had no head-piece. When no wood was used, the stone jambs of the opening constituted the doorposts. To the present day the post retains its function as commanded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,9);">De 6:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,20);">11:20</a>, and in it is fitted a small case containing a parchment on which is written the exhortation to obedience.<P>(5) Hinge:<P>Hinge (poth, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,50);">1Ki 7:50</a>; tsir, <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',26,14);">Pr 26:14</a>).—Specimens of sill and head sockets of stone have been discovered which suggest the use of the pivot hinge, the elongated swinging stile of the door being let into the sockets at top and bottom. A more advanced form of construction was necessary to this type of door than in the previous instance, and some little skill was required to brace it so that it would hold together. The construction of doors and windows is an interesting question, as it is in these two details that the joinery craft first claimed development. There is no indication, however, of anything of the nature of advancement, and it seems probable that there was none.<P>(6) Lock and key:<P>Lock and key ("lock," man\'ul, <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,3);">Ne 3:3</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',5,5);">So 5:5</a>; "key," maphteach, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',3,25);">Jud 3:25</a>; figurative. <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',22,22);">Isa 22:22</a>; kleis, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,19);">Mt 16:19</a>, etc.).—In later Hellenic times a sort of primitive lock and key appeared, similar to the Arabic type. See Excavations of Gezer, I, 197, and illustration in article <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=KEY">KEY</a>.<P>(7) Threshold:<P>Threshold (caph, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,17);">1Ki 14:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,6);">Eze 40:6</a>ff; miphtan, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',5,4,5);">1Sa 5:4-5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',9,3);">Eze 9:3</a>, etc.).—Next to the corner-stone, the threshold was specially sacred, and in many instances foundation-sacrifices have been found buried under the threshold. In later times, when the Hebrews became weaned of this unholy practice, the rite remained with the substitution of a lamp enclosed between two bowls as a symbol of the life.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GEZER">GEZER</a>.<P>(8) Hearth:<P>Hearth (\'ach, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,22,23);">Jer 36:22-23</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "brazier"; kiyyor).—The references in the Old Testament and the frequent discovery of hearths make it clear that so much provision for heating had been made. It is unlikely, however, that chimneys were provided. The smoke from the wood or charcoal fuel was allowed to find its way through the door and windows and the many interstices occurring in workmanship of the worst possible description. The "chimney" referred to (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,3);">Ho 13:3</a>) is a doubtful translation. The "fire in the brazier" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,22);">Jer 36:22</a> the Revised Version (British and American)) which burned before the king of Judah in his "winter house" was probably of charcoal. The modern natives, during the cold season, huddle around and warm their hands at a tiny glow in much the same way as their ancient predecessors. The use of cow and camel dung for baking-oven (tannur) fires appears to have continued from the earliest time to the present day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',4,15);">Eze 4:15</a>).<P>See also <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HEARTH">HEARTH</a>.<P>(9) Window:<P>Window (thuris, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,9);">Ac 20:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,33);">2Co 11:33</a>).—It would appear that windows were often simple openings in the wall which were furnished with some method of closing, which, it may be conjectured, was somewhat the same as the primitive door previously mentioned. The window of the ark (challon, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,6);">Ge 8:6</a>), the references in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,8);">Ge 26:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,15);">Jos 2:15</a>, and the window from which Jezebel looked (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,30);">2Ki 9:30</a>), were presumably of the casement class. Ahaziah fell through a lattice (cebhakhah) in the same palace, and the same word is used for the "networks" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,41);">1Ki 7:41</a>) "covering the bowls of the capitals," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',2,9);">So 2:9</a>, "through the lattice" (charakkim). It would appear, therefore, that some variety of treatment existed, and that the simple window opening with casement and the opening filled in with a lattice or grill were distinct. Windows were small, and, according to the Mishna, were kept not less than 6 ft. from floor to sill. The lattice was open, without glass filling, and in this connection there is the interesting figurative reference in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,12);">Isa 54:12</a> the King James Version, "windows of agates," translated in the Revised Version (British and American) "pinnacles of rubies." Heaven is spoken of as having "windows" (\'arubbah) for rain (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',7,11);">Ge 7:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,2);">8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',7,2);">2Ki 7:2</a>, etc.).<P>(10) Roof:<P>Roof (gagh; stege).—These were flat. Compare "The beams of our house are cedars, and our rafters are firs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',1,17);">So 1:17</a>). To get over the difficulty of the larger spans, a common practice was to introduce a main beam (qurah) carried on the walls and strengthened by one or more intermediate posts let into stone sockets laid on the floor. Smaller timbers as joists ("rafters," rahit) were spaced out and covered in turn with brushwood; the final covering, being of mud mixed with chopped straw, was beaten and rolled. A tiny stone roller is found on every modern native roof, and is used to roll the mud into greater solidity every year on the advent of the first rains. Similar rollers have been found among the ancient remains throughout the country; see Excavations of Gezer, I, 190; PEFS, Warren\'s letters, 46. "They let him down through the tiles (keramos) with his couch into the midst before Jesus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',5,19);">Lu 5:19</a>) refers to the breaking through of a roof similar to this. The roof ("housetop," gagh; doma) was an important part of every house and was subjected to many uses. It was used for worship (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,12);">2Ki 23:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,13);">Jer 19:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',32,29);">32:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',1,5);">Ze 1:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,9);">Ac 10:9</a>). Absalom spread his tent on the "top of the house" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,22);">2Sa 16:22</a>). In the Feast of the Tabernacles temporary booths (cukkah) were erected on the housetops. The people, as is their habit today, gathered together on the roof as a common meeting-place on high days and holidays (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',16,27);">Jud 16:27</a>). The wild wranglings which can be heard in any modern native village, resulting in vile accusations and exposure of family secrets hurled from the housetops of the conflicting parties, illustrate the passage, "And what ye have spoken in the ear in the inner chambers shall be proclaimed upon the housetops" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,3);">Lu 12:3</a>).<P>2. Houses of More than One Story:<P>(1) Upper Chambers and Stairs:<P>It is certain that there were upper chambers (\'aliyah; huperoon, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,37);">Ac 9:37</a>, etc.) to some of the houses. Ahaziah was fatally injured by falling from the window of his palace, and a somewhat similar fate befell his mother, Jezebel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',1,2);">2Ki 1:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,33);">9:33</a>). The escape of the spies from the house on the wall at Jericho (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',2,15);">Jos 2:15</a>) and that of Paul from Damascus (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,33);">2Co 11:33</a>) give substantial evidence of window openings at a considerable height. Elijah carried the son of the widow of Zarephath "up into the chamber." The Last Supper was held in an upper chamber (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,15);">Mr 14:15</a>). Some sort of stairs (ma\'alah) of stone or wood must have existed, and the lack of the remains of stone steps suggests that they were wood steps, probably in the form of ladders.<P>(2) Palaces and Castles:<P>Palaces and castles (\'armon, birah, hekhal; aule, parembole).—These were part of every city and were more elaborate in plan, raised in all probability to some considerable height. The Canaanite castle discovered by Macalister at Gezer shows a building of enormously thick walls and small rooms. Reisner has unearthed Ahab\'s palace at Samaria, revealing a plan of considerable area. Solomon\'s palace is detailed in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,\'1-\');">1Ki 7</a> (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE,+A1">TEMPLE</A>). In this class may also be included the megalithic fortified residences with the beehive guard towers of an earlier date, described by Dr. Mackenzie (PEF, I) .<P>3. Internal Appearance:<P>Walls were plastered (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,43,48);">Le 14:43, 48</a>), and small fragments of painted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',22,14);">Jer 22:14</a>) plaster discovered from time to time show that some attempt at mural decoration was made, usually in the form of crudely painted line ornament. Walls were recessed here and there into various forms of cupboards (which see) at various levels. The smaller cuttings in the wall were probably for lamps, and in the larger and deeper recesses bedmats may have been kept and garments stored.<P>III. Other Meanings.<P>The word has often the sense of "household," and this term is frequently substituted in the Revised Version (British and American) for "house" of the King James Version (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,3);">Ex 12:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',7,11);">2Ki 7:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',10,5);">10:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',15,5);">15:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,3);">Isa 36:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,11);">1Co 1:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,14);">1Ti 5:14</a>); in certain cases for phrases with "house" the Revised Version (British and American) has "at home". (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,46);">Ac 2:46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,42);">5:42</a>).<P>LITERATURE.<P>Macalister, Excavations at Gezer; PEFS; Sellin, Excavations at Taanach; Schumacher, Excavations at Tell Mutesellim; Bliss, Mound of Many Cities; articles in Dictionaries and Encyclopedias.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE+OF+GOD">HOUSE OF GOD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSEHOLD">HOUSEHOLD</a>`39';
isbe[4462]='House of God`In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',28,17,22);">Ge 28:17, 22</a> = <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BETHEL">BETHEL</a> (which see). In Judges, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Psalms, etc. (beth ha-\'elohim), a designation of the sanctuary = "house of Yahweh" (of the tabernacle, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',18,31);">Jud 18:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',20,18,26);">20:18, 26</a> the King James Version; of the temple, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,11);">1Ch 9:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,5);">24:5</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',5,14);">2Ch 5:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,4);">Ps 42:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,3);">Isa 2:3</a>, etc.; of the 2nd temple, <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',5,8,15);">Ezr 5:8, 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',6,10);">Ne 6:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,11);">13:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,4);">Mt 12:4</a>). Spiritually, in the New Testament, the "house of God" (oikos theou) is the church or community of believers (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',3,15);">1Ti 3:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,21);">Heb 10:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',4,17);">1Pe 4:17</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,9,16,17);">1Co 3:9, 16-17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,5);">1Pe 2:5</a>).``1';
isbe[4463]='House, Father\'s``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FATHER\'S+HOUSE;+FATHERS\'+HOUSE">FATHER\'S HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[4464]='House, Garden``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GARDEN-HOUSE">GARDEN-HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[4465]='Household`hous\'-hold: Three words are usually found in the Bible where the family is indicated. These three are the Hebrew word bayith and the Greek words oikia and oikos. The unit of the national life of Israel, from the very beginning, was found in the family. In the old patriarchal days each family was complete within itself, the oldest living sire being the unquestioned head of the whole, possessed of almost arbitrary powers. The house and the household are practically synonymous. God had called Abraham "that he might command his children and household after him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,19);">Ge 18:19</a>). The Passover-lamb was to be eaten by the "household" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,3);">Ex 12:3</a>). The "households" of the rebels in the camp of Israel shared their doom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,\'31-33\');">Nu 16:31-33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,6);">De 11:6</a>). David\'s household shares his humiliation (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,16);">2Sa 15:16</a>); the children everywhere in the Old Testament are the bearers of the sins of the fathers. Human life is not a conglomerate of individuals; the family is its center and unit.<P>Nor is it different in the New Testament. The curse and the blessing of the apostles are to abide on a house, according to its attitude (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,13);">Mt 10:13</a>). A divided house falls (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,25);">Mr 3:25</a>). The household believes with the head thereof (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,53);">Joh 4:53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,15,34);">Ac 16:15, 34</a>). Thus the households became the nuclei for the early life of the church, e.g. the house of Prisca and Aquila at Rome (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,5);">Ro 16:5</a>), of Stephanas (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,15);">1Co 16:15</a>), of Onesiphorus (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',1,16);">2Ti 1:16</a>), etc. No wonder that the early church made so much of the family life. And in the midst of all our modern, rampant individualism, the family is still the throbbing heart of the church as well as of the nation.``42';
isbe[4466]='Household, Caesar\'s``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CAESAR\'S+HOUSEHOLD">CAESAR\'S HOUSEHOLD</a>`1';
isbe[4467]='Householder`hous\'-hol-der (oikodespotes): The word occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,27,52);">Mt 13:27, 52</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,1);">20:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,33);">21:33</a>, for the master or owner of a "household," i.e. of servants (douloi). The Greek word emphasizes the authority of the master.``1';
isbe[4468]='Housetop`hous\'-top.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`1';
isbe[4469]='How`Represents various Hebrew and Greek words, interrogative, interjectional and relative. Its different uses refer to<P>(1) the manner or way, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',44,34);">Ge 44:34</a>, "How shall I go up to my father?" (\'ekh); <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,28);">Mt 6:28</a>, "how they grow" (pos); <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,35);">1Co 15:35</a>, "How are the dead raised?";<P>(2) degree, extent, frequently, "how great" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',4,3);">Da 4:3</a>, mah; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,19);">Mr 5:19</a>, hosos, "how much"); "how many" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,13);">Mt 27:13</a>, posos); "how much" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,13);">Ac 9:13</a>, hosos); "how much more" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,11);">Mt 7:11</a>, posos; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,30);">1Sa 14:30</a>, \'aph ki); "how oft" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',78,40);">Ps 78:40</a>, kammah; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,21);">Mt 18:21</a>, posakis); "how long" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',7,19);">Job 7:19</a>, kammah; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,17);">Mt 17:17</a>, heos pote), etc.;<P>(3) the reason, wherefore, etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,12);">Mt 18:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,49);">Lu 12:49</a>, tis);<P>(4) means—by what means? (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,4,9);">Joh 3:4, 9</a>, pos);<P>(5) cause (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,34);">Joh 12:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,8);">Ac 2:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,21);">4:21</a>, pos);<P>(6) condition, in what state, etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,55);">Lu 23:55</a>, hos; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,36);">Ac 15:36</a>, pos; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,21);">Eph 6:21</a>, tis); "how" is sometimes used to emphasize a statement or exclamation (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',1,19,25,27);">2Sa 1:19, 25, 27</a>, "How are the mighty fallen!"); "how" is also used for "that" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',30,29);">Ge 30:29</a>, \'eth \'asher, frequently "how that"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',9,29);">Ex 9:29</a>, ki most frequently, in the New Testament, hoti, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,5);">Mt 12:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,12,21);">16:12, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,25);">Ac 7:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',7,1);">Ro 7:1</a>, etc., in the King James Version).<P>The Revised Version (British and American) has "wherefore" for "how" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,29);">Ge 38:29</a>, margin "how"); has "what" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',13,12);">Jud 13:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',12,6);">1Ki 12:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,\'1-\');">Job 13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,26);">1Co 14:26</a>), omits (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',13,5);">2Co 13:5</a>); has "how that" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,22);">1Sa 2:22</a>); "that" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',18,9);">1Ch 18:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,58);">Lu 1:58</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,13);">Ga 4:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,22);">Jas 2:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,2);">Re 2:2</a>); has "that even" for "how that" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,17);">Heb 12:17</a>);" What is this?" for "How is it that?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,2);">Lu 16:2</a>); omits "How is it?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,16);">Mr 2:16</a>, different text); has "Do ye not yet," for "How is it that?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',8,21);">Mr 8:21</a>); "Have ye not yet" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,40);">Mr 4:40</a>, different text); "what" for "how much" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,15);">Lu 19:15</a>, different text); omits "how that" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,22);">Lu 7:22</a>); "then how" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,24);">Jas 2:24</a>); has "cannot" for "How can he" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,20);">1Joh 4:20</a>); omits "How hast thou" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,3);">Job 26:3</a>), "how is" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,41);">Jer 51:41</a>); has "how" for "the fashion which" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,15);">Ge 6:15</a>), for "and" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,1);">Ex 18:1</a>), for "what" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',18,24);">Jud 18:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',4,16);">1Sa 4:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,16);">1Co 7:16</a>), for "why" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,28);">Job 19:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,1);">31:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,33);">Jer 2:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,14);">Ga 2:14</a>), for "when" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',37,15);">Job 37:15</a>), for "for" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,4);">Ps 42:4</a>), for "but God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,12);">Pr 21:12</a>), for "whereunto" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,30);">Mr 4:30</a>); for "by what means" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,36);">Lu 8:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,21);">Joh 9:21</a>), for "how greatly" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,8);">Php 1:8</a>); "how that" for "because" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',6,9);">Eze 6:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,5);">1Th 1:5</a>), for "and how" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,20);">Ac 20:20</a>); "know how to" for "can" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,3);">Mt 16:3</a>); "how" for "by whom" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,2,5);">Am 7:2, 5</a>).<P>"How" in compounds gives us howbeit (how be it). It is the translation of \'ulam, "but," "truly," "yet" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',18,29);">Jud 18:29</a>); of \'akh, "certainly," "only" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',8,9);">1Sa 8:9</a>); of \'ephes, "moreover," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',12,14);">2Sa 12:14</a>); of ken, "so," "thus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',32,31);">2Ch 32:31</a>); of rak, "only," "surely" "nevertheless" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',11,13);">1Ki 11:13</a>); of alla, "but," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,27);">Joh 7:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,48);">Ac 7:48</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',8,7);">1Co 8:7</a>, etc.); of de, "but," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,23);">Joh 6:23</a>); of mentoi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,13);">Joh 7:13</a> the King James Version); many other instances.<P>For "howbeit," the Revised Version (British and American) has frequently "but" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',12,13);">2Ki 12:13</a>, etc.), "and" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',21,20);">2Ch 21:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',5,19);">Mr 5:19</a>), "surely" (ERV) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,24);">Job 30:24</a>), "now" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,13);">Joh 11:13</a>), "yet" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,21);">2Co 11:21</a>), "nay, did" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,16);">Heb 3:16</a>); omits (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,21);">Mt 17:21</a>, different text); it has "howbeit" for "but" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',12,3);">2Ki 12:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,27);">Lu 19:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,34);">Joh 5:34</a>, etc.), for "also" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',23,27,39);">Le 23:27, 39</a>), for "nevertheless" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,28);">Nu 13:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,43);">1Ki 22:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,36);">Mr 14:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,33);">Lu 13:33</a> the English Revised Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,8);">Lu 18:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',2,19);">2Ti 2:19</a>), for "notwithstanding" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',22,19);">Jos 22:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,20);">Lu 10:20</a> the English Revised Version, "nevertheless" the American Standard Revised Version; (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,14);">Php 4:14</a>), for "nay" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',7,7);">Ro 7:7</a>).<P>Howsoever (in what manner soever, although, however) is the translation of kol \'asher, "all that which," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',3,7);">Ze 3:7</a>, "howsoever I punished them," the Revised Version (British and American) "according to all that I have appointed concerning her," margin "howsoever I have punished her"; the English Revised Version omits "have"); of raq, "only," "surely," "nevertheless" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',19,20);">Jud 19:20</a>); of yehi-mah, "let be what" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',18,22,23);">2Sa 18:22-23</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "but come what may"); in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',24,3);">2Sa 24:3</a> "how" and "soever" are separated (kahem), "how many soever they may be," literally, "as they and as they."``185';
isbe[4470]='Hozai`ho\'-za-i (chozay, or as it stands at the close of the verse in question, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,19);">2Ch 33:19</a>, chozay; Septuagint ton horonton; Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) "Hozai"; the King James Version the seers; the King James Version margin "Hosai"; the American Standard Revised Version "Hozia," the American Revised Version margin "the seers." Septuagint not improbably reads ha-chozim, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,18);">2Ch 33:18</a>; an easy error, since there we find we-dhibhere ha-chozim, "the words of the seers," and here dibhere chozay, "the words of Hozai." Kittel, following Budde, conjectures as the original reading chozayw, "his (Manasseh\'s) seers"): A historiographer of Manasseh, king of Judah. Thought by many of the Jews, incorrectly, to be the prophet Isaiah, who, as we learn from <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',26,22);">2Ch 26:22</a>, was historiographer of a preceding king, Uzziah. This "History of Hozai" has not come down to us. The prayer of Manasseh, mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,12);">33:12</A>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,18);">18</A>f and included in this history, suggested the apocryphal book, "The Prayer of Manasses," written, probably, in the 1st century BC.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCRYPHA">APOCRYPHA</a>`108';
isbe[4471]='Huckster`huk\'-ster: A retailer of small wares, provisions, or the like; a peddler. "A huckster shall not be acquitted of sin" (Sirach 26:29). Neither a merchant nor a huckster is without sin.``1';
isbe[4472]='Hukkok`huk\'-ok (chuqqoq): A town on the border of Naphtali named with Aznoth-tabor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,34);">Jos 19:34</a>). It is usually identified with the village of yaquq, which stands on the west of Wady el-\'Amud, to the northwest of Gennesaret, about 4 miles from the sea. This would fall on the boundary of Zebulun and Naphtali, between Tabor and Hannathon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,14);">Jos 19:14</a>). The identification may be correct; but it seems too far from Tabor.``1';
isbe[4473]='Hukok`hu\'-kok.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HELKATH">HELKATH</a>`1';
isbe[4474]='Hul`hul (chul): The name of one of the "sons of Aram" in the list of nations descended from Noah, but a people of uncertain identity and location (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,23);">Ge 10:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,17);">1Ch 1:17</a>).``1';
isbe[4475]='Huldah`hul\'-da (chuldah, "weasel"; Holda): A prophetess who lived in Jerusalem during the reign of Josiah. She was the wife of Shallum, keeper of the wardrobe, and resided in the "Mishneh" or second part or quarter of Jerusalem (location unknown). Cheyne says it should read, "She was sitting in the upper part of the gate of the Old City," i.e. in a public central place ready to receive any who wished to inquire of Yahweh. He gives no reason for such a change of text. The standing and reputation of Huldah in the city are attested by the fact that she was consulted when the Book of the Law was discovered. The king, high priest, counselors, etc., appealed to her rather than to Jeremiah, and her word was accepted by all as the word of Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',22,\'14-20\');">2Ki 22:14-20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',34,\'22-29\');">2Ch 34:22-29</a>)``146';
isbe[4476]='Human Sacrifice``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE,+HUMAN">SACRIFICE, HUMAN</a>`1';
isbe[4477]='Humiliation of Christ`hu-mil-i-a\'-shun (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,33);">Ac 8:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,8);">Php 2:8</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KENOSIS">KENOSIS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PERSON+OF+CHRIST,+1-3">PERSON OF CHRIST</a>`1';
isbe[4478]='Humility`hu-mil\'-i-ti ([\'anawah]; tapeinophrosune):<P>(1) The noun occurs in the Old Testament only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,33);">Pr 15:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',18,12);">18:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',22,4);">22:4</a>, but the adjective "humble" appears frequently as the translation of \'ani, \'anaw, shaphal, meaning also "poor," "afflicted"; the verb, as the translation of \'anah, "to afflict," "to humble," and of kana\', "to be or become humbled"; tsana\', "to be lowly," occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',6,8);">Mic 6:8</a>. For "humble" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',9,12);">Ps 9:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,12);">10:12</a>) the Revised Version (British and American) has "poor"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,17);">Ps 10:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',34,2);">34:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',69,32);">69:32</a>, "meek"; for "humbled" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,13);">Ps 35:13</a>), "afflicted" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,11);">Isa 2:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',10,33);">10:33</a>), "brought low"; for "He humbleth himself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,9);">Isa 2:9</a>) "is brought low," margin "humbleth himself"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,10);">Ps 10:10</a>, "boweth down"; tapeinophrosune is translated "humility" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',2,18,23);">Col 2:18, 23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',5,5);">1Pe 5:5</a>); in several other places it is translated "lowliness" and "lowliness of mind"; tapeinos is translated "humble" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',4,6);">Jas 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',5,5);">1Pe 5:5</a>; elsewhere "lowly," etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,8);">1Pe 3:8</a>, tapeinophron), the Revised Version (British and American) "humble-minded"; tapeinoo, "to humble," occurs frequently (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,4);">Mt 18:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,12);">23:12</a>, etc.); tapeinosis is "humiliation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,33);">Ac 8:33</a>); for "vile body" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,21);">Php 3:21</a>) the Revised Version (British and American) gives "body of our humiliation."<P>(2) (a) In the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament, humility is an essential characteristic of true piety, or of the man who is right with God. God humbles men in order to bring them to Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,2,3);">De 8:2-3</a>, etc.), and it is when men humble themselves before Him that they are accepted (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,29);">1Ki 21:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',7,14);">2Ch 7:14</a>, etc.); to "walk humbly with thy God" completes the Divine requirements (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',6,8);">Mic 6:8</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',18,35);">Ps 18:35</a> (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',22,36);">2Sa 22:36</a>) the quality is ascribed to God Himself, "Thy gentleness (or condescension) hath made me great." Of "him that hath his seat on high" it is said, (Hebrew) "humbleth (shaphel) himself to behold the things that are in heaven and in the earth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',113,6);">Ps 113:6</a>). It is in the humble heart that "the high and lofty One,...whose name is Holy" dwells (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',57,15);">Isa 57:15</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,2);">Isa 66:2</a>).<P>(b) The word tapeinophrosune is not found in classical Greek (Lightfoot); in the New Testament (with the exception of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',5,5);">1Pe 5:5</a>) it is Pauline. In Greek pre-Christian writers tapeinos is, with a few exceptions in Plato and Platonic writers, used in a bad or inferior sense—as denoting something evil or unworthy. The prominence it gained in Christian thought indicates the new conception of man in relation to God, to himself, and to his fellows, which is due to Christianity. It by no means implies slavishness or servility; nor is it inconsistent with a right estimate of oneself, one\'s gifts and calling of God, or with proper self-assertion when called for. But the habitual frame of mind of a child of God is that of one who feels not only that he owes all his natural gifts, etc., to God, but that he has been the object of undeserved redeeming love, and who regards himself as being not his own, but God\'s in Christ. He cannot exalt himself, for he knows that he has nothing of himself. The humble mind is thus at the root of all other graces and virtues. Self-exaltation spoils everything. There can be no real love without humility. "Love," said Paul, "vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',13,4);">1Co 13:4</a>). As Augustine said, humility is first, second and third in Christianity.<P>(c) Jesus not only strongly impressed His disciples with the need of humility, but was in Himself its supreme example. He described Himself as "meek and lowly (tapeinos) in heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,29);">Mt 11:29</a>). The first of the Beatitudes was to "the poor in spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,3);">Mt 5:3</a>), and it was "the meek" who should "inherit the earth. Humility is the way to true greatness: he who should "humble himself as this little child" should be "the greatest in the kingdom of heaven"; "Whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled; and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,4);">Mt 18:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,12);">23:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,11);">Lu 14:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,14);">18:14</a>). To the humble mind truth is revealed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,25);">Mt 11:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,21);">Lu 10:21</a>). Jesus set a touching example of humility in His washing His disciples\' feet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,\'1-17\');">Joh 13:1-17</a>).<P>(d) Paul, therefore, makes an earnest appeal to Christians (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,\'1-11\');">Php 2:1-11</a>) that they should cherish and manifest the Spirit of their Lord\'s humility—"in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself," and adduces the supreme example of the self-emptying (kenosis) of Christ: "Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus," etc. The rendering of heauton ekenosen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,7);">Php 2:7</a> the King James Version) by "he humbled himself" has given rise to the designation of the Incarnation as "the Humiliation of Christ."<P>(e) There is a false humility which Paul warns against, a self-sought, "voluntary humility" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',2,18,23);">Col 2:18, 23</a>). This still exists in many forms, and has to be guarded against. It is not genuine humility when we humble ourselves with the feeling that we are greater than others, but only when we do not think of self at all. It is not alone the sense of sin that should create the humble spirit: Jesus had no sin. It belongs not merely to the creature, but even to a son in relation to God. There may be much self-satisfaction where sinfulness is confessed. We may be proud of our humility. It is necessary also always to beware of "the pride that apes humility."``185';
isbe[4479]='Humps`humps: Appears in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,6);">Isa 30:6</a> in the American Standard Revised Version for "bunches" in the King James Version.``1';
isbe[4480]='Humtah`hum\'-ta (chumtah): An unidentified place mentioned between Aphekah and Hebron in the mountain of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,54);">Jos 15:54</a>).``1';
isbe[4481]='Hundred`hun\'-dred (me\'-ah; hekaton).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NUMBER">NUMBER</a>`1';
isbe[4482]='Hunger`hun\'-ger (ra\'abh; limos (subs.), peinao (vb.):<P>(1) The desire for food, a physiological sensation associated with emptiness of the stomach, and dependent on some state of the mucous membrane;<P>(2) starvation as the effect of want of food, as <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',16,3);">Ex 16:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,10);">Isa 49:10</a>;<P>(3) to feel the craving for food as <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,3);">De 8:3</a>; when used to indicate the condition due to general scarcity of food as <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',38,9);">Jer 38:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',34,29);">Eze 34:29</a> it is replaced in the Revised Version (British and American) by "famine." The word is used to express the poverty which follows idleness and sloth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',19,15);">Pr 19:15</a>). The absence of this condition is given as one of the characteristics of the future state of happiness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,10);">Isa 49:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',34,29);">Eze 34:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,16);">Re 7:16</a>). Metaphorically the passionate striving for moral and spiritual rectitude is called hungering and thirsting after righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,6);">Mt 5:6</a>); and the satisfaction of the soul which receives Christ is described as a state in which "he shall not hunger" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,35);">Joh 6:35</a>).<P>On two occasions it is said of our Lord that He hungered (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,18);">Mt 21:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,2);">Lu 4:2</a>); 9 times the old English expression "an hungred" is used, the "an" being a prefix which indicates that the condition is being continued (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,1,3);">Mt 12:1, 3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,35,37,42,44);">25:35, 37, 42, 44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,25);">Mr 2:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,3);">Lu 6:3</a> the King James Version). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,2);">Mt 4:2</a> the King James Version, "an hungred" has been changed to "hungered" in the Revised Version (British and American). "Hard bestead and hungry" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',8,21);">Isa 8:21</a> means bested (that is, placed) in a condition of hardship, "sore distressed," the American Standard Revised Version. The word occurs in Spenser, "Thus ill bestedd and fearful more of shame" (I, i, 24). The reference of the aggravation of the sensation of hunger when one who is starving awakes from a dream of food (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,8);">Isa 29:8</a>) is graphically illustrated by the experience of the antarctic voyager (Shackleton, Heart of the Antarctic, II, 9).``107';
isbe[4483]='Hunting`hunt\'-ing (tsayidh): The hunting of wild animals for sport, or for the defense of men and flocks, or for food, was common in Western Asia and Egypt, especially in early times. Some of the Egyptian and Assyrian kings were great hunters in the first sense, for example Amenhotep III (1411-1375 BC) "a lion-hunting and bull-baiting Pharaoh," who boasted of having slain 76 bulls in the course of one expedition, and of having killed at one time or other 102 lions; and the Assyrian conqueror, Tiglath-pileser I (circa 1100 BC), who claimed 4 wild bulls, 14 elephants and 920 lions as the trophies of his skill and courage.<P>1. Nimrod and His Like:<P>The Biblical prototype of these heroes of war and the chase is Nimrod, "a mighty hunter before Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,9);">Ge 10:9</a>), that is perhaps "a hunter who had no equal," a figure not yet clearly identifiable with any historical or mythical character in the Assyro-Bab monuments, but possibly the Gilgamesh of the great epic, who may be the hero represented on seals and reliefs as victorious over the lion (Skinner, "Gen," ICC, 208). We are reminded also of Samson\'s exploit at Timnah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',14,5);">Jud 14:5</a>f), but this, like David\'s encounter with the lion and the bear (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,34);">1Sa 17:34</a>f) and Benaiah\'s struggle with a lion in a pit on a snowy day (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,20);">2Sa 23:20</a>), was an occasional incident and scarcely comes under the category of hunting. There is no evidence that hunting for sport was ever practiced by the kings of Judah and Israel. Not until the time of Herod the Great, who had a hunting establishment and was a great hunter of boars, stags, and wild asses (Josephus, BJ, I, xxi, 13), mastering as many as 40 beasts in one day, do we find a ruler of Palestine indulging in this pastime.<P>2. Hunting in the Old Testament:<P>Hunting, however, for the two other purposes mentioned above was probably as frequent among the Israelites, even after they had ceased to be nomads, as among their neighbors. We know indeed of only two personal examples, both in the patriarchal period and both outside the direct line of Israelite descent: Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,27);">Ge 25:27</a>) and Ishmael (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,20);">Ge 21:20</a>); but there are several references and many figurative allusions to the pursuit and its methods and instruments. Hunting (inclusive of following) is mentioned in the Pentateuch in the regulation about pouring out the blood and covering it with dust (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',17,13);">Le 17:13</a>); and there is a general reference in the proverb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',12,27);">Pr 12:27</a>): "The slothful man roasteth not that which he took in hunting." The hunting of the lion is assumed in Ezekiel\'s allegory of the lioness and her two whelps (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,\'1-9\');">Eze 19:1-9</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',10,16);">Job 10:16</a>); of the antelope or oryx (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,5);">De 14:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,20);">Isa 51:20</a>); of the roe (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',6,5);">Pr 6:5</a>); of the partridge in the mountains (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',26,20);">1Sa 26:20</a>), and of birds in general in many passages. Hunting is probably implied in the statement about the provision of harts, gazelles and roebucks for Solomon\'s kitchen (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,23);">1Ki 4:23</a>), and to some extent in the reference to the den of lions in Babylon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,7);">Da 6:7</a>).<P>3. Methods of Hunters:<P>The weapons most frequently employed by hunters seem to have been bows and arrows. Isaac (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',27,3);">Ge 27:3</a>) commands Esau to take his bow and quiver and procure him venison or game (compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,24);">Isa 7:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,28);">Job 41:28</a>). This method is amply illustrated by the monuments. Ashur-nazir-pal lII (885-860 BC) and Darius (circa 500 BC), for example, are depicted shooting at lions from the chariot. Use was also made of the sword, the spear, the dart or javelin, the sling and the club (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,26,28);">Job 41:26, 28</a>f; where the application of these weapons to hunting is implied). The larger animals were sometimes caught in a pit. The classical reference is in Ezekiel\'s allegory, "He was taken in their pit" (shachath, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,4,8);">Eze 19:4, 8</a>; compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',24,17);">Isa 24:17</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,43);">Jer 48:43</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,7);">Ps 35:7</a>, etc.). The details of this mode of capture as practiced at the present day, and probably in ancient times, are described by Tristram in his Natural History of the Bible (118f). A more elaborate method is described by Maspero in Lectures historiques (285). To make the pit-capture more effective, nets were also employed: "They spread their net over him" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,8);">Eze 19:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,7);">Ps 35:7</a>). When caught, the lion was sometimes placed in a large wooden cage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,9);">Eze 19:9</a>, cughar, the Assyrian shigaru; for the word and the thing compare SBOT, "Ezk," English, 132; Heb, 71). The lion (or any other large animal) was led about by a ring or hook (chach) inserted in the jaws or nose (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,28);">2Ki 19:28</a> equals <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,29);">Isa 37:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',19,4,9);">Eze 19:4, 9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',29,4);">29:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',38,4);">38:4</a>). From wild animals the brutal Assyrians transferred the custom to their human captives, as the Israelites were well aware (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',33,11);">2Ch 33:11</a> the Revised Version margin, Hebrew choach; for monumental illustrations compare SBOT, "Ezkekiel," English, 132f). Nets were also used for other animals such as the oryx or antelope (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,20);">Isa 51:20</a>). The Egyptian and Assyrian monuments show that dogs were employed in hunting in the ancient East, and it is not improbable that they were put to this service by the Hebrews also, but there is no clear Biblical evidence, as "greyhound" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,31);">Pr 30:31</a> is a questionable rendering. Josephus indeed (Ant., IV, viii, 9) mentions the hunting dog in a law ascribed to Moses, but the value of the allusion is uncertain.<P>4. Fowlers and Their Snares:<P>The hunting of birds or fowling is so often referred or alluded to that it must have been very widely practiced (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',91,3);">Ps 91:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',124,7);">124:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',1,17);">Pr 1:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',6,5);">6:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',9,12);">Ec 9:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',3,5);">Am 3:5</a>, etc.). The only bird specifically mentioned is the partridge, said to be hunted on the mountains (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',26,20);">1Sa 26:20</a>). The method of hunting is supposed by Tristram (N H B, 225) to be that still prevalent—continual pursuit until the creature is struck down by sticks thrown along the ground—but the interpretation is uncertain. Birds were generally caught by snares or traps. Two passages are peculiarly instructive on this point: <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',18,\'8-10\');">Job 18:8-10</a>, where six words are used for such contrivances, represented respectively by "net," "toils," "gin," "snare," "noose," "trap "; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',3,5);">Am 3:5</a>, which is important enough to be cited in full: "Can a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, where no gin is set for him? shall a snare spring up from the ground, and have taken nothing at all?" The word for "snare" in this passage (pach) probably describes a net laid on the ground, perhaps a circular net like the Egyptian bird-trap represented in the Cambridge Bible, "Amos," 157. The word for "gin," usually ira in the Revised Version (British and American) "snare" (moqesh, literally, "fowling instrument") is supposed to refer either to the bait (ibid., 158) or to the catch connected with it which causes the net to collapse (Siegfried). For a full account of Egyptian modes of following which probably illustrate ancient Palestinian methods, compare Wilkinson, Popular Account, II, 178-83. The two words (moqesh and pach) mentioned above are used figuratively in many Old Testament passages, the former repeatedly of the deadly influence of Canaanitish idolatry on Israel, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,33);">Ex 23:33</a>, "For if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,12);">Ex 34:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',7,16);">De 7:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',23,13);">Jos 23:13</a>). The use of the hawk in fowling, which is attested for Northern Syria by a bas-relief found in 1908 at Sakje-Geuzi, is not mentioned in the Old Testament, but there may perhaps be an allusion in Apocrypha (Baruch 3:17, "they that had their pastime with the fowls of the air"). A reference to the use of decoys has been found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',5,27);">Jer 5:27</a>, "a cage...full of birds," but that is a doubtful interpretation, and in the Greek of Sirach 11:30, "As a decoy partridge in a cage, so is the heart of a proud man," but the Hebrew text of the latter is less explicit.<P>See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=FOWLER">FOWLER</a>.<P>5. Allusions in the New Testament:<P>The New Testament has a few figurative allusions to hunting. The words for "catch" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,13);">Mr 12:13</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,54);">Lu 11:54</a> (agreuo and thereuo) mean literally, "hunt." The verb "ensnare" (pagideuo) occurs in the Gospels (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,15);">Mt 22:15</a>), and the noun "snare" (pagis) is met with in 5 passages (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,34);">Lu 21:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,9);">Ro 11:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',3,7);">1Ti 3:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,9);">6:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',2,26);">2Ti 2:26</a>). Another word for "snare" (brochos), which means literally, "noose" (Revised Version margin), is used in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,35);">1Co 7:35</a>. The words for "things that cause stumbling" and "stumble" (skandalon and skandalizo) may possibly conceal in some passages an allusion to a hunter\'s trap or snare. Skandalon is closely allied to skandalethron, "the stick in a trap on which the bait is placed," and is used in Septuagint for moqesh. The abundant use of imagery taken from hunting in the Bible is remarkable, in view of the comparative rarity of literal references.<P>LITERATURE.<P>In addition to the works cited in the course of the article, the article "Hunting" in DB2, HDB large and small, EB, Jewish Encyclopedia; and "Jagd" in German Bible Diets. of Guthe, Riehm2, and Wiener, and in RE3.``162';
isbe[4484]='Hupham`hu\'-fam (chupham, "coast-inhabitant"): One of Benjamin\'s sons and head of the Huphamite family (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,39);">Nu 26:39</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HUPPIM">HUPPIM</a>`1';
isbe[4485]='Huppah`hup\'-a (chuppah, "protection"): The priest in charge of the 13th course as prescribed under David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,13);">1Ch 24:13</a>).``1';
isbe[4486]='Huppim`hup\'-im (chuppim, "coast-people"): Probably a variant form of <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HUPHAM">HUPHAM</a> (which see). From the only mention made of him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,21);">Ge 46:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,12,15);">1Ch 7:12, 15</a>), his direct descent is difficult to establish.``1';
isbe[4487]='Hur`hur (chur):<P>(1) A prominent official in Israel. With Aaron he held up Moses\' hands during the battle against the Amalekites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',17,10,12);">Ex 17:10, 12</a>) and assisted him as judicial head of the people during Moses\' stay in the mount (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',24,14);">Ex 24:14</a>).<P>(2) Grandfather of Bezalel, the head artificer in the construction of the Tabernacle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',31,2);">Ex 31:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,30);">35:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',38,22);">38:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',1,5);">2Ch 1:5</a>). He is here assigned to the tribe of Judah, and in 1Ch is connected with the same by descent through Caleb (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,19,20,50);">2:19,20,50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,1,4);">4:1,4</a>). Josephus (Ant., III, ii, 4; vi, 1) makes him identical with (1) and the husband of Miriam.<P>(3) One of the five kings of Midian slain along with Balaam when Israel avenged the "matter of Peor" upon this people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,8);">Nu 31:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,1,2,16);">Nu 31:1-2, 16</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',13,21);">Jos 13:21</a> these kings are spoken of as "chiefs (nesi\'im) of Midian" and "princes (necikhim) of Sihon," king of the Amorites.<P>(4) According to <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,8);">1Ki 4:8</a> the King James Version, the father of one of Solomon\'s twelve officers who provided food for the king\'s household, and whose district was the hill country of Ephraim. Here the Revised Version (British and American) has "Ben-hur," taking the Hebrew ben, "son of," as part of the proper name; and the same is true in reference to the names of four others of these officers (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,9,10,11,13);">1Ki 4:9, 10-11, 13</a>).<P>(5) Father of Rephaiah, who was one of the builders of the wall under Nehemiah, and ruler of half the district of Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,9);">Ne 3:9</a>).``44';
isbe[4488]='Hurai`hu\'-ri, hu\'-ra-i, hu-ra\'-i (churay, "linen-weaver"): One of David\'s "mighty men" mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,32);">1Ch 11:32</a> as of the brooks of Gaash, i.e. from Mt. Gash. In the parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,30);">2Sa 23:30</a>, the orthography is Hiddai.``1';
isbe[4489]='Huram`hu\'-ram (churam, "noble-born"):<P>(1) Grandson of Benjamin (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,5);">1Ch 8:5</a>).<P>(2) King of Tyre in alliance with David and Solomon. So named in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',2,3,11,12);">2Ch 2:3, 11-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',8,2);">8:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',9,10,21);">9:10, 21</a>, but elsewhere written <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HIRAM">HIRAM</a> (which see).<P>(3) The Tyrian artisan who is so named in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',2,13);">2Ch 2:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,11,16);">4:11, 16</a>, but elsewhere called "Hiram."``1';
isbe[4490]='Huri`hu\'-ri (churi, "linen weaver"): One of the immediate descendants of Gad, and father of Abihail, a chief man of his family (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,14);">1Ch 5:14</a>).``1';
isbe[4491]='Hurt`hurt: The term (noun and verb) represents a large number of Hebrew words, of which the chief are ra\' (verb ra\'a\'), "evil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,29);">Ge 26:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',24,9);">1Sa 24:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,4);">Ps 35:4</a>, etc.), and shebher or shebher (from shabhar), "a fracture" or "breaking" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',6,14);">Jer 6:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',8,11,21);">8:11, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',10,19);">10:19</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,10,14);">Ex 22:10, 14</a>). In Greek a principal verb is adikeo, "to do injustice" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,19);">Lu 10:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,11);">Re 2:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',6,6);">6:6</a>, etc.); once the word "hurt" is used in the King James Version (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,10);">Ac 27:10</a>, story of Paul\'s shipwreck) for hubris, "injury" (thus the Revised Version (British and American)). In the Revised Version (British and American) "hurt" sometimes takes the place of other words in the King James Version, as "sick" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,35);">Pr 23:35</a>), "breach" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,26);">Isa 30:26</a>), "bruise" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',30,12);">Jer 30:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Nah\',3,19);">Na 3:19</a>); sometimes, on the other hand, the word in the King James Version is exchanged in the Revised Version (British and American) for "evil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',24,20);">Jos 24:20</a>), "harm" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,10);">Ac 18:10</a>), or, as above, "injury" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,10);">Ac 27:10</a>). These references sufficiently show the meaning of the word—harm, bruise, breaking, etc. In Jeremiah (ut supra) the word is used figuratively for moral disease or corruption.``132';
isbe[4492]='Husband`huz\'-band (\'ish; aner): In the Hebrew household the husband and father was the chief personage of an institution which was regarded as more than a social organism, inasmuch as the family in primitive Semitic society had a distinctively religious character and significance. It was through it that the cult of the household and tribal deities was practiced and perpetuated. The house-father, by virtue of being the family head, was priest of the household, and as such, responsible for the religious life of the family and the maintenance of the family altar. As priest he offered sacrifices to the family gods, as at first, before the centralization of worship, he did to Yahweh as the tribal or national Deity. We see this reflected in the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and in the Book of Job. This goes far to explain such records as we have in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,53);">Ge 31:53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',32,9);">32:9</a>, and the exceptional reverence that was paid the paternal sepulchers (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',20,6);">1Sa 20:6</a>). Abraham was regarded as being the father of a nation. It was customary, it would seem, to assign a "father" to every known tribe and nation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,\'1-\');">Ge 10</a>). So the family came to play an important and constructive part in Hebrew thought and life, forming the base upon which the social structure was built, merging gradually into the wider organism of the clan or tribe, and vitally affecting at last the political and religious life of the nation itself.<P>The husband from the first had supreme authority over his wife, or wives, and children. In his own domain his rule was well-nigh absolute. The wife, or wives, looked up to him as their lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,12);">Ge 18:12</a>). He was chief (compare Arabic sheik), and to dishonor him was a crime to be punished by death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,15,17);">Ex 21:15, 17</a>). He was permitted to divorce his wife with little reason, and divorces were all too common (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',22,13,19,28,29);">De 22:13, 19, 28-29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',50,1);">Isa 50:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',3,8);">Jer 3:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',5,8);">5:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',2,16);">Mal 2:16</a>, etc.). The wife seems to have had no redress if wronged by him. Absolute faithfulness, though required of the wife, was apparently not expected or exacted of the husband, so long as he did not violate the rights of another husband. In general among Eastern people women were lightly esteemed, as in the Japhetic nations they came to be. Plato counted a state "disorganized" "where slaves are disobedient to their masters, and wives are on equality with their husbands." "Is there a human being," asks Socrates, "with whom you talk less than with your wife?" But from the first, among the Hebrews the ideal husband trained his household in the way they should go religiously, as well as instructed them in the traditions of the family, the tribe, and the nation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,19);">Ge 18:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,26);">Ex 12:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',13,8);">13:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,7);">De 6:7</a>, etc.). It was due to this, in part at least, that, in spite of the discords and evils incident to polygamy, the Hebrew household was nursery of virtue and piety to an unusual degree, and became a genuine anticipation of the ideal realized later in the Christian home (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,2);">1Co 7:2</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,25);">Eph 5:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,7);">1Pe 3:7</a>).<P>Used figuratively of the relation (1) between Yahweh and His people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,5);">Isa 54:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',3,14);">Jer 3:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,19);">Ho 2:19</a>f); (2) between Christ and His church (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,15);">Mt 9:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,2);">2Co 11:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,25);">Eph 5:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',19,7);">Re 19:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,2);">21:2</a>).``47';
isbe[4493]='Husband\'s Brother`(yabham, "brother-in-law"; epigambreuo; Late Latin levir): He was required (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',25,\'5-10\');">De 25:5-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,24);">Mt 22:24</a>) "to perform the duty of a husband\'s brother" (yibbemah); that is, if his brother, living with him on the paternal estate, died without male issue, he should take the widow to wife, and "raise up seed unto his brother," the firstborn of the new marriage inheriting the deceased brother\'s estate. Refusal of the duty was possible, but entailed public ceremonial disgrace and lasting reproach. This provision for a specific case modified the general law which forbade the marriage of a sister-in-law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',18,16,18);">Le 18:16, 18</a>). It was a patriarchal custom (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,\'1-\');">Ge 38</a>; Judah and Tamar), and is alluded to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',1,\'11-13\');">Ru 1:11-13</a>. A related custom is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',4,1);">Ru 4:1</a>, Boaz playing; however, the part, not of levir ("brother-in-law"), but of go\'el ("redeemer"). It was at least theoretically in force in our Lord\'s time (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,\'23-28\');">Mt 22:23-28</a>; the question of the Sadducees concerning the resurrection).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FAMILY">FAMILY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MARRIAGE">MARRIAGE</a>`31';
isbe[4494]='Husbandman; Husbandry`huz\'-band-man, huz\'-band-ri: Husbandman, originally a "householder" or "master of the house," is now limited in its meaning to "farmer" or "tiller of the soil." In this sense it is the correct translation of the various Biblical words: ish \'adahamah, literally, "man of the soil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',9,20);">Ge 9:20</a>); \'ikkar, literally, "digger," "a farmer" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',26,10);">2Ch 26:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,24);">Jer 31:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,23);">51:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,16);">Am 5:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,11);">Joe 1:11</a>); gubh, "to dig" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,12);">2Ki 25:12</a>); yaghabh, "to dig" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,16);">Jer 52:16</a>); georgos, "cultivator" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,33);">Mt 21:33</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,1);">Joh 15:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,7);">Jas 5:7</a>).<P>It is a common practice in Palestine and Syria today for a rich man to own lands in many different parts of the country. He sets farmers over these different tracts who, with the helpers, do the plowing, planting, reaping, etc.; or he lets out his lands to farmers who pay him an annual rental or return to him a certain percentage of the crop. Much of the plain of Esdraelon, for example, was until recently owned by Beirut proprietors and farmed in this way. The writer while riding on the plain near ancient Dan, was surprised to overtake an acquaintance from Beirut (3 days\' journey away), who had just dismounted at one of his farms to inspect it and to receive the annual account of his farmer. The pride with which the husbandman pointed out the abundant harvest will not be forgotten. All the difficulties of the owner with his husbandmen described by Jesus are often repeated today.<P>Figurative: Jesus said "I am the true vine, and my father is the husbandman" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,1);">Joh 15:1</a>). He sows, cultivates, prunes and expects fruits from His church. In the parable of the Householder (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,33);">Mt 21:33</a>), the wicked husbandmen were the Jews. The church is referred to as "God\'s husbandry" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,9);">1Co 3:9</a> (margin "tilled land").`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AGRICULTURE">AGRICULTURE</a>`133';
isbe[4495]='Hushah`hu\'-sha (chushah, "haste"): Mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,4);">1Ch 4:4</a> as probably an individual, a Judahite, or a family name; but may possibly be a place.``1';
isbe[4496]='Hushai`hut\'-shi, hus\'-sha-i (chushay, Chousei; Josephus, Chousi): An Archite, native of Archi or Erech(?), west of Bethel on the northern border of Benjamin and southern border of Joseph (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',16,2);">Jos 16:2</a>). Hushai was one of David\'s most faithful and wise counselors. When David was fleeing from Jerusalem and Absalom, Hushai met him, having his coat rent and earth on his head. The king persuaded him to return to Jerusalem, feign submission to Absalom, and try to defeat the counsel of Ahithophel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,32);">2Sa 15:32</a>f). Whatever Absalom decided on, Hushai was to send word to David through two young men, sons of the priests Zadok and Abiathar (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,\'34-36\');">2Sa 15:34-36</a>). Hushai obeyed, and succeeded in persuading Absalom to adopt his counsel rather than that of Ahithophel (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,\'16-\');">2Sa 16:16</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',17,\'1-14\');">17:14</a>). He sent word to David of the nature of Ahithophel\'s counsel, and the king made good his escape that night across the Jordan. The result was the suicide of Ahithophel and the ultimate defeat and death of Absalom.``146';
isbe[4497]='Husham`hu\'-sham (chusham, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,34);">Ge 36:34</a>; chusham, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,\'45-46\');">1Ch 1:45-46</a>, "alert"): According to the former reference, Husham was one of the kings of Edom, and according to the latter he was "of the land of the Temanites" and (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,35);">1Ch 1:35</a>f) descended from Esau.``1';
isbe[4498]='Hushathite`hu\'-shath-it, (chushathi, "a dweller in Hushah"?): The patronymic given in two forms, but probably of the same man, Sibbeccai, one of David\'s thirty heroes (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',21,18);">2Sa 21:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,29);">1Ch 11:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',20,4);">20:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,11);">27:11</a>), or Mebunnai as named in the parallel passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,27);">2Sa 23:27</a>).``1';
isbe[4499]='Hushim`hu\'-shim (chusim, "hasters”):<P>(1) Family name of the children of Dan (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,23);">Ge 46:23</a>), but of form "Shuham" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,42);">Nu 26:42</a>.<P>(2) The sons of Aher of the lineage of Benjamin (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,12);">1Ch 7:12</a>).<P>(3) One of the wives of Shaharaim, of the family of Benjamin (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,8,11);">1Ch 8:8, 11</a>).``1';
isbe[4500]='Hushshathite`hush\'-shath-it (chushshathi). Same as <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HUSHATHITE">HUSHATHITE</A> (which see), except in reduplicated form (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,11);">1Ch 27:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,29);">1Ch 11:29</a>, Hebrew pronunciation).``1';
</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