exlim/blb
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
blb/study/isbe/4200.html

112 lines
239 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[4201]='Heap`hep (\'aremah, gal, nedh, tel): "Heap" appears<P>(1) in the simple sense of a gathering or pile, as the translation of \'aremah, a "heap," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',3,7);">Ru 3:7</a> of grain; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',4,2);">Ne 4:2</a> of stones; in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,6);">2Ch 31:6</a>, etc., of the tithes, etc.; of chomer (boiling up), a "heap"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',8,14);">Ex 8:14</a> of frogs; of gal, a "heap"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',8,17);">Job 8:17</a> of stones.<P>(2) As indicating "ruin," "waste," gal (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,25);">2Ki 19:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',15,28);">Job 15:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',25,2);">Isa 25:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,26);">37:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,11);">Jer 9:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,37);">51:37</a>); me\'i (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',17,1);">Isa 17:1</a>); \'i (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',79,1);">Ps 79:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',26,18);">Jer 26:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,6);">Mic 1:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',3,12);">3:12</a>); tel, "mound," "hillock," "heap" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',13,16);">De 13:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',8,28);">Jos 8:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',30,18);">Jer 30:18</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,2);">Jer 49:2</a>).<P>(3) Of waters, nedh, "heap," "pile" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,8);">Ex 15:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',3,13,16);">Jos 3:13, 16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',33,7);">Ps 33:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',78,13);">78:13</a>); chomer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',3,15);">Hab 3:15</a>, "the heap of mighty waters," the Revised Version margin "surge").<P>(4) A cairn, or heap of stones (a) over the dead body of a dishonored person, gal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',7,26);">Jos 7:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',8,29);">8:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',18,17);">2Sa 18:17</a>); (b) as a witness or boundary-heap (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,46);">Ge 31:46</a>f; Gal\'edh (Galeed) in Hebrew, also mitspah, "watch tower," Yeghar-Sahadhutha\' (Jegar-sahadutha) in Aramaic, both words meaning "the heap of witness"; see <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',31,47,49);">Ge 31:47, 49</a> the Revised Version (British and American)).<P>(5) As a way mark, tamrurim, from tamar, "to stand erect" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,21);">Jer 31:21</a> the King James Version, "Set thee up waymarks, make thee high heaps," the Revised Version (British and American) "guide-posts," a more likely translation).<P>"To heap" represents various single words: chathah, "to take," "to take hold of," with one exception, applied to fire or burning coals (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',25,22);">Pr 25:22</a>, "Thou writ heap coals of fire upon his head," "Thou wilt take coals of fire (and heap them) on his head"); caphah, "to add" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,23);">De 32:23</a>); tsabhar, "to heap up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',1,10);">Hab 1:10</a>); kabhats, "to press together" (with the fingers or hand) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',2,5);">Hab 2:5</a>); rabhah, "to multiply" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',24,10);">Eze 24:10</a>); episoreuo, "to heap up upon" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',4,3);">2Ti 4:3</a>, they "will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts"); soreuo, "to heap up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,20);">Ro 12:20</a>, "Thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head"); thesaurizo, "to lay up" (as treasure) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,3);">Jas 5:3</a> the King James Version, "Ye have heaped treasure together," the Revised Version (British and American) "laid up"); tsabhar, "to heap up," "to heap" or "store up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,16);">Job 27:16</a>, "silver"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',39,6);">Ps 39:6</a>, "riches"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',9,3);">Zec 9:3</a>, "silver,"); sum, sim "to place," "set," "put" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,13);">Job 36:13</a> the King James Version, "The hypocrites in heart heap up wrath," the Revised Version (British and American) "They that are godless in heart lay up anger"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',15,16);">Jud 15:16</a> we have chamor, chamorothayim, "with the jawbone of an ass, heaps upon heaps," the Revised Version margin "heap, two heaps"; one of Samson\'s sayings; chamor means "an ass," chomer "a heap."<P>For "heap up words" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,4);">Job 16:4</a>), the Revised Version (British and American) has "join together"; for "shall be a heap" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',17,11);">Isa 17:11</a>), "fleeth away," margin "shall be a heap"; "heap" for "number" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Nah\',3,3);">Na 3:3</a>); the English Revised Version "heap of stones" for "sling," margin as the King James Version and the American Standard Revised Version (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',26,8);">Pr 26:8</a>); "in one heap" for "upon a heap" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',3,16);">Jos 3:16</a>); "he heapeth up (dust)" for "they shall heap" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',1,10);">Hab 1:10</a>).``185';
isbe[4202]='Heart`hart (lebh, lebhabh; kardia): The different senses in which the word occurs in the Old Testament and the New Testament may be grouped under the following heads:<P>1. Various Meanings:<P>It represents in the first place the bodily organ, and by easy transition those experiences which affect or are affected by the body. Fear, love, courage, anger, Joy, sorrow, hatred are always ascribed to the heart<72>especially in the Old Testament; thus courage for which usually ruach is used (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',27,14);">Ps 27:14</a>); joy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',4,7);">Ps 4:7</a>); anger (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,6);">De 19:6</a>, "while his heart is hot," lebhabh); fear (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,37);">1Sa 25:37</a>); sorrow (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',13,2);">Ps 13:2</a>), etc.<P>Hence, naturally it came to stand for the man himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',7,17);">De 7:17</a>; "say in thine heart," <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,13);">Isa 14:13</a>).<P>2. Heart and Personality:<P>As representing the man himself, it was considered to be the seat of the emotions and passions and appetites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,5);">Ge 18:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,17);">Le 19:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',104,15);">Ps 104:15</a>), and embraced likewise the intellectual and moral faculties<65>though these are necessarily ascribed to the "soul" as well. This distinction is not always observed.<P>3. Soul and Heart:<P>"Soul" in Hebrew can never be rendered by "heart"; nor can "heart" be considered as a synonym for "soul." Cremer has well observed: "The Hebrew nephesh ("soul") is never translated kardia ("heart")...The range of the Hebrew nephesh, to which the Greek psuche alone corresponds, differs so widely from the ideas connected with psuche, that utter confusion would have ensued had psuche been employed in an unlimited degree for lebh ("heart"). The Biblical lebh never, like psuche, denotes the personal subject, nor could it do so. That which in classical Greek is ascribed to psuche (a good soul, a just soul, etc.) is in the Bible ascribed to the heart alone and cannot be otherwise" (Cremer, Lexicon, article "Kardia," 437ff, German edition).<P>4. Center of Vital Action:<P>In the heart vital action is centered (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,7);">1Ki 21:7</a>). "Heart," except as a bodily organ, is never ascribed to animals, as is the case sometimes with nephesh and ruach (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',17,11);">Le 17:11</a>, nephesh; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',2,19);">Ge 2:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,22);">Nu 16:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',7,22);">Ge 7:22</a>, ruach). "Heart" is thus often used interchangeably with these two (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,8);">Ge 41:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',86,4);">Ps 86:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,20);">119:20</a>); but "it never denotes the personal subject, always the personal organ."<P>5. Heart and Mind:<P>As the central organ in the body, forming a focus for its vital action, it has come to stand for the center of its moral, spiritual, intellectual life. "In particular the heart is the place in which the process of self-consciousness is carried out, in which the soul is at home with itself, and is conscious of all its doing and suffering as its own" (Oehler). Hence, it is that men of "courage" are called "men of the heart"; that the Lord is said to speak "in his heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,21);">Ge 8:21</a>); that men "know in their own heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,5);">De 8:5</a>); that "no one considereth in his heart\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,19);">Isa 44:19</a> the King James Version). "Heart" in this connection is sometimes rendered "mind," as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,28);">Nu 16:28</a> ("of mine own mind," Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) ex proprio corde, Septuagint ap\' emautou); the foolish "is void of understanding," i.e. "heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',6,32);">Pr 6:32</a>, where the Septuagint renders phrenon, Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) cordis, Luther "der ist ein Narr"). God is represented as "searching the heart" and "trying the reins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,10);">Jer 17:10</a> the King James Version). Thus, "heart" comes to stand for "conscience," for which there is no word in Hebrew, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',27,6);">Job 27:6</a>, "My heart shall not reproach me," or in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',24,5);">1Sa 24:5</a>, "David\'s heart smote him"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',25,31);">1Sa 25:31</a>. From this it appears, in the words of Owen: "The heart in Scripture is variously used, sometimes for the mind and understanding, sometimes for the will, sometimes for the affections, sometimes for the conscience, sometimes for the whole soul. Generally, it denotes the whole soul of man and all the faculties of it, not absolutely, but as they are all one principle of moral operations, as they all concur in our doing of good and evil."<P>6. Figurative Senses:<P>The radical corruption of human nature is clearly taught in Scripture and brought into connection with the heart. It is "uncircumcised" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,26);">Jer 9:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,7);">Eze 44:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',7,51);">Ac 7:51</a>); and "hardened" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,21);">Ex 4:21</a>); "wicked" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',26,23);">Pr 26:23</a>); "perverse" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,20);">Pr 11:20</a>); "godless" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',36,13);">Job 36:13</a>); "deceitful and desperately wicked" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,9);">Jer 17:9</a> the King James Version). It defiles the whole man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,19,20);">Mt 15:19-20</a>); resists, as in the case of Pharaoh, the repeated call of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',7,13);">Ex 7:13</a>). There, however, the law of God is written (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',2,15);">Ro 2:15</a>); there the work of grace is wrought (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,9);">Ac 15:9</a>), for the "heart" may be "renewed" by grace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',36,26);">Eze 36:26</a>), because the "heart" is the seat of sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,5);">Ge 6:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,21);">8:21</a>).<P>7. Process of Heart Renewal:<P>This process of heart-renewal is indicated in various ways. It is the removal of a "stony heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',11,19);">Eze 11:19</a>). The heart becomes "clean" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,10);">Ps 51:10</a>); "fixed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',112,7);">Ps 112:7</a>) through "the fear" of the Lord (verse <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',112,1);">1</a>); "With the heart man believeth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',10,10);">Ro 10:10</a>); on the "heart" the power of God is exercised for renewal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,33);">Jer 31:33</a>). To God the bereaved apostles pray as a knower of the heart (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,24);">Ac 1:24</a><3E>a word not known to classical writers, found only here in the New Testament and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,8);">Ac 15:8</a>, kardiognostes). In the "heart" God\'s Spirit dwells with might (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,16);">Eph 3:16</a>, eis ton eso anthropon); in the "heart" God\'s love is poured forth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',5,5);">Ro 5:5</a>). The Spirit of His son has been "sent forth into the heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,6);">Ga 4:6</a>); the "earnest of the Spirit" has been given "in the heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',1,22);">2Co 1:22</a>). In the work of grace, therefore, the heart occupies a position almost unique.<P>8. The Heart First:<P>We might also refer here to the command, on which both the Old Testament and New Testament revelation of love is based: "Thou shalt love Yahweh thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,5);">De 6:5</a>); where "heart" always takes the first place, and is the term which in the New Testament rendering remains unchanged (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',22,37);">Mt 22:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,30,33);">Mr 12:30, 33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',10,27);">Lu 10:27</a>, where "heart" always takes precedence).<P>9. A Term for "Deepest":<P>A bare reference may be made to the employment of the term for that which is innermost, hidden, deepest in anything (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,8);">Ex 15:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',2,3);">Jon 2:3</a>), the very center of things. This we find in all languages. Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,16,17);">Eph 3:16-17</a>, "in the inward man," as above.``113';
isbe[4203]='Hearth`harth: Occurs 7 times in the King James Version: <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,6);">Ge 18:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',102,3);">Ps 102:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,22,23);">Jer 36:22-23</a> bis; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',12,6);">Zec 12:6</a>; <span class="noTag">4</span> times in the Revised Version: <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,9);">Le 6:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',43,15,16);">Eze 43:15-16</a> ("altar hearth"); compare also <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,1);">Isa 29:1</a> the Revised Version margin. It will be noted that the renderings of the two versions agree in only one passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>).<P>(1) The hearth in case of a tent was nothing more than a depression in the ground in which fire was kindled for cooking or for warmth. Cakes were baked, after the fashion of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,6);">Ge 18:6</a>, in the ashes or upon hot stones. In this passage, however, there is nothing in the Hebrew corresponding to the King James Version "on the hearth." In the poorer class of houses also the hearth consisted of such a depression, of varying dimensions, in the middle or in one corner of the room. There was no chimney for the smoke, which escaped as it could, or through a latticed opening for the purpose (the "chimney" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',13,3);">Ho 13:3</a>). While the nature of the hearth is thus clear enough, more or less uncertainty attaches to specific terms used in the Hebrew. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a> the expression means simply "that which is kindled," referring to the bed of live coals. From this same verb (yaqadh, "be kindled") are formed the nouns moqedh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',102,3);">Ps 102:3 (Hebrew 4)</a>) and moqkedhah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,9);">Le 6:9 (Hebrew 2)</a>) which might, according to their formation, mean either the material kindled or the place where a fire is kindled. Hence, the various renderings, "firebrand," "hearth," etc. Moreover, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,9);">Le 6:9 (Hebrew 2)</a> the termination -ah of moqedhah may be taken as the pronominal suffix, "its"; hence, the Revised Version margin "on its firewood."<P>(2) Two other terms have reference to heating in the better class of houses. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,22,23);">Jer 36:22-23</a> the word (\'ach) means a "brazier" of burning coals, with which Jehoiakim\'s "winter house" was heated. The same purpose was served by the "pan (kiyyor) of fire" of <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',12,6);">Zec 12:6</a> the Revised Version (British and American), apparently a wide, shallow vessel otherwise used for cooking (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,14);">1Sa 2:14</a>, English Versions of the Bible "pan"), or as a wash basin (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,18);">Ex 30:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,38);">1Ki 7:38</a>, etc., "laver").<P>(3) Another class of passages is referred to the signification "altar hearth," which seems to have been a term applied to the top of the altar of burnt offering. The moqedhah of <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,9);">Le 6:9</a> (2), though related by derivation to the words discussed under (1) above, belongs here (compare also Ecclesiasticus 50:12, "by the hearth of the altar," par\' eschara bomou). Again in Ezekiel\'s description of the altar of the restored temple (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',43,15,16);">43:15,16</A>), he designates the top of the altar by a special term (the Revised Version margin, ariel), which is by most understood to mean "altar hearth" (so the Revised Version (British and American)). With this may be compared the symbolical name given to Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,1);">Isa 29:1</a>), and variously explained as "lion (or lioness) of God," or "hearth of God."``44';
isbe[4204]='Heartily`har\'-ti-li: Occurs (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,23);">Col 3:23</a>) as the translation of ek psuches, "out of the soul," "Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily as unto the Lord (who sees the heart and recompenses "whatsoever good thing a man does") and not unto men" (however they, your masters according to the flesh, may regard it); the Revised Version (British and American) "work heartily," margin (Greek) "from the soul."<P>In 2Macc 4:37, we have "Antiochus was heartily sorry," psuchikos ("from the soul").``1';
isbe[4205]='Heat`het (chom, horebh, "drought," <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,30);">Job 30:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',4,6);">Isa 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',25,4);">25:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,30);">Jer 36:30</a>; sharabh, <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,10);">Isa 49:10</a>, translated in the Revised Version margin "mirage"; zestos, "fervent," <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',3,15);">Re 3:15</a>, therme, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,3);">Ac 28:3</a>, kauma, <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,16);">Re 7:16</a>, kauson, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,12);">Mt 20:12</a>; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MIRAGE">MIRAGE</A>):<P>1. Dreaded in Palestine:<P>The heat of the summer is greatly dreaded in Palestine, and as a rule the people rest under cover during the middle of the day, when the sun is hottest. There is no rain from May to October, and scarcely a cloud in the sky to cool the air or to screen off the burning vertical rays of the sun. The first word of advice given to visitors to the country is to protect themselves from the sun. Even on the mountains, where the temperature of the air is lower, the sun is perhaps more fierce, owing to the lesser density of the atmosphere.<P>2. Causes Disease:<P>This continuous summer heat often causes sunstroke, and the glare causes diseases of the eye which affect a large percentage of the people of Palestine and Egypt.<P>3. Relief Sought:<P>It is to be expected that in these times of heat and drought the ideal pleasure has come to be to sit in the shade by some cool flowing fountain. In the mountains the village which has the coolest spring of water is the most desired. These considerations give renewed meaning to the passages: "as cold waters to a thirsty soul" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',25,25);">Pr 25:25</a>); "He maketh me to lie down in green pastures; he leadeth me beside still waters" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',23,2);">Ps 23:2</a>). What a blessing to be "under the shadow of the Almighty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',91,1);">Ps 91:1</a>), where "the sun shall not strike upon them, nor any heat" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,16);">Re 7:16</a>)!<P>4. Midday Heat:<P>The middle of the day is often referred to as the "heat of the day" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',11,11);">1Sa 11:11</a>). It made a great difference to the army whether it could win the battle before the midday heat. Saladin won the great battle at Hattin by taking advantage of this fact. It was a particular time of the day when it was the custom to rest. "They came about the heat of the day to the house of Ish-bosheth, as he took his rest at noon" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',4,5);">2Sa 4:5</a>). Yahweh appeared to Abraham as "he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,1);">Ge 18:1</a>). The hardship of working throughout the day is expressed in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,12);">Mt 20:12</a>, "who have borne the burden of the day and scorching heat." Sometimes just after sunrise the contrast of the cold of night and the heat of the sun is especially noticeable. "The sun ariseth with the scorching wind" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',1,11);">Jas 1:11</a>).<P>5. Summer Heat:<P>In summer the wind is usually from the southwest, but in case it is from the south it is sure to be hot. "When ye see a south wind blowing, ye say, There will be a scorching heat" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,55);">Lu 12:55</a>). The heat on a damp, sultry day, when the atmosphere is full of dust haze is especially oppressive, and is referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',25,5);">Isa 25:5</a> as "the heat by the shade of a cloud." The heat of summer melts the snow on the mountains and causes all vegetation to dry up and wither. Ice and snow vanish in the heat thereof (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',6,17);">Job 6:17</a>), "Drought and heat consume the snow waters" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,19);">Job 24:19</a>). But the "tree planted by the waters, that spreadeth out its roots by the river...shall not fear when heat cometh, but its leaf shall be green" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',17,8);">Jer 17:8</a>).<P>6. Figurative Uses:<P>The word is used often in connection with anger in the Scriptures: "hot anger" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',11,8);">Ex 11:8</a>); "hot displeasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',9,19);">De 9:19</a>); "anger of the Lord was hot against Israel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',2,14);">Jud 2:14</a> the King James Version); "thine anger from waxing hot" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',85,3);">Ps 85:3</a> King James Version, margin); "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',3,15);">Re 3:15</a>).``85';
isbe[4206]='Heath`heth.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TAMARISK">TAMARISK</a>`1';
isbe[4207]='Heathen`he\'-th\'-n, he\'-then.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GENTILES">GENTILES</a>`1';
isbe[4208]='Heave offering`hev of\'-er-ing.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a>`1';
isbe[4209]='Heaven`hev\'-\'n.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY,+I">ASTRONOMY</a>`1';
isbe[4210]='Heaven, Host of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY,+I">ASTRONOMY</a>`1';
isbe[4211]='Heaven, Ordinances of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY,+I">ASTRONOMY</a>`1';
isbe[4212]='Heaven, Windows of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY,+I">ASTRONOMY</a>`1';
isbe[4213]='Heavenly`hev\'-\'n-li (ouranios, epouranios): Pertaining to heaven or the heavens. See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HEAVENS">HEAVENS</A>. The phrase ta epourania, translated "heavenly things" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,12);">Joh 3:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,5);">Heb 8:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,23);">9:23</a>, but in Ephesians "heavenly places" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,3,10);">Joh 1:3, 10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',2,6);">2:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,10);">3:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,12);">6:12</a>), has shades of meaning defined by the context. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',3,12);">Joh 3:12</a>, in contrast with "earthly things" (i.e. such as can be brought to the test of experience), it denotes truths known only through revelation (God\'s love in salvation). In Hebrews the sense is local. In Ephesians it denotes the sphere of spiritual privilege in Christ, except in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,12);">6:12</a>, where it stands for the unseen spiritual world, in which both good and evil forces operate. It is always the sphere of the super-earthly.``132';
isbe[4214]='Heavens`hev\'-\'nz (shamayim; ouranoi): On the physical heavens see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY">ASTRONOMY</A>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=WORLD">WORLD</A>. Above these, in popular conception, were the celestial heavens, the abode of God and of the hosts of angels (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',11,4);">Ps 11:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,\'19-21\');">103:19-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,1);">Isa 66:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,2);">Re 4:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,11);">5:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',7,10);">Da 7:10</a>), though it was recognized that Yahweh\'s presence was not confined to any region (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,27);">1Ki 8:27</a>). Later Judaism reckoned seven heavens. The apostle Paul speaks of himself as caught up into "the third heaven," which he evidently identifies with Paradise (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,2);">2Co 12:2</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEAVENLY">HEAVENLY</a>`1';
isbe[4215]='Heavens, New (And Earth, New)`1. Eschatological Idea<P>2. Earliest Conceptions: Cosmic verses National Type<P>3. Different from Mythological Theory<P>4. Antiquity of Cosmical Conception<P>5. The Cosmical Dependent on the Ethico-Religious<P>6. The End Correspondent to the Beginning<P>7. The Cosmical Heavens: <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'26-29\');">Hebrews 12:26-29</a><P>8. Palingenesis: <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Matthew 19:28</a><P>9. A Purified Universe<hr /><P>1. Eschatological Idea:<P>The formal conception of new heavens and a new earth occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',65,17);">Isa 65:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,22);">66:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,13);">2Pe 3:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,1);">Re 21:1</a> (where "heaven," singular). The idea in substance is also found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,16);">Isa 51:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Mt 19:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,17);">2Co 5:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'26-28\');">Heb 12:26-28</a>. In each case the reference is eschatological, indeed the adjective "new" seems to have acquired in this and other connections a semi-technical eschatological sense. It must be remembered that the Old Testament has no single word for "universe," and that the phrase "heaven and earth" serves to supply the deficiency. The promise of a new heavens and a new earth is therefore equivalent to a promise of world renewal.<P>2. Earliest Conceptions: Cosmic verses National Type:<P>It is a debated question how old in the history of revelation this promise is. Isaiah is the prophet with whom the idea first occurs in explicit form, and that in passages which many critics would assign to the post-exilic period (the so-called Trito-Isaiah). In general, until recently, the trend of criticism has been to represent the universalistic-cosmic type of eschatology as developed out of the particularistic-national type by a gradual process of widening of the horizon of prophecy, a view which would put the emergence of the former at a comparatively late date. More recently, however, Gressmann (Der Ursprung der israelitisch-judischen Eschatologie, 1905) and others have endeavored to show that often even prophecies belonging to the latter type embody material and employ means of expression which presuppose acquaintance with the idea of a world-catastrophe at the end. On this view the world-eschatology would have, from ancient times, existed alongside of the more narrowly confined outlook, and would be even older than the latter. These writers further assume that the cosmic eschatology was not indigenous among the Hebrews, but of oriental (Babylonian) origin, a theory which they apply not only to the more developed system of the later apocalyptic writings, but also to its preformations in the Old Testament. The cosmic eschatology is not believed to have been the distinctive property of the great ethical prophets, but rather a commonly current mythological belief to which the prophets refer without formally endorsing it.<P>3. Different from Mythological Theory:<P>Its central thought is said to have been the belief that the end of the world-process must correspond to the beginning, that consequently the original condition of things, when heaven and earth were new, must repeat itself at some future point, and the state of paradise with its concomitants return, a belief supposed to have rested on certain astronomical observations.<P>4. Antiquity of Cosmical Conception<P>While this theory in the form presented is unproven and unacceptable, it deserves credit for having focused attention on certain phenomena in the Old Testament which clearly show that Messianic prophecy, and particularly the world-embracing scope which it assumes in some predictions, is far older than modern criticism had been willing to concede. The Old Testament from the beginning has an eschatology and puts the eschatological promise on the broadest racial basis (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',3,\'1-\');">Ge 3</a>). It does not first ascend from Israel to the new humanity, but at the very outset takes its point of departure in the race and from this descends to the election of Israel, always keeping the Universalistic goal in clear view. Also in the earliest accounts, already elements of a cosmical universalism find their place side by side with those of a racial kind, as when Nature is represented as sharing in the consequences of the fall of man.<P>5. The Cosmical Dependent on the Ethico-Religious:<P>As regards the antiquity of the universalistic and cosmical eschatology, therefore, the conclusions of these writers may be registered as a gain, while on the two other points of the pagan origin and the unethical character of the expectation involved, dissent from them should be expressed. According to the Old Testament, the whole idea of world-renewal is of strictly super-natural origin, and in it the cosmical follows the ethical hope. The cosmical eschatology is simply the correlate of the fundamental Biblical principle that the issues of the world-process depend on the ethico-religious developments in the history of man (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,13);">2Pe 3:13</a>).<P>6. The End Correspondent to the Beginning:<P>But the end correspondent to the beginning is likewise a true Scriptural principle, which theory in question has helped to reemphasize, although there is this difference that Scripture does not look forward to a repetition of the same process, but to a restoration of the primeval harmony on a higher plane such as precludes all further disturbance. In the passages above cited, there are clear reminiscences of the account of creation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,16);">Isa 51:16</a>, "that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',65,17);">Isa 65:17</a>, "I create new heavens and a new earth"; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,13);">2Pe 3:13</a> compared with <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,\'4-6\');">2Pe 3:4-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,1);">Re 21:1</a> compared with the imagery of paradise throughout the chapter). Besides this, where the thought of the renewal of earth is met with in older prophecy, this is depicted in colors of the state of paradise (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,\'6-9\');">Isa 11:6-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,\'18-21\');">Ho 2:18-21</a>). The "regeneration" (palingenesia) of <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Mt 19:28</a> also points back to the first genesis of the world. The \'inhabited earth to come\' (oikoumene mellousa) of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,5);">Heb 2:5</a> occurs at the opening of a context throughout which the account of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,\'1-\');">Ge 1-3</a> evidently stood before the writer\'s mind.<P>7. The Cosmical Heavens: <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'26-29\');">Hebrews 12:26-29</a>:<P>In the combination "new heavens and a new earth," the term "heavens" must therefore be taken in the sense imposed upon it by the story of creation, where "heavens" designates not the celestial habitation of God, but the cosmical heavens, the region of the supernal waters, sun moon and stars. The Bible nowhere suggests that there is anything abnormal or requiring renewal in God\'s dwelling-place (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,23);">Heb 9:23</a> is of a different import). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,\'1-\');">Re 21</a>, where "the new heaven and the new earth" appear, it is at the same time stated that the new Jerusalem comes down from God out of heaven (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,1,2,10);">21:1,2,10</A>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'26-28\');">Heb 12:26-28</a> also the implication is that only the lower heavens are subject to renewal. The "shaking" that accompanies the new covenant and corresponds to the shaking of the law-giving at Sinai, is a shaking of "not the earth only, but also the heaven." This shaking, in its reference to heaven as well as to earth, signifies a removal of the things shaken. But from the things thus shaken and removed (including heaven), the writer distinguishes "those things which are not shaken," which are destined to remain, and these are identified with the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God, however, according to the general trend of the teaching of the epistle, has its center in the heavenly world. The words "that have been made," in 12:27, do not assign their created character as the reason why heaven and earth can be shaken, an exegesis which would involve us in the difficulty that among that which remains there is something uncreated besides God; the true construction and correct paraphrase are: "as of things that were made with the thought in the mind of God that those things which cannot be shaken may remain," i.e. already at creation God contemplated an unchangeable universe as the ultimate, higher state of things.<P>8. Palingenesis: <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Matthew 19:28</a>:<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Mt 19:28</a> the term palingenesia marks the world-renewing as the renewal of an abnormal state of things. The Scripture teaching, therefore, is that around the center of God\'s heaven, which is not subject to deterioration or renewal, a new cosmical heaven and a new earth will be established to be the dwelling-place of the eschatological humanity. The light in which the promise thus appears reminds us that the renewed kosmos, earth as well as cosmical heavens, is destined to play a permanent (not merely provisional, on the principle of chiliasm) part in the future life of the people of God. This is in entire harmony with the prevailing Biblical representation, not only in the Old Testament but likewise in the New Testament (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,5);">Mt 5:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,5);">Heb 2:5</a>), although in the Fourth Gospel and in the Pauline Epistles the emphasis is to such an extent thrown on the heaven-centered character of the future life that the role to be played in it by the renewed earth recedes into the background. Revelation, on the other hand, recognizes this element in its imagery of "the new Jerus" coming down from God out of heaven upon earth.<P>9. A Purified Universe:<P>That the new heavens and the new earth are represented as the result of a "creation" does not necessarily involve a production ex nihilo. The terms employed in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',3,\'6-13\');">2Pe 3:6-13</a> seem rather to imply that the renewal will out of the old produce a purified universe, whence also the catastrophe is compared to that of the Deluge. As then the old world perished by water and the present world arose out of the flood, so in the end-crisis "the heavens shall be dissolved by fire and the elements melt with fervent heat," to give rise to the new heaven and the new earth in which righteousness dwells. The term palingenesia (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,28);">Mt 19:28</a>) points to renewal, not to creation de novo. The Talmud also teaches that the world will pass through a process of purification, although at the same time it seems to break up the continuity between this and the coming world by the fantastic assumption that the new heavens and the new earth of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',65,17);">Isa 65:17</a> were created at the close of the Hexemeron of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,\'1-\');">Ge 1</a>. This was inferred from the occurrence of the article in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,22);">Isa 66:22</a>, "the new heavens and the new earth."``182';
isbe[4216]='Heavy; Heaviness`hev\'-i, hev\'-i-nes (kabhedh, de\'aghah; lupe):<P>1. Literal:<P>Heavy (heave, to lift) is used literally with respect to material things, as the translation of kobhedh, "heaviness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,3);">Pr 27:3</a>, "a stone is heavy"); of kabhedh, "to be weighty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',4,18);">1Sa 4:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,26);">2Sa 14:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',3,7);">La 3:7</a>); of \'amac, "to load" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',46,1);">Isa 46:1</a> the King James Version; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,43);">Mt 26:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,40);">Mr 14:40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,32);">Lu 9:32</a>, "Their eyes were heavy"); bareomai, "to be weighed down."<P>2. Figuratively:<P>It is used<P>(1) for what is hard to bear, oppressive, kabhedh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,18);">Ex 18:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,14);">Nu 11:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',5,6,11);">1Sa 5:6, 11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',38,4);">Ps 38:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',24,20);">Isa 24:20</a>); motah, a "yoke" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',58,6);">Isa 58:6</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "bands of the yoke"); qasheh, "sharp," "hard" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,6);">1Ki 14:6</a>, "heavy tidings"); barus, "heavy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,4);">Mt 23:4</a>);<P>(2) for sad, sorrowful (weighed down), mar, "bitter" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,6);">Pr 31:6</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "bitter"); ra\', "evil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',25,20);">Pr 25:20</a>); ademoneo, literally, "to be sated," "wearied," then, "to be very heavy," "dejected" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,37);">Mt 26:37</a>, of our Lord in Gethsemane, "(he) began to be sorrowful and very heavy," the Revised Version (British and American) "sore troubled"); "ademonein denotes a kind of stupefaction and bewilderment, the intellectual powers reeling and staggering under the pressure of the ideas presented to them" (Mason, The Conditions of our Lord\'s Life on Earth); compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,33);">Mr 14:33</a>;<P>(3) morose, sulky, as well as sad, car, "sullen," "sour," "angry" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',20,43);">1Ki 20:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,4);">21:4</a>, "heavy and displeased");<P>(4) dull, kabhedh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',6,10);">Isa 6:10</a>, "make their ears heavy"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',59,1);">Isa 59:1</a>, "neither (is) his ear heavy");<P>(5) "tired" seems to be the meaning in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',17,12);">Ex 17:12</a>, "Moses\' hands were heavy" (kabhedh); compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,43);">Mt 26:43</a> and parallels above.<P>Heavily is the translation of kebhedhuth, "heaviness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',14,25);">Ex 14:25</a>), meaning "with difficulty"; of qadhar, "to be black," "to be a mourner" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,14);">Ps 35:14</a> the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "I bowed down mourning"); of kabhedh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',47,6);">Isa 47:6</a>).<P>Heaviness has always the sense of anxiety, sorrow, grief, etc.; de\'aghah, "fear," "dread," "anxious care" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',12,25);">Pr 12:25</a>, "Heaviness in the heart of a man maketh it stoop," the Revised Version margin "or care"); kehah, "to be feeble," "weak" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,3);">Isa 61:3</a>, "the spirit of heaviness"); panim, "face," "aspect" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,27);">Job 9:27</a> the King James Version, "I will leave off my heaviness," the Revised Version (British and American) "(sad) countenance"; compare 2Esdras 5:16; The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 17:4</span>; Ecclesiasticus 25:23); ta\'aniyah, from \'anah, "to groan," "to sigh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,2);">Isa 29:2</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "mourning and lamentation"); tughah, "sadness," "sorrow" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,28);">Ps 119:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,1);">Pr 10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,13);">14:13</a>); ta\'anith, "affliction of one\'s self," "fasting" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',9,5);">Ezr 9:5</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "humiliation," margin "fasting"); katepheia, "dejection," "sorrow" (literally, "of the eyes") (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',4,9);">Jas 4:9</a>, "your joy (turned) to heaviness"); lupe, "grief" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,2);">Ro 9:2</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "great sorrow"; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',2,1);">2Co 2:1</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "sorrow"); lupeomai (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,6);">1Pe 1:6</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "put to grief"); for nush, "to be sick," "feeble" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',69,20);">Ps 69:20</a>, the Revised Version margin "sore sick"), and ademoneo (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,26);">Php 2:26</a> the Revised Version (British and American) "sore troubled"), the King James Version has "full of heaviness." "Heaviness," in the sense of sorrow, sadness, occurs in 2Esdras 10:7,8,24; Tobit 2:5; lupe (Ecclesiasticus 22:4, the Revised Version (British and American) "grief"; 30:21, "Give not thy soul to heaviness," the Revised Version (British and American) "sorrow"; 1Macc 6:4); lupeo (Ecclesiasticus 30:9, the Revised Version (British and American) "will grieve thee"; penthos (1Macc 3:51, etc.).<P>The Revised Version has "heavier work" for "more work" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',5,9);">Ex 5:9</a>); "heavy upon men" for "common among men" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',6,1);">Ec 6:1</a>); for "were heavy loaden" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',46,1);">Isa 46:1</a>), "are made a load"; for "the burden thereof is heavy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,27);">Isa 30:27</a>), "in thick rising smoke."``185';
isbe[4217]='Heber`he\'-ber (chebher, "associate" or, possibly, "enchanter"; Eber): A name occurring several times in the Old Testament as the name of an individual or of a clan.<P>(1) A member of the tribe of Asher and son of Beraiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,17);">Ge 46:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,45);">Nu 26:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,31);">1Ch 7:31</a>f).<P>(2) A Kenite, husband of Jael, who deceptively slew Sisera, captain of the army of Jabin, a Canaanite king (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,17);">Jud 4:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,24);">5:24</a>). He had separated himself from the main body of the Kenites, which accounts for his tent being near Kedesh, the place of Sisera\'s disastrous battle (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',4,11);">Jud 4:11</a>).<P>(3) Head of a clan of Judah, and son of Mered by his Jewish, as distinguished from an Egyptian wife. He was father, or founder, of Soco (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,18);">1Ch 4:18</a>).<P>(4) A Benjamite, or clan or family of Elpaal belonging to Benjamin (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,17);">1Ch 8:17</a>).<P>(5) Heber, of our Lord\'s genealogy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,35);">Lu 3:35</a> the King James Version), better, Eber.<P>So, the name "Eber," \'ebher, in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,13);">1Ch 5:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',8,22);">8:22</a>, is not to be confused with Heber, chebher, as in the foregoing passages.``137';
isbe[4218]='Heberites`he\'-ber-its (ha-chebhri): Descendants of Heber, a prominent clan of Asher, (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,45);">Nu 26:45</a>). Supposed by some to be connected with the Chabiri of the Tell el-Amarna Letters.``1';
isbe[4219]='Hebrew Language``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LANGUAGES+OF+THE+OLD+TESTAMENT">LANGUAGES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARAMAIC;+ARAMAIC+LANGUAGE">ARAMAIC</a>`1';
isbe[4220]='Hebrew; Hebrewess`he\'-broo, he\'-broo-es (\'ibhri, feminine \'ibhriyah; Hebraios): The earliest name for Abraham (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,13);">Ge 14:13</a>) and his descendants (Joseph, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',39,14,17);">Ge 39:14, 17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',40,15);">40:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,12);">41:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',43,32);">43:32</a>; Israelites in Egypt, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',1,15);">Ex 1:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,6,11,13);">2:6, 11, 13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,18);">3:18</a>; in laws, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,2);">Ex 21:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,12);">De 15:12</a>; in history, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',4,6,9);">1Sa 4:6, 9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',13,7,19);">13:7, 19</a>, etc.; later, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,9);">Jer 34:9</a>, "Hebrewess," 34:14; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',1,9);">Jon 1:9</a>; in the New Testament, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,1);">Ac 6:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',11,22);">2Co 11:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,5);">Php 3:5</a>). The etymology of the word is disputed. It may be derived from Eber (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,21,24,25);">Ge 10:21, 24-25</a>, etc.), or, as some think, from the verb \'abhar, "to cross over" (people from across the Euphrates; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',24,2);">Jos 24:2</a>). A connection is sought by some with the apri or epri of the Egyptian monuments, and again with the Habiri of the Tell el-Amarna Letters. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,1);">Ac 6:1</a>, the "Hebrews" are contrasted with "Hellenists," or Greek-speaking Jews. By the "Hebrew" tongue in the New Testament (Hebraisti, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,2);">Joh 5:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,13,17,20);">19:13, 17, 20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',20,16);">20:16</a>) is meant <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARAMAIC;+ARAMAIC+LANGUAGE">ARAMAIC</A> (which see), but also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',9,11);">Re 9:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',16,16);">16:16</a>, Hebrew proper.``132';
isbe[4221]='Hebrews, Epistle to the`he\'-brooz,<P><b>I. TITLE</b><P><b>II. LITERARY</b><P class="in15">1. The Author\'s Culture and Style<P class="in15">2. Letter, Epistle or Treatise?<P class="in15">3. A Unity or a Composite Work?<P><B>III. THE AUTHOR</b><P class="in15">1. Tradition<P class="in30">(1) Alexandrian: Paul<P class="in30">(2) African: Barnabas<P class="in30">(3) Rome and the West: Anonymous<P class="in15">2. The Witness of the Epistle Itself<P class="in30">(1) Paul not the Author<P class="in30">(2) Other Theories<p class="in45">(a) Luke and Clement<p class="in45">(b) Barnabas; Priscilla and Aquila; Philip; Aristion; Apollos<P><b>IV. DESTINATION</b><P class="in15">1. General Character of the Readers<P class="in15">2. Jews or Gentiles?<P class="in15">3. The Locality of the Readers<P><b>V. DATE</b><P class="in15">1. Terminal Dates<P class="in15">2. Conversion and History of the Readers<P class="in15">3. Doctrinal Development<P class="in15">4. The Fall of Jerusalem<P class="in15">5. Timothy<P class="in15">6. Two Persecutions<P><b>VI. CONTENTS</b><P class="in15">1. Summary of Contents<P class="in15">2. The Main Theme<P class="in15">3. Alexandrian Influences<P class="in15">4. The Christian Factor<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Title.<P>In the King James Version and the English Revised Version the title of this book describes it as "the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews." Modern scholarship has disputed the applicability of every word of this title. Neither does it appear in the oldest manuscripts, where we find simply "to Hebrews" (pros Hebraious). This, too, seems to have been prefixed to the original writing by a collector or copyist. It is too vague and general for the author to have used it. And there is nothing in the body of the book which affirms any part of either title. Even the shorter title was an inference from the general character of the writing. Nowhere is criticism less hampered by problems of authenticity and inspiration. No question arises, at least directly, of pseudonymity either of author or of readers, for both are anonymous. For the purpose of tracing the history and interpreting the meaning of the book, the absence of a title, or of any definite historical data, is a disadvantage. We are left to infer its historical context from a few fragments of uncertain tradition, and from such general references to historical conditions as the document itself contains. Where no date, name or well-known event is fixed, it becomes impossible to decide, among many possibilities, what known historical conditions, if any, are pre-supposed. Yet this very fact, of the book\'s detachment from personal and historical incidents, renders it more self-contained, and its exegesis less dependent upon understanding the exact historical situation. But its general relation to the thought of its time must be taken into account if we are to understand it at all.<P>II. Literary Form.<P>1. The Author\'s Culture and Style:<P>The writer was evidently a man of culture, who had a masterly command of the Greek language. The theory of Clement of Alexandria, that the work was a translation from Hebrew, was merely an inference from the supposition that it was first addressed to Hebrew-speaking Christians. It bears none of the marks of a translation. It is written in pure idiomatic Greek. The writer had an intimate knowledge of the Septuagint, and was familiar with Jewish life. He was well-read in Hellenic literature (e.g. Wisdom), and had probably made a careful study of Philo (see VI below). His argument proceeds continuously and methodically, in general, though not strict, accord with the rules of Greek rhetoric, and without the interruptions and digressions which render Paul\'s arguments so hard to follow. "Where the literary skill of the author comes out is in the deft adjustment of the argumentative to the hortatory sections" (Moffatt, Introduction, 424f). He has been classed with Luke as the most "cultured" of the early Christian writers.<P>2. Letter, Epistle or Treatise?:<P>It has been questioned whether Hebrews is rightly called a letter at all. Unlike all Paul\'s letters, it opens without any personal note of address or salutation; and at the outset it sets forth, in rounded periods and in philosophical language, the central theme which is developed throughout. In this respect it resembles the Johannine writings alone in the New Testament. But as the argument proceeds, the personal note of application, exhortation and expostulation emerges more clearly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,1);">Heb 2:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,\'1-12\');">3:1-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,1,14);">4:1, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,11);">5:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,9);">6:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,9);">10:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">13:7</a>); and it ends with greetings and salutations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>). The writer calls it "a word of exhortation." The verb epesteila (the Revised Version (British and American) "I have written") is the usual expression for writing a letter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,22);">Heb 13:22</a>). Hebrews begins like an essay, proceeds like a sermon, and ends as a letter.<P>Deissmann, who distinguishes between a "true letter," the genuine personal message of one man to another, and an "epistle," or a treatise written in imitation of the form of a letter, but with an eye on the reading public, puts Hebrews in the latter class; nor would he "consider it anything but a literary oration<6F>hence, not as an epistle at all<6C>if the epesteila, and the greetings at the close, did not permit of the supposition that it had at one time opened with something of the nature of an address as well" (Bible Studies, 49-50). There is no textual or historical evidence of any opening address having ever stood as part of the text; nor does the opening section bear any mark or suggestion of fragmentariness, as if it had once followed such an address.<P>Yet the supposition that a greeting once stood at the beginning of our document is not so impossible as Zahn thinks (Introduction to the New Testament, II, 313f), as a comparison with James or 1 Peter will show.<P>So unusual is the phenomenon of a letter without a greeting, that among the ancients, Pantaenus had offered the explanation that Paul, out of modesty, had refrained from putting his name to a letter addressed to the Hebrews, because the Lord Himself had been apostle to them.<P>In recent times, Julicher and Harnack have conjectured that the author intentionally suppressed the greeting, either from motives of prudence at a time of persecution, or because it was unnecessary, since the bearer of the letter would communicate the name of the sender to the recipients.<P>Overbeck advanced the more revolutionary hypothesis that the letter once opened with a greeting, but from someone other than Paul; that in order to satisfy the general conditions of canonization, the non-apostolic greeting was struck out by the Alexandrians, and the personal references in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'22-25\');">Heb 13:22-25</a> added, in order to represent it as Pauline.<P>3. A Unity or a Composite Work?:<P>W. Wrede, starting from this theory, rejects the first part of it and adopts the second. He does not base his hypothesis on the conditions of canonization, but on an examination of the writing itself. He adopts Deissmann\'s rejected alternative, and argues that the main part of the book was originally not an epistle at all, but a general doctrinal treatise. Then <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'1-\');">Heb 13</a>, and especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">13:18</A>ff, were added by a later hand, in order to represent the whole as a Pauline letter, and the book in its final form was made, after all, pseudonymous. The latter supposition is based upon an assumed reference to imprisonment in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,19);">13:19</A> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Phm\',1,22);">Phm 1:22</a>) and upon the reference to Timothy in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">Heb 13:23</a> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,19);">Php 2:19</a>); and the proof that these professed Pauline phrases are not really Pauline is found in a supposed contradiction between <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,19);">Heb 13:19</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">13:23</A>. But <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,19);">13:19</A> does not necessarily refer to imprisonment exclusively or even at all, and therefore it stands in no contradiction with <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">13:23</A> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,\'9-13\');">Ro 1:9-13</a>). And Timothy must have associated with many Christian leaders besides Paul. But why should anybody who wanted to represent the letter as Pauline and who scrupled not to add to it for that purpose, refrain from the obvious device of prefixing a Pauline greeting? Moreover, it is only by the most forced special pleading that it can be maintained that <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-\');">Heb 1-12</a> are a mere doctrinal treatise, devoid of all evidences of a personal relation to a circumscribed circle of readers. The period and manner of the readers\' conversion are defined (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</A>f). Their present spiritual condition is described in terms of such anxiety and hope as betoken a very intimate personal relation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,11);">5:11</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,\'9-11\');">6:9-11</a>). Their past conflicts, temptations, endurance and triumph are recalled for their encouragement under present trials, and both past and present are defined in particular terms that point to concrete situations well known to writer and readers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'32-36\');">10:32-36</a>). There is, it is true, not in Hebrews the same intense and all-pervading personal note as appears in the earlier Pauline letters; the writer often loses sight of his particular audience and develops his argument in detached and abstract form. But it cannot be assumed that nothing is a letter which does not conform to the Pauline model. And the presence of long, abstract arguments does not justify the excision or explaining away of undoubted personal passages. Neither the language nor the logic of the book either demands or permits the separation of doctrinal and personal passages from one another, so as to leave for residuum a mere doctrinal treatise. Doctrinal statements lead up to personal exhortations, and personal exhortations form the transition to new arguments; they are indissolubly involved in one another; and chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'1-\');">13</a> presents no such exceptional features as to justify its separation from the whole work. There is really no reason, but the unwarrantable assumption that an ancient writer must have conformed with a certain convention of letter-writing, to forbid the acceptance of Hebrews for what it appears to be<62>a defense of Christianity written for the benefit of definite readers, growing more intimate and personal as the writer gathers his argument into a practical appeal to the hearts and consciences of his readers,<P>III. The Author.<P>Certain coincidences of language and thought between this epistle and that of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians justify the inference that Hebrews was known in Rome toward the end of the 1st century AD (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,7,31);">Heb 11:7, 31</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,3);">1:3</A>ff with Clement ad Cor 9,12,36). Clement makes no explicit reference to the book or its author: the quotations are unacknowledged. But they show that Hebrews already had some authority in Rome. The same inference is supported by similarities of expression found also in the Shepherd of Hermas. The possible marks of its influence in Polycarp and Justin Martyr are too uncertain and indefinite to justify any inference. Its name does not appear in the list of New Testament writings compiled and acknowledged by Marcion, nor in that of the Muratorian Fragment. The latter definitely assigns letters by Paul to only seven churches, and so inferentially excludes Hebrews.<P>When the book emerges into the clear light of history toward the end of the 2nd century, the tradition as to its authorship is seen to divide into three different streams.<P>(1) Alexandrian: Paul<P>In Alexandria, it was regarded as in some sense the work of Paul. Clement tells how his teacher, apparently Pantaenus, explained why Paul does not in this letter, as in others, address his readers under his name. Out of reverence for the Lord (II, 2, above) and to avoid suspicion and prejudice, he as apostle of the Gentiles refrains from addressing himself to the Hebrews as their apostle. Clement accepts this explanation, and adds to it that the original Hebrew of Paul\'s epistle had been translated into Greek by Luke. That Paul wrote in Hebrew was assumed from the tradition or inference that the letter was addressed to Aramaic-speaking Hebrews. Clement also had noticed the dissimilarity of its Greek from that of Paul\'s epistles, and thought he found a resemblance to that of Acts.<P>Origen starts with the same tradition, but he knew, moreover, that other churches did not accept the Alexandrian view, and that they even criticized Alexandria for admitting Hebrews into the Canon. And he feels, more than Clement, that not only the language, but the forms of thought are different from those of Paul\'s epistles. This he tries to explain by the hypothesis that while the ideas were Paul\'s, they had been formulated and written down by some other disciple. He found traditions that named Luke and Clement of Rome, but who the actual writer was, Origen declares that "God alone knows."<P>The Pauline tradition persisted in Alexandria, and by the 4th century it was accepted without any of the qualifications made by Clement and Origen. It had also in the same period spread over the other eastern churches, both Greek and Syrian. But the Pauline tradition, where it is nearest the fountain-head of history, in Clement and Origen, only ascribes Hebrews to Paul in a secondary sense.<P>(2) African: Barnabas<P>In the West, the Pauline tradition failed to assert itself till the 4th century, and was not generally accepted till the 5th century. In Africa, another tradition prevailed, namely, that Barnabas was the author. This was the only other definite tradition of authorship that prevailed in antiquity. Tertullian, introducing a quotation of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,1,4,5,6);">Heb 6:1, 4-6</a>, writes: "There is also an Epistle to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas...and the Epistle of Barnabas is more generally received among the churches than that apocryphal \'Shepherd\' of adulterers" (De Pudicitia, 20). Tertullian is not expressing his mere personal opinion, but quoting a tradition which had so far established itself as to appear in the title of the epistle in the MS, and he betrays no consciousness of the existence of any other tradition. Zahn infers that this view prevailed in Montanist churches and may have originated in Asia. Moffatt thinks that it had also behind it "some Roman tradition" (Introduction, 437). If it was originally, or at any time, the tradition of the African churches, it gave way there to the Alexandrian view in the course of the 4th century. A Council of Hippo in 393 reckons "thirteen epistles of the apostle Paul, and one by the same to the Hebrews." A council of Carthage in 419 reckons "fourteen epistles of the apostle Paul." By such gradual stages did the Pauline tradition establish itself.<P>(3) Rome and the West: Anonymous<P>All the evidence tends to show that in Rome and the remaining churches of the West, the epistle was originally anonymous. No tradition of authorship appears before the 4th century. And Stephen Gobarus, writing in 600, says that both Irenaeus and Hippolytus denied the Pauline authorship. Photius repeats this statement as regards Hippolytus. Neither he nor Gobarus mentions any alternative view (Zahn, Intro, II, 310). The epistle was known in Rome (to Clement) toward the end of the 1st century, and if Paul\'s name, or any other, had been associated with it from the beginning, it is impossible that it could have been forgotten by the time of Hippolytus. The western churches had no reason for refusing to admit Hebrews into the Pauline and canonical list of books, except only that they did not believe it to be the work of Paul, or of any other apostle.<P>It seems therefore certain that the epistle first became generally known as an anonymous writing. Even the Alexandrian tradition implies as much, for it appears first as an explanation by Pantaenus why Paul concealed his name. The idea that Paul was the author was therefore an Alexandrian inference. The religious value of the epistle was naturally first recognized in Alexandria, and the name of Paul, the chief letter-writer of the church, at once occurred to those in search for its author. Two facts account for the ultimate acceptance of that view by the whole church. The spiritual value and authority of the book were seen to be too great to relegate it into the same class as the Shepherd or the Epistle of Barnabas. And the conception of the Canon developed into the hard-and-fast rule of apostolicity. No writing could be admitted into the Canon unless it had an apostle for its author; and when Hebrews could no longer be excluded, it followed that its apostolic authorship must be affirmed. The tradition already existing in Alexandria supplied the demand, and who but Paul, among the apostles, could have written it?<P>The Pauline theory prevailed together with the scheme of thought that made it necessary, from the 5th to the 16th century. The Humanists and the Reformers rejected it. But it was again revived in the 17th and 18th centuries, along with the recrudescence of scholastic ideas. It is clear, however, that tradition and history shed no light upon the question of the authorship of Hebrews. They neither prove nor disprove the Pauline, or any other theory.<P>2. The Witness of the Epistle Itself:<P>We are therefore thrown back, in our search for the author, on such evidence as the epistle itself affords, and that is wholly inferential. It seems probable that the author was a Hellenist, a Greek-speaking Jew. He was familiar with the Scriptures of the Old Testament and with the religious ideas and worship of the Jews. He claims the inheritance of their sacred history, traditions and institutions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,1);">Heb 1:1</a>), and dwells on them with an intimate knowledge and enthusiasm that would be improbable, though not impossible, in a proselyte, and still more in a Christian convert from heathenism. But he knew the Old Testament only in the Septuagint translation, which he follows even where it deviates from the Hebrew. He writes Greek with a purity of style and vocabulary to which the writings of Luke alone in the New Testament can be compared. His mind is imbued with that combination of Hebrew and Greek thought which is best known in the writings of Philo. His general typological mode of thinking, his use of the allegorical method, as well as the adoption of many terms that are most familiar in Alexandrian thought, all reveal the Hellenistic mind. Yet his fundamental conceptions are in full accord with the teaching of Paul and of the Johannine writings.<P>The central position assigned to Christ, the high estimate of His person, the saving significance of His death, the general trend of the ethical teaching, the writer\'s opposition to asceticism and his esteem for the rulers and teachers of the church, all bear out the inference that he belonged to a Christian circle dominated by Pauline ideas. The author and his readers alike were not personal disciples of Jesus, but had received the gospel from those who had heard the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>) and who were no longer living (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">Heb 13:7</a>). He had lived among his readers, and had probably been their teacher and leader; he is now separated from them but he hopes soon to return to them again (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>f).<P>Is it possible to give a name to this person?<P>(1) Paul not the Author<P>Although the Pauline tradition itself proves nothing, the internal evidence is conclusive against it. We know enough about Paul to be certain that he could not have written Hebrews, and that is all that can be said with confidence on the question of authorship. The style and language, the categories of thought and the method of argument, all differ widely from those of any writings ascribed to Paul. The latter quotes the Old Testament from the Hebrew and Septuagint, but he only from Septuagint. Paul\'s formula of quotation is, "It is written" or "The scripture saith"; that of Hebrews, "God," or "The Holy Spirit," or "One somewhere saith." For Paul the Old Testament is law, and stands in antithesis to the New Testament, but in Hebrews the Old Testament is covenant, and is the "shadow" of the New Covenant. Paul\'s characteristic terms, "Christ Jesus," and "Our Lord Jesus Christ," are never found in Hebrews; and "Jesus Christ" only 3 times (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,10);">10:10</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,8);">13:8</a>), and "the Lord" (for Christ) only twice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,14);">7:14</A>)<29>phrases used by Paul over 600 times (Zahn). Paul\'s Christology turns around the death, resurrection and living presence of Christ in the church, that of Hebrews around His high-priestly function in heaven. Their conceptions of God differ accordingly. In Hebrews it is Judaistic-Platonistic, or (in later terminology) Deistic. The revelation of the Divine Fatherhood and the consequent immanence of God in history and in the world had not possessed the author s mind as it had Paul\'s. Since the present world is conceived in Hebrews as a world of "shadows," God could only intervene in it by mediators.<P>The experience and conception of salvation are also different in these two writers. There is no evidence in Hebrews of inward conflict and conversion and of constant personal relation with Christ, which constituted the entire spiritual life of Paul. The apostle\'s central doctrine, that of justification by faith, does not appear in Hebrews. Faith is less the personal, mystical relation with Christ, that it is for Paul, than a general hope which lays hold of the future to overcome the present; and salvation is accomplished by cleansing, sanctification and perfection, not by justification. While Paul\'s mind was not uninfluenced by Hellenistic thought, as we find it in Alexandria (as, e.g. in Col and Eph), it nowhere appears in his epistles so clearly and prominently as it does in Hebrews. Moreover, the author of Hebrews was probably a member of the community to which he writes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>f), but Paul never stood in quite the relation supposed here to any church. Finally, Paul could not have written <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>, for he emphatically declares that he did not receive his gospel from the older disciples (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,12);">Ga 1:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,6);">2:6</a>).<P>The general Christian ideas on which He was in agreement with Paul were part of the heritage which the apostle had left to all the churches. The few more particular affinities of Hebrews with certain Pauline writings (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,2);">Heb 2:2</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,19);">Ga 3:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,22);">Heb 12:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,14);">3:14</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,25);">Ga 4:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,10);">Heb 2:10</a> parallel <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,36);">Ro 11:36</a>; also with Ephesians; (see yon Soden, Hand-Commentar, 3) are easily explicable either as due to the author\'s reading of Paul\'s Epistles or as reminiscences of Pauline phrases that were current in the churches. But they are too few and slender to rest upon them any presumption against the arguments which disprove the Pauline tradition.<P>(2) Other Theories<P>The passage that is most conclusive against the Pauline authorship (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>) is equally conclusive against any other apostle being the author. But almost every prominent name among the Christians of the second generation has been suggested. The epistle itself excludes Timothy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">Heb 13:23</a>), and Titus awaits his turn. Otherwise Luke, Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Silas, Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila, Philip the Deacon, and Aristion have all had their champions.<P>(a) Luke and Clement<P>The first two, Luke and Clement, were brought in through their connection with Paul. Where it was recognized that a direct Pauline authorship could not be maintained, the Pauline tradition might still be retained, if the epistle could be assigned to one of the apostle\'s disciples. These two were fixed upon as being well-known writers. But this very fact reveals the improbability of theory. Similar arguments from language and thought to those derived from the comparison of Hebrews with the Pauline writings avail also in the comparison of Hebrews with the writings of Luke and Clement. Both these disciples of the apostle adhere much closer to his system of thought than Hebrews does, and they reveal none of the influences of Alexandrian thought, which is predominant in Hebrews.<P>(b) Barnabas; Priscilla and Aquila; Philip; Aristion; Apollos<P>Of all the other persons suggested, so little is known that it is impossible to establish, with any convincing force, an argument for or against their authorship.<P>(i) Barnabas was a Levite of Cyprus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,36);">Ac 4:36</a>), and once a companion of Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,2);">Ac 13:2</a>). Another ancient writing is called "the Epistle of Barnabas," but it has no affinity with Hebrews. The coincidence of the occurrence of the word "consolation" in Barnabas\' name (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,36);">Ac 4:36</a>) and in the writer\'s description of Hebrews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,22);">13:22</a>) is quite irrelevant. Tertullian\'s tradition is the only positive argument in favor of the Barnabas theory. It has been argued against it that Barnabas, being a Levite, could not have shown the opposition to the Levitical system, and the unfamiliarity with it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">Heb 7:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,4);">9:4</a>), which is supposed to mark our epistle. But the author\'s Levitical system was derived, not from the Hebrew Old Testament, nor from the Jerusalem temple, but from Jewish tradition; and the supposed inaccuracies as to the daily sin offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">7:27</a>), and the position of the golden altar of incense (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,4);">9:4</a>) have been traced to Jewish tradition (see Moffatt, Introduction, 438). And the writer\'s hostility to the Levitical system is not nearly as intense as that of Paul to Pharisaism. There is nothing that renders it intrinsically impossible that Barnabas was the author, nor is anything known of him that makes it probable; and if he was, it is a mystery why the tradition was confined to Africa.<P>(ii) Harnack has argued the probability of a joint authorship by Priscilla and Aquila. The interchange of "I" and "we" he explains as due to a dual authorship by persons intimately related, but such an interchange of the personal "I" and the epistolary "we" can be paralleled in the Epistles of Paul (e.g. Romans) where no question of joint authorship arises. The probable relation of the author to a church in Rome may suit Priscilla arid Aquila (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',16,5);">Ro 16:5</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'22-24\');">Heb 13:22-24</a>), but even if this interpretation of the aforementioned passages were correct, it is possible and probable that Luke, Barnabas, Apollos, and certainly Clement, stood in a similar relation to a Roman church. Harnack, on this theory, explains the disappearance of the author\'s name as due to prejudice against women teachers. This is the only novel point in favor of this theory as compared with several others; and it does not explain why Aquila\'s name should not have been retained with the address. The evidences adduced of a feminine mind behind the epistle are highly disputable. On the other hand, a female disciple of Paul\'s circle would scarcely assume such authority in the church as the author of Hebrews does (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,17);">13:17</a>f; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,34);">1Co 14:34</a>f). And nothing that is known of Priscilla and Aquila would suggest the culture and the familiarity with Alexandrian thought possessed by this writer. <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,26);">Ac 18:26</a> does not prove that they were expert and cultured teachers, but only that they knew and could repeat the salient points of Paul\'s early preaching. So unusual a phenomenon as this theory supposes demands more evidence to make it even probable. (But see Rendel Harris, Sidelights on New Testament Research, 148-76.)<P>(iii) Philip the Deacon and Aristion, "a disciple of the Lord" mentioned by Papias, are little more than names to us. No positive knowledge of either survives on which any theory can be built. It is probable that both were personal disciples of the Lord, and they could not therefore have written <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>.<P>(iv) Apollos has found favor with many scholars from Luther downward. No ancient tradition supports this theory, a fact which tells heavily against it, but not conclusively, for someone must have written the letter, and his name was actually lost to early tradition, unless it were Barnabas, and that tradition too was unknown to the vast majority of the early churches. All that is known of Apollos suits the author of Hebrews. He may have learned the gospel from "them that heard" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</A>); he was a Jew, "an Alexandrian by race, a learned (or eloquent) man," "mighty in the Scriptures," "he powerfully confuted the Jews" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,24);">Ac 18:24</a>), and he belonged to the same Pauline circle as Timothy and Titus (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',16,\'10-12\');">1Co 16:10-12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,13);">Tit 3:13</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">Heb 13:23</a>). The Alexandrian type of thought, the affinities with Philo, the arguments from Jewish tradition and ceremonial, the fluent style, may all have issued from "an eloquent Jew of Alexandria." But it does not follow that Apollos was the only person of this type. The author may have been a Gentile, as the purity of his Greek language and style suggests; and the combination of Greek and Hebrew thought, which the epistle reflects, and even Philo\'s terms, may have had a wide currency outside Alexandria, as for instance in the great cosmopolitan cities of Asia. All that can be said is that the author of Hebrews was someone generally like what is known of Apollos, but who he actually was, we must confess with Origen, "God alone knows."<P>IV. Destination.<P>The identity of the first readers of Hebrews is, if possible, more obscure than that of the author. It was written to Christians, and to a specific body or group of Christians (see I above). The title "to Hebrews" might mean properly Palestinian Jews who spoke the Hebrew language, but the fact that the epistle was written in Greek excludes that supposition. It therefore meant Christians of Jewish origin, and gives no indication of their place of residence. The title represents an early inference drawn from the contents of the document, and the tradition it embodies was unanimously accepted from the 2nd century down to the early part of the last century. Now, however, a considerable body of critics hold that the original readers were Gentiles. The question is entirely one of inference from the contents of the epistle itself.<P>1. General Character of the Readers:<P>The readers, like the writer, received the gospel first from "them that heard" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>), from the personal disciples of the Lord, but they were not of their number. They had witnessed "signs and wonders" and "manifold powers" and "gifts of the Holy Spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,4);">Heb 2:4</a>). Their conversion had been thorough, and their faith and Christian life had been of a high order. They had a sound knowledge of the first principles of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,1);">Heb 6:1</a>). They had become "partakers of Christ," and had need only to "hold fast the beginning of (their) confidence firm unto the end" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,14);">Heb 3:14</a>). They had been fruitful in good works, ministering unto the saints (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,10);">Heb 6:10</a>), enduring suffering and persecution, and sympathizing with whose who were imprisoned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'32-34\');">Heb 10:32-34</a>). All this had been in former days which appeared now remote. Their rulers and ministers of those days are now dead (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">Heb 13:7</a>). And they themselves have undergone a great change. While they should have been teachers, they have become dull of hearing, and have need again to be taught the rudiments of the first principles of the gospel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,12);">Heb 5:12</a>), and they are in danger of a great apostasy from the faith. They need warning against "an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,12);">Heb 3:12</a>). They are become sluggish (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,12);">Heb 6:12</a>), profane like Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,16);">Heb 12:16</a>), worldly-minded (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,5);">Heb 13:5</a>). Perhaps their religion was tending toward a false asceticism and outward works (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,4,9);">Heb 13:4, 9</a>). And now that this moral dulness and spiritual indifference had fallen upon them, they are being subjected to a new test by persecution from outside (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,36);">Heb 10:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,4);">12:4</a>), which renders the danger of their falling away from the faith all the more imminent. The author apparently bases his claim to warn them on the fact that he had been a teacher among them, and hoped soon to return to them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>f). The same might be said perhaps of Timothy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">Heb 13:23</a>). Both author and readers had friends in Italy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,24);">Heb 13:24</a>) who were with the author when he wrote, either in Italy saluting the readers outside, or outside, saluting the readers in Italy. In all this there is little or nothing to help to fix the destination of the letter, for it might be true at some time or other of any church.<P>2. Jews or Gentiles?:<P>The old tradition that the readers were Jews claims some more definite support from the epistle itself. The writer assumes an intimate knowledge of the Old Testament and of Jewish ceremonial on their part. The fathers of the Hebrew race are also their fathers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,1);">Heb 1:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,9);">3:9</a>). The humanity that Christ assumed and redeemed is called "the seed of Abraham" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,16);">Heb 2:16</a>). All this, however, might stand in reference to a Gentile church, for the early Christians, without distinction of race, regarded themselves as the true Israel and heirs of the Hebrew revelation, and of all that related to it (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,1);">1Co 10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,7);">Ga 3:7</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,21);">4:21</A>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,\'11-18\');">Ro 4:11-18</a>). Still there is force in Zahn\'s argument that "Hebrews does not contain a single sentence in which it is so much as intimated that the readers became members of God\'s people who descended from Abraham, and heirs of the promise given to them and their forefathers, and how they became such" (Intro to New Testament, II, 323). Zahn further finds a direct proof in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,13);">Heb 13:13</a> that "both the readers and the author belong to the Jewish people," which he interprets as "meaning that the readers were to renounce fellowship with the Jewish people who had rejected Jesus, to confess the crucified Jesus, and to take upon themselves all the ignominy that Jesus met at the hands of his countrymen" (ibid., 324-25). But that is too large an inference to draw from a figurative expression which need not, and probably does not, mean more than an exhortation to rely on the sacrifice of Christ, rather than upon any external rules and ceremomes. Nor were the "divers and strange teachings" about marriage and meats (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,4,9);">13:4,9</a>) necessarily Jewish doctrines. They might be the doctrines of an incipient Gnosticism which spread widely throughout the Christian churches, both Jewish and Gentile, toward the end of the 1st century. There is otherwise no evidence that the apostasy, of which the readers stood in danger, was into Judaism, but it was rather a general unbelief and "falling away from the living God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,12);">3:12</a>).<P>It is the whole argument of the epistle, rather than any special references, that produced the tradition, and supports the view, that the readers were Jews. The entire message of the epistle, the dominant claims of Christ and of the Christian faith, rests upon the supposition that the readers held Moses, Aaron, the Jewish priesthood, the old Covenant and the Levitical ritual, in the highest esteem. The author\'s argument is: You will grant the Divine authority and greatness of Moses, Aaron and the Jewish institutions: Christ is greater than they; therefore you ought to be faithful to Him. He assumes an exclusively Jewish point of view in the minds of his readers as his major premise. He could scarcely do that, if they had been Gentiles. Paul, when writing to the mixed church at Rome, relates his philosophy of the Christian revelation to both Jewish and Gentile pre-Christian revelation. Gentile Christians adopted the Jewish tradition as their own in consequence of, and secondary to, their attachment to Christianity. Even Judaizing Gentile Christians, such as may be supposed to have belonged to the Galatian and Corinthian churches, adopted some parts of the Jewish law only as a supplement to Christianity, but not as its basis.<P>Von Soden and others have argued with much reason that these Christians were not in danger of falling back into Judaism from Christianity, but rather of falling away from all faith into unbelief and materialism, like the Israelites in the wilderness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,7);">Heb 3:7</a>), or Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,16);">Heb 12:16</a>). With all its references to Old Testament sacrifice and ceremonial, the letter contains not a single warning against reviving them, nor any indications that the readers were in danger of so doing (Hand-Commentar, 12-16). But it has been too readily assumed that these facts prove that the readers were not Jews. The pressure of social influence and persecution rendered Jews and Jewish Christians, as well as Gentile Christians, liable to apostatize to heathenism or irreligion (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 2:10,20</span>; 2Macc 4; 6; 7; Philo, De Migratione Abrahami, XVI; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,10,12);">Mt 24:10, 12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,30);">Ac 20:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,7,14);">1Co 10:7, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',2,4);">2Th 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,18);">1Joh 2:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,21);">5:21</a>; Pliny Epistle X, 96). Von Soden\'s argument really cuts the other way. If the writer had been dealing with Gentile Christians who were in danger of relapsing into heathenism or of falling into religious indifference, his argument from the shadowy and temporary glories of Judaism to the perfect salvation in Christ would avail nothing, because, for such, his premises would depend upon his conclusion. But if they were Jewish Christians, even though leaning toward heathenism, his argument is well calculated to call up on its side all the dormant force of their early religious training. He is not arguing them out of a "subtle Judaism" quickened by the zeal of a propaganda (Moffatt, Introduction, 449-50), but from "drifting away" in Heb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,1);">2:1</A>), from "neglect" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</A>), from "an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,12);">3:12</A>), from "disobedience" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,11);">4:11</A>), from "a dulness of hearing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,11);">5:11</A>), but into "diligence...that ye be not sluggish" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,11);">6:11</A>f), into "boldness and patience" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,35);">10:35</A>f), and to "lift up the hands that hang down, and the palsied knees" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,12);">12:12</A>); and this he might well do by his appeal to their whole religious experience, both Jewish and Christian, and to the whole religious history of their race.<P>3. The Locality of the Readers:<P>The question of the locality of these "Hebrews" remains a matter for mere conjecture. Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome, Antioch, Colosse, Ephesus, Berea, Ravenna and other places have been suggested. Tradition, since Clement of Alexandria, fixed on Jerusalem, but on the untenable ground that the letter was written to Aramaic-speaking Jews. The undisputed fact that it was written in Greek tells against Jerusalem. So does the absence of all reference to the temple ritual, and the mention of almsgiving as the chief grace of the "Hebrews" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,10);">6:10</A>). Jerusalem received rather than gave alms. Nor is it likely that all the personal disciples of the Lord would have died out in Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</a>). And it could not be charged against the mother church that it had produced no teachers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,12);">5:12</A>). These points also tell with almost equal force against any Palestinian locality.<P>Alexandria was suggested as an alternative to Jerusalem, on the supposition that those references to Jewish ritual which did not correspond with the Jerusalem ritual (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">Heb 7:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,4);">9:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,11);">10:11</a>) might refer to the temple at Leontopolis. But the ritual system of the epistle is that of the tabernacle and of tradition, and not of any temple. The Alexandrian character of the letter has bearing on the identity of the author, but not so much on that of his readers. The erroneous idea that Paul was the author arose in Alexandria, but it would have been least likely to arise where the letter was originally sent.<P>Rome has lately found much favor. We first learn of the existence of the letter at Rome. The phrase "they of Italy salute you" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,24);">Heb 13:24</a>) implies that either the writer or his readers were in Italy. It may be more natural to think of the writer, with a small group of Italian friends away from home, sending greetings to Italy, than to suppose that a greeting from Italy generally was sent to a church at a distance. It is probable that a body of Jewish Christians existed in Rome, as in other large cities of the Empire. But this view does not, as von Soden thinks, explain any coincidences between Hebrews and Romans. A Roman origin might. It could explain the use of Hebrews by Clement. But the letter might also have come to Rome by Clement\'s time, even though it was originally sent elsewhere. The slender arguments in favor of Rome find favor chiefly because no arguments can be adduced in favor of any other place.<P>V. Date.<P>1. Terminal Dates:<P>The latest date for the composition of Hebrews is clearly fixed as earlier than 96 AD by reason of its use by Clement of Rome about that time. There is no justification for the view that Hebrews shows dependence on Josephus. The earliest date cannot be so definitely fixed. The apparent dependence of Hebrews on Paul\'s Epistles, Galatians, 1 Corinthians and Romans, brings it beyond 50 AD.<P>2. Conversion and History of Readers:<P>But we have data in the epistle itself which require a date considerably later. The readers had been converted by personal disciples of the Lord (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>). They did not, therefore, belong to the earliest group of Christians. But it is not necessary to suppose a long interval between the Lord\'s ascension and their conversion. The disciples were scattered widely from Jerusalem by the persecution that followed the death of Stephen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,1);">Ac 8:1</a>). "We may well believe that the vigorous preaching of Stephen would set a wave in motion which would be felt even at Rome" (Sanday, Romans, xxviii). They are not, therefore, necessarily to be described as Christians of the 2nd generation in the strict chronological sense. But the letter was written a considerable time after their conversion. They have had time for great development in Heb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,12);">5:12</a>). They have forgotten the former days after their conversion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,32);">10:32</A>). Their early leaders are now dead (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">13:7</A>). Yet the majority of the church still consists of the first converts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">2:3</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,32);">10:32</A>). And although no argument can be based upon the mention of 40 years (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,9);">3:9</A>), for it is only an incidental phrase in a quotation, yet no longer interval could lie between the founding of the church and the writing of the letter. It might be shorter. And the church may have been founded at any time from 32 to 70 AD.<P>3. Doctrinal Development:<P>The doctrinal development represented in Hebrews stands midway between the system of the later Pauline Epistles (Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians) and that of the Johannine Writings. The divers and strange teachings mentioned include only such ascetic tendencies about meat and marriage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,4,9);">Heb 13:4, 9</a>) as are reflected in Paul\'s Epistles early and late. There is no sign of the appearance of the full-blown heresies of the Ebionites, Docetists, and Gnostics, which became prevalent before the end of the 1st century. On the other hand the Logos-doctrine as the interpretation of the person of Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-4\');">Heb 1:1-4</a>) is more fully thought out than in Paul, but less explicit, and less assimilated with the purpose of Christianity, than in the Fourth Gospel.<P>4. The Fall of Jerusalem:<P>It has been argued that the letter must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, because in writing to a Jewish community, and especially in dealing with Jewish ritual, the writer would have referred to that event, if it had happened. This point would be relevant, if the letter had been addressed to Jerusalem, which is highly improbable. But, at a distance, an author so utterly unconcerned with contemporary history could easily have omitted mention of even so important a fact. For in fact the author never mentions the temple or its ritual. His system is that of the tabernacle of the Old Testament and of Jewish tradition. The writer\'s interest is not in historical Judaism, and his omission to mention the great catastrophe does not prove that it had not occurred. The use of the present tense of the ritual does not imply its present continuance. "The present expresses the fact that so it is enjoined in the law, the past that with the founding of the New Covenant the old had been abolished" (Peake, Hebrews, 39).<P>5. Timothy:<P>A point of contact with contemporary history is found in the fact that Timothy was still living and active when Hebrews was written (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">13:23</A>), but it does not carry us far. Timothy was a young man and already a disciple, when Paul visited Galatia on his 2nd journey about 46 AD (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,1);">Ac 16:1</a>). And he may have lived to the end of the century or near to it. It cannot be safely argued from the mere mention of his name alone, that Paul and his other companions were dead.<P>6. Two Persecutions:<P>Two incidents in the history of the readers are mentioned which afford further ground for a somewhat late date. Immediately after their conversion, they suffered persecution, "a great conflict of sufferings; partly, being made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, becoming partakers with them that were so used" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,32);">Heb 10:32</a>f). And now again, when the letter is written, they are entering upon another time of similar trial, in which they "have need of patience" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,36);">Heb 10:36</a>), though they "have not yet resisted unto blood" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,4);">Heb 12:4</a>). Their leaders, at least, it would appear, the writer and Timothy, have also been in prison, but one is at liberty and the other expects to be soon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,19,23);">Heb 13:19, 23</a>). It has been conjectured that the first persecution was that under Nero in 64 AD, and the second, that in the reign of Domitian, after 81 AD. But when it is remembered that in some part of the Empire Christians were almost always under persecution, and that the locale of these readers is very uncertain, these last criteria do not justify any dogmatizing. It is certain that the letter was written in the second half of the 1st century. Certain general impressions, the probability that the first apostles and leaders of the church were dead, the absence of any mention of Paul, the development of Paul\'s theological ideas in a new medium, the disappearance of the early enthusiasm, the many and great changes that had come over the community, point strongly to the last quarter of the century. The opinions of scholars at present seem to converge about the year 80 AD or a little later.<P>VI. Contents.<P>1. Summary of Contents:<p><b>I. The Revelation of God in His Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-\');">Heb 1</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>)</b>.<P class="in15">1. Christ the completion of revelation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-3\');">Heb 1:1-3</a>).<P class="in15">2. Christ\'s superiority over the angels (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,4);">Heb 1:4</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Because He is a Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'4-6\');">Heb 1:4-6</a>).<P class="in30">(2) Because His reign is eternal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,7);">Heb 1:7</a>).<P class="in15">3. The dangers of neglecting salvation through the Son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'1-4\');">Heb 2:1-4</a>).<P class="in15">4. The Son and humanity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,5);">Heb 2:5</a>).<P class="in30">(1) The lowliness and dignity of man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'5-8\');">Heb 2:5-8</a>).<P class="in30">(2) Necessity for the Incarnation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,9);">Heb 2:9</a>).<P class="in45">(a) To fulfill God\'s gracious purpose (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,9);">Heb 2:9</a>f).<P class="in45">(b) That the Saviour and saved might be one (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'11-15\');">Heb 2:11-15</a>).<P class="in45">(c) That the Saviour may sympathize with the saved (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,16);">Heb 2:16</a>).<P><b>II. The Prince of Salvation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,\'1-\');">Heb 3:1</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'1-13\');">4:13</a>)</b>.<P class="in15">1. Christ as Son superior to Moses as servant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,\'1-6\');">Heb 3:1-6</a>).<P class="in15">2. Consequences of Israel\'s unbelief (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,\'7-11\');">Heb 3:7-11</a>).<P class="in15">3. Warning the "Hebrews" against similar unbelief (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,12);">Heb 3:12</a>).<P class="in15">4. Exhortations to faithfulness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'1-13\');">Heb 4:1-13</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Because a rest remains for the people of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'1-11\');">Heb 4:1-11</a>).<P class="in30">(2) Because the omniscient God is judge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,12);">Heb 4:12</a>f).<P><b>III. The Great High Priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'14-\');">Heb 4:14-10:18</a>)</b>.<P class="in15">1. Christ\'s priesthood the Christian\'s confidence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'14-16\');">Heb 4:14-16</a>).<P class="in15">2. Christ has the essential qualifications for priesthood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'1-10\');">Heb 5:1-10</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Sympathy with men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'1-3\');">Heb 5:1-3</a>).<P class="in30">(2) God\'s appointment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'4-10\');">Heb 5:4-10</a>).<P class="in15">3. The spiritual dulness of the Hebrews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,11);">Heb 5:11-6:12</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Their lack of growth in knowledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,11);">Heb 5:11</a>).<P class="in30">(2) "Press on unto perfection" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,\'1-3\');">Heb 6:1-3</a>).<P class="in30">(3) The danger of falling away from Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,\'4-8\');">Heb 6:4-8</a>).<P class="in30">(4) Their past history ground for hoping better things (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,\'9-12\');">Heb 6:9-12</a>).<P class="in15">4. God\'s oath the ground of Christ\'s priesthood and of the believer\'s hope (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,13);">Heb 6:13</a>).<P class="in15">5. Christ a priest after the order of Melchizedek (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,1);">Heb 7:1</a>).<P class="in30">(1) The history of Melchizedek (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'1-3\');">Heb 7:1-3</a>).<P class="in30">(2) The superiority of his order over that of Aaron (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'4-10\');">Heb 7:4-10</a>).<P class="in30">(3) Supersession of the Aaronic priesthood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'11-19\');">Heb 7:11-19</a>).<P class="in30">(4) Superiority of Christ\'s priesthood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'20-24\');">Heb 7:20-24</a>).<P class="in30">(5) Christ a priest befitting us (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,24);">Heb 7:24</a>).<P class="in15">6. Christ the true high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,\'1-\');">Heb 8:1-10:18</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Because He entered the true sanctuary (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,\'1-5\');">Heb 8:1-5</a>).<P class="in30">(2) Because He is priest of the New Covenant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,6);">Heb 8:6</a>).<P class="in30">(3) A description of the old tabernacle and its services (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'1-7\');">Heb 9:1-7</a>).<P class="in30">(4) Ineffectiveness of its sacrifices (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'8-10\');">Heb 9:8-10</a>).<P class="in30">(5) Superiority of Christ\'s sacrifice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'11-14\');">Heb 9:11-14</a>).<P class="in30">(6) The Mediator of the New Covenant through His own blood (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,15);">Heb 9:15</a>).<P class="in30">(7) Weakness of the sacrifices of the law (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'1-5\');">Heb 10:1-5</a>).<P class="in30">(8) Incarnation for the sake of sacrifice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'6-9\');">Heb 10:6-9</a>).<P class="in30">(9) The one satisfactory sacrifice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'10-18\');">Heb 10:10-18</a>).<P><b>IV. Practical Exhortations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,19);">Heb 10:19-13:25</a>)</b>.<P class="in15">1. Draw near to God and hold fast the faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'19-23\');">Heb 10:19-23</a>).<P class="in15">2. The responsibility of Christians and the judgment of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'24-31\');">Heb 10:24-31</a>).<P class="in15">3. Past faithfulness a ground for present confidence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,32);">Heb 10:32</a>).<P class="in15">4. The household of faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,1);">Heb 11:1</a>).<P class="in30">(1) What is faith? (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,\'1-3\');">Heb 11:1-3</a>).<P class="in30">(2) The examples of faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,\'4-32\');">Heb 11:4-32</a>).<P class="in30">(3) The triumphs of faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,33);">Heb 11:33</a>).<P class="in15">5. Run the race looking unto Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'1-3\');">Heb 12:1-3</a>).<P class="in15">6. Sufferings as discipline from the Father (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'4-11\');">Heb 12:4-11</a>).<P class="in15">7. The duty of helping and loving the brethren (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,\'12-17\');">Heb 12:12-17</a>).<P class="in15">8. Comparison of the trials and privileges of Christians with those of the Israelites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,18);">Heb 12:18</a>).<P class="in15">9. Various duties (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'1-17\');">Heb 13:1-17</a>).<P class="in30">(1) Moral and social relations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'1-6\');">Heb 13:1-6</a>).<P class="in30">(2) Loyalty to leaders (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,7);">Heb 13:7</a>f).<P class="in30">(3) Beware of Jewish heresies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'9-14\');">Heb 13:9-14</A>).<P class="in30">(4) Ecclesiastical worship and order (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,\'15-17\');">Heb 13:15-17</a>).<P class="in15">10. Personal affairs and greetings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>).<P class="in30">(1) A request for the prayers of the church (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,18);">Heb 13:18</a>f).<P class="in30">(2) A prayer for the church (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,20);">Heb 13:20</a>f) .<P class="in30">(3) "Bear with the word of exhortation" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,22);">Heb 13:22</a>).<P class="in30">(4) "Our brother Timothy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,23);">Heb 13:23</a>).<P class="in30">(5) Greetings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,24);">Heb 13:24</a>).<P class="in30">(6) Grace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,25);">Heb 13:25</a>).<P>2. The Main Theme:<P>The theme of the epistle is the absoluteness of the Christian religion, as based-upon the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, the one and only mediator of salvation. The essence of Christ\'s preeminence is that He fully realizes in His own person the principles of revelation and reconciliation. It is made manifest in His superiority over the Jewish system of salvation, which He therefore at once supersedes and fulfils. The author\'s working concept is the Logos-doctrine of Philo; and the empirical data to which it is related is the religious history of Israel, as it culminates in Christianity. He makes no attempt to prove either his ideal first principles or his historical premises, and his philosophy of religion takes no account of the heathen world. The inner method of his argument is to fit Judaism and Christianity into the Logos-concept; but his actual is related to the ideal in the way of Plato\'s antithesis, of shadow and reality, of pattern and original, rather than in Aristotle\'s way of development, although the influence of the latter method may often be traced, as in the history of faith, which is carried back to the beginnings of history, but is made perfect only in the Christian consummation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,40);">Heb 11:40</a>). In a number of other ideas the teleological movement may be seen cutting across the categories of shadow and reality (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,3);">Heb 1:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,10);">1:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,8);">4:8</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,8);">5:8</A>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,12);">9:12</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,12);">10:12</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,22);">12:22</A>).<P>3. Alexandrian Influences:<P>The form of the argument may be described as either rabbinical or Alexandrian. The writer, after laying down his proposition, proceeds to prove it by quotations from the Old Testament, taken out of their context and historical connection, adapted and even changed to suit his present purpose. This practice was common to Palestinian and Alexandrian writers; as was also the use of allegory which plays a large part in Hebrews (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,\'7-\');">Heb 3:7</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'1-11\');">4:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',13,11);">13:11</a>f). But the writer\'s allegorical method differs from that of the rabbis in that it is like Philo\'s, part of a conscious philosophy, according to which the whole of the past and present history of the world is only a shadow of the true realities which are laid up in heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,5);">Heb 8:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,23);">9:23</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,1);">10:1</a>). His interest in historical facts, in Old Testament writers, in Jewish institutions and even in the historical life of Jesus, is quite subordinate to his prepossession with the eternal and heavenly realities which they, in more or less shadowy fashion, represent. That the affinities of Hebrews are Alexandrian rather than Palestinian is further proved by many philological and literary correspondences with The Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. Most of the characteristic terms and phrases of the epistle are also found in these earlier writers. It has been argued that Hebrews and Wisdom came from the same hand, and it seems certain that the author of Hebrews was familiar with both Wisdom and the writings of Philo (Plumptre in The Expositor, I, 329ff, 409ff; von Soden in Hand-Commentar, 5-6). In Philo the dualism of appearance and reality finds its ultimate synthesis in his master-conception of the Logos, and although this term does not appear in Hebrews in Philo\'s sense, the doctrine is set forth in Philonic phraseology in the opening verses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-4\');">1:1-4</A>). As Logos, Christ excels the prophets as revealer of God, is superior to the angels who were the mediators of the old Covenant, and is more glorious than Moses as the builder of God\'s true tabernacle, His eternal house; He is a greater Saviour than Joshua, for He brings his own to final rest; and He supersedes the Aaronic priesthood, for while they ministered in a "holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true," under a "law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,24);">Heb 9:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,1);">10:1</a>), He "having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands...nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,11);">Heb 9:11</a>f).<P>4. The Christian Factor:<P>Yet it is possible to exaggerate the dependence of Hebrews on Alexandrian thought. Deeper than the allegorical interpretation of passages culled from the Septuagint, deeper than the Logos-philosophy which formed the framework of his thought, is the writer\'s experience and idea of the personal Christ. His central interest lies, not in the theoretical scheme which he adopts, but in the living person who, while He is the eternal reality behind all shadows, and the very image of God\'s essence, is also our brother who lived and suffered on earth, the author of our salvation, our "fore-runner within the veil," who "is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-4\');">Heb 1:1-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,14);">2:14</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,10);">2:10</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'7-9\');">5:7-9</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,14,15);">4:14-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,20);">6:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,25);">7:25</A>). As in Paul and John, so in Hebrews, the historical and ever-living Christ comes in as an original and creative element, which transforms the abstract philosophy of Hellenistic thought into a living system of salvation. Because of His essential and personal preeminence over the institutions and personalities of the old Covenant, Christ has founded a new Covenant, given a new revelation and proclaimed a new gospel. The writer never loses sight of the present bearing of these eternal realities on the lives of his readers. They are for their warning against apostasy, for their encouragement in the face of persecution, and for their undying hope while they \'run the race that is set before (them), looking unto Jesus the author and perfecter of...faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,3);">Heb 2:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,12);">3:12</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,1);">4:1</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,28);">10:28</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,1);">12:1</A>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,22);">22</a>).<P>LITERATURE.<P>(1) Commentary by A. S. Peake, Century Bible; A.B. Davidson, Bible Handbooks; Marcus Dods, Expositor\'s Greek Test.; T.C. Edwards, Expositor\'s Bible; F. Rendall (London, 1888); Westcott 3 (1903); von Soden, Hand-Commentar; Hollmann, Die Schriften des New Testament.<P>(2) Introductions by Moffatt, Introduction to the Lit. of the New Testament; A. B. Bruce in HDB; von Soden in EB; Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament; H.H.B Ayles, Destination, Date, and Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews; Harnack, "Probabilia, uber die Addresse und den Verfasser des Hebraerbriefes," ZNTW, I (1900); W. Wrede, Das literarische Ratsel des Hebraerbriefes (1906).<P>(3) Theology: Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews; Milligan, The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews; Menegoz, La theologie de l\'epitre aux Hebreux. For fuller list, see Moffatt, in the work quoted``145';
isbe[4222]='Hebrews, Gospel According to the`(Euaggelion kath\' Hebraious, to Hebraikon, to Ioudaikon; Evangelium Hebraeorum, Judeorum):<P>1. References in Early Church History<P>2. Its Character and Contents<P>3. Its Circulation and Language<P>4. Relation to Matthew<P>5. Time of Composition<P>6. Uncanonical Sayings and Incidents<P>7. Conclusion<P>LITERATURE<hr /><P>"The Gospel according to the Hebrews" was a work of early Christian literature to which reference is frequently made by the church Fathers in the first five centuries, and of which some twenty or more fragments, preserved in their writings, have come down to us. The book itself has long disappeared. It has, however, been the subject of many critical surmises and discussions in the course of the last century. It has been regarded as the original record of the life of Jesus, the Archimedespoint of the whole gospel history. From it Justin Martyr has been represented as deriving his knowledge of the works and words of Christ, and to it have been referred the gospel quotations found in Justin and other early writers when these deviate in any measure from the text of the canonical gospels. Recent discussions have thrown considerable light upon the problems connected with this Gospel, and a large literature has grown up around it of which the most important works will be noted below.<P>1. References in Early Church History:<P>Speaking of Papias Eusebius mentions that he has related the story of a woman who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the "Gospel according to the Hebrews." This does not prove that Papias was acquainted with this Gospel, for he might have obtained the story, which cannot any longer be regarded as part of John\'s Gospel, from oral tradition. But there is a certain significance in Eusebius\' mentioning it in this connection (Euseb., HE, III, xxxix, 16). Eusebius, speaking of Ignatius and his epp., takes notice of a saying of Jesus which he quotes (Ep. ad Smyrn, iii; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,39);">Lu 24:39</a>), "Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal spirit." The saying differs materially from the saying in Luke\'s Gospel, and Eusebius says he has no knowledge whence it had been taken by Ignatius. Jerome, however, twice over attributes the saying to the "Gospel according to the Hebrews," and Origen quotes it from the "Teaching of Peter." Ignatius may have got the saying from oral tradition, and we cannot, therefore, be sure that he knew this Gospel.<P>The first early Christian writer who is mentioned as having actually used the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" is Hegesippus, who flourished in the second half of the 2nd century. Eusebius, to whom we owe the reference, tells us that Hegesippus in his Memoirs quotes passages from "the Syriac Gospel according to the Hebrews" (Historia Ecclesiastica, IV, xxii, 7).<P>Irenaeus, in the last quarter of the 2nd century, says the Ebionites use only the "Gospel according to Matthew" and reject the apostle Paul, calling him an apostate from the law (Adv. Haer., i. 26, 2). There is reason to believe that there is some confusion in this statement of Irenaeus, for we have the testimony of Eusebius, Jerome and Epiphanius that it was the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" that was used by the Ebionites. With this qualification we may accept Irenaeus as a witness to this Gospel.<P>Clement of Alexandria early in the 3rd century quotes from it an apocryphal saying with the same formula as he employs for quotation of Holy Scripture (Strom., ii.9). Origen, Clement\'s successor at Alexandria, has one very striking quotation from the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" (Comm. in Joann, ii), and Jerome says this Gospel is often used by Origen. Eusebius, in the first half of the 4th century, mentions that the Ebionites use only the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" and take small account of the others (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, xxvii, 4). He has, besides, other references to it, and in his widely known classification of Christian Scriptures into "acknowledged" "disputed," and "rejected," he mentions this Gospel which he says some have placed in the last category, although those of the Hebrews who have accepted Christ are delighted with it (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, xxv, 5). Eusebius had himself in all probability seen and handled the book in the library of his friend Pamphilus at Caesarea, where Jerome, half a century later, found it and translated it.<P>Epiphanius, who lived largely in Palestine, and wrote his treatise on heresies in the latter half of the 4th century, has much to say of the Ebionites, and the Nazarenes. Speaking of the Ebionites, he says they receive the "Gospel according to Matthew" to the exclusion of the others, mentioning that it alone of the New Testament books is in Hebrew speech and Hebrew characters, and is called the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" (Haer., xxx.3). He goes on to say, that their "Gospel according to Matthew," as it is named, is not complete but falsified and mutilated, "and they call it the Hebrew Gospel" (Haer., xxx. 13). The quotations which Epiphanius proceeds to make show that this Gospel diverges considerably from the canonical Gospel of Matthew and may well be that according to the Hebrews. It is more likely that "the Gospel according to Matthew, very full, in Hebrew," of which Epiphanius speaks, when telling about the Nazarene, is the Hebrew "Gospel of Matthew" attested by Papias, Irenaeus, and a widespread early tradition. But as Epiphanius confesses he does not know whether it has the genealogies, it is clear he was not himself acquainted with the book.<P>Jerome, toward the end of the 4th century, is our chief authority for the circulation and use of the "Gospel according to the Hebrews," although his later statements on the subject do not always agree with the earlier. He was proud of being "trilinguis," acquainted with Hebrew as well as with Latin and Greek. "There is a Gospel," he says, "which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, which I lately translated from the Hebrew tongue into Greek and which is called by many the authentic Gospel of Matthew" (Commentary on <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,13);">Matthew 12:13</a>). The fact here mentioned, that he translated the work, seems to imply that this Gospel was really something different from the canonical Matthew which he had in his hands. In another place, however, he writes: "Matthew...first of all composed the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words, in Judea, for behoof of those of the circumcision who had believed, and it is not quite certain who afterward translated it into Greek. But the very Hebrew is preserved to this day in the Caesarean library, which Pamphilus the Martyr, with such care, collected. I myself was allowed the opportunity of copying it by the Nazarenes in Berea who use this volume. In which it is to be observed that the evangelist, when he uses the testimonies of the Old Testament, either in his own person, or in that of the Lord and Saviour, does not follow the authority of the Septuagint translators, but the Hebrew. Of those, the following are two examples: \'Out of Egypt have I called my Son\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,15);">Mt 2:15</a> the King James Version); and \'He shall be called a Nazarene\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,23);">Mt 2:23</a>)" (De Vir. Ill., iii). It certainly looks as if in the former instance Jerome meant the Gospel according to the Hebrews, and in the latter the well-authenticated Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. At a later time, however, Jerome appears to withdraw this and to introduce a confusing or even contradictory note. His words are: "In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which was written indeed in the Chaldee-Syr (Aramaic) language, but in Hebrew characters, which the Nazarenes use as the \'Gospel of the Apostles,\' or as most people think \'according to Matthew,\' which also is contained in the library at Caesarea, the narrative says" (Adv. Pelag., iii.2). As he proceeds, he quotes passages which are not in the canonical Mt. He also says: "That Gospel which is called the Gospel of the Hebrews which was latedly translated by me into Greek and Latin, and was used frequently by Origen" (Catal. Script. Eccl., "Jacobus"). Jerome\'s notices of the actual Gospel were frequent, detailed and unequivocal.<P>Nicephorus at the beginning of the 9th century puts the Gospel according to the Hebrews in his list of disputed books of the New Testament along with the Apocalypse of John, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Epistle of Barnabas. This list is believed to rest upon an authority of about the year 500 AD, and, in the stichometry attached, this Gospel is estimated to have occupied 2,200 lines, while the canonical Matthew occupied 2,500.<P>Codex Lambda of the 9th century, discovered by Tischendorf, and now in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, has marginal notes affixed to four passages of Matthew giving the readings of to Ioudaikon, the lost Gospel according to the Hebrews (Scrivener, Textual Criticism, I4, 160; see also Plate XI, 30, p. 131).<P>2. Its Character and Contents:<P>All that survives, and all that we are told, of this work, show that it was of the nature of a Gospel, and that it was written in the manner of the Synoptic Gospels. But it seems not to have acquired at any time ecclesiastical standing outside the very limited circles of Jewish Christians who preferred it. And it never attained canonical authority. The Muratorian Fragment has no reference to it. Irenaeus knew that the Ebionites used only the Gospel according to Matthew in Hebrew, although, as we have seen, this may be really the Gospel according to the Hebrews; but his fourfold Gospel comprises the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which we know. There is no reason to believe that it was the source of the quotations made by Justin from the Apomnemoneumata, or of quotations made anonymously by others of the early Fathers. Like the Synoptic Gospels, however, it contained narratives of events as well as sayings and discourses. It had an account of John the Baptist\'s ministry, of the baptism of Jesus, of the call of the apostles, of the woman taken in adultery, of the Last Supper, of the denial of Peter, of appearances of Jesus after the resurrection; and it contained the Lord\'s Prayer, and sayings of Jesus, like the forgiveness of injuries seventy times seven, the counsel to the rich young ruler, and others. One or two sayings have a Gnostic tinge, as when Jesus calls the Holy Spirit His mother, and is made to express His unwillingness to eat the flesh of the Passover Lamb. There are apocryphal additions, even where incidents and sayings are narrated belonging to the canonical Gospels, and there are sayings and incidents wholly apocryphal in the fragments of the Gospel which have survived. But these superfluities do not imply any serious deviation from Catholic doctrine; they only prove, as Professor Zahn says, "the earnestness of the redactor of the Gospel according to the Hebrews to enrich the only Gospel which Jewish Christians possessed up to that time from the still unexhausted source of private oral tradition" (GK, II, 717).<P>The very title of the work suggests that it circulated among Jewish Christians. Those Christians of Palestine to whom Jerusalem was the ecclesiastical center betook themselves, after the troubles which befell the Holy City, to the less frequented regions beyond the Jordan, and were thus cut off from the main stream of catholic Christianity.<P>3. Its Circulation and Language:<P>It was accordingly easier for the spirit of exclusiveness to assert itself among them and also for heretical tendencies to develop. The Ebionites went farthest in this direction. They denied the supernatural birth of our Lord, and insisted upon the binding character of the Law for all Christians. The Nazarenes, as all Jewish Christians were called at first, observed the ceremonial law themselves, but did not impose it upon GentileChristians. And they accepted the catholic doctrine of the person of Christ. It was among a community of these Nazarenes at Berea, the modern Aleppo, that Jerome, during a temporary residence at Chalcis in Northern Syria, found the Gospel according to the Hebrews in circulation. No fewer than 9 times does he mention that this Gospel is their one Gospel, and only once does he connect the Ebionites with them in the use of it. Epiphanius draws a clear line of distinction between the Ebionites and the Nazarenes; and we can scarcely suppose that a Gospel which satisfied the one would be wholly acceptable to the other. There is reason to believe that the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was most to the mind of the Hebrew Christians, and that it took different forms in the hands of the sects into which the Jewish Christian church became divided. Thus the Gospel of the Nazarenes was the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which in all probability had some affinity with the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. The Gospel of the Ebionites, which seems to have been the same as the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, was something of a more divergent doctrinal tendency suited to the exclusive and heretical views of that sect. But it is not easy to reconcile the statements of Epiphanius with those of Eusebius and Jerome.<P>That the Hebrew tongue in which Papins says Matthew composed his Logia was the Aramaic of Palestine is generally accepted. This Aramaic was closely akin to the Syriac spoken between the Mediterranean and the Tigris. It was the same as the Chaldee of the Books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, of which examples have so recently been found in the Aramaic papyri from Elephantine at Assouan. Eusebius and Jerome are emphatic and precise in recording the fact that the Gospel according to the Hebrews was not only Hebrew or Aramaic in composition, but written in the square Hebrew characters, so different from the Old Hebrew of the Moabite Stone and the Siloam inscription. That there was a Greek translation before the time of Jerome of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which was used by Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and others, is strenuously affirmed by Professor Harnack (Altchristliche Literatur, I, 6ff) and as strenuously denied by Professor Zahn (GK, II, 648ff). One reason why the book never attained to any ecclesiastical authority was no doubt its limited circulation in a tongue familiar, outside the circle of Jewish Christians, to only a learned few. For this reason also it is unlikely that it will ever be found, as the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd, and other works have been.<P>4. Relation to Matthew:<P>It is natural to seek for traces of special relationship between the Gospel according to the Hebrews, circulating among communities of Jewish Christians, and the Gospel according to Matthew which grew up on the soil of Palestine, and which was originally composed in the interest of Jewish Christians, and circulated at a very early period in a Hebrew recension, soon superseded by the canonical Gospel of Matthew and now altogether lost. We have already seen that Irenaeus in all likelihood confused the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" with the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew; and that Jerome says the Gospel used by the Nazarenes was called by many the authentic Gospel of Matthew. Moreover, among the fragments that have survived, there are more which resemble Matthew\'s record than either of the other Synoptics. E.B. Nicholson, after a full and scholarly examination of the fragments and of the references, puts forward the hypothesis that "Matthew wrote at different times the canonical Gospel and the Gospel according to the Hebrews, or, at least, that large part of the latter which runs parallel to the former" (The Gospel according to the Hebrews, 104). The possibility of two editions of the same Gospel-writing coming from the same hand has recently received illustration from Professor. Blass\' theory of two recensions of the Acts and of Luke\'s Gospel to explain the textual peculiarities of these books in Codex Bezae (D). This theory has received the adhesion of eminent scholars, but Nicholson has more serious differences to explain, and it cannot be said that his able argument and admirably marshaled learning have carried conviction to the minds of New Testament scholars.<P>5. Time of Composition:<P>If we could be sure that Ignatius in his Epistle to the Smyrneans derived the striking saying attributed to our Lord, "Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal spirit," from the Gospel according to the Hebrews, we should be able to fix its composition as at any rate within the 1st century. The obscurity of its origin, the primitive cast of its contents, and the respect accorded to it down into the 5th century, have disposed some scholars to assign it an origin not later than our Synoptic Gospels, and to regard it as continuing the Aramaic tradition of the earliest preaching and teaching regarding Christ. The manifestly secondary character of some of its contents seems to be against such an early origin. Professor Zahn is rather disposed to place it not earlier than 130, when, during the insurrection of Bar-cochba, the gulf that had grown up between Jews and Jewish Christians was greatly deepened, and with an exclusively Gentile church in Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians had lost their center and broken off into sects. The whole situation seems to him to point to a date somewhere between 130-50 AD. The data for any precise determination of the question are wanting.<P>6. Uncanonical Sayings and Incidents:<P>There is a saying which Clement of Alexandria quotes from it as Scripture: "He that wonders shall reign and he that reigns shall rest" (Strom., ii.9). Origen quotes from it a saying of Jesus, reminding us somewhat of Ezekiel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',8,3);">8:3</A>): "Just now My Mother the Holy Spirit took me by one of my hairs, and bore me away to the great mountain Thabor" (Orig., In Joann., ii; it is quoted several times both by Origen and Jerome). Jerome more than once quotes from it a saying of the Lord to His disciples: "Never be joyful except when ye look on your brother in love" (Hieron. in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,4);">Eph 5:4</a>; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,7);">Eze 18:7</a>). In his commentary on Mattew (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,11);">6:11</a>) Jerome mentions that he found in the third petition of the Lord\'s prayer for the difficult and unique Greek word epiousios, which he translates "supersubstantialis," the Aramaic word machar, crastinus, so that the sense would be, "Tomorrow\'s bread give us today." Of unrecorded incidents the most notable is that of the appearance of the Risen Lord to James: "And when the Lord had given His linen cloth to the servant of the priest, He went to James and appeared to him. For James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour wherein he had drunk the cup of the Lord until he saw Him rising from the dead. Again a little afterward the Lord says, Bring a table and bread. Immediately it is added: He took bread and blessed and brake, and afterward gave it to James the Just and said to him, My brother, eat thy bread for the Son of Man has risen from them that sleep" (Hieron., De Vir. Illustr., "Jacobus").<P>Jerome also tells that in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, there is the following passage: "Lo, the mother of the Lord and His brethren said unto Him: John the Baptist is baptizing for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them: What sin have I committed that I should go and be baptized by him? Unless perchance this very word which I have spoken is a sin of ignorance" (Hieron., Adv. Pelag., iii.2).<P>7. Conclusion:<P>This Gospel is not to be classed with heretical Gospels like that of Marcion, nor with apocryphal Gospels like that of James or Nicodemus. It differed from the former in that it did not deviate from any essential of catholic truth in its representation of our Lord. It differed from the latter in that it narrated particulars mostly relating to our Lord\'s public ministry, while they occupy themselves with matters of curiosity left unrecorded in the canonical Gospels. It differs from the canonical Gospels only in that it is more florid in style, more diffuse in the relation of incidents, and more inclined to sectional views of doctrine. Its uncanonical sayings and incidents may have come from oral tradition, and they do lend a certain interest and picturesqueness to the narrative. Its language confined it to a very limited sphere, and its sectional character prevented it from ever professing Scriptural authority or attaining to canonical rank.<P>LITERATURE.<P>E.B. Nicholson, The Gospel according to the Hebrews (1879); R. Handmann, Das Hebrder-Evangelium: Texte u. Untersuchungen, Band V (1889); Zahn, GK, II, 642-723 (1890); Harnack, Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, I, 6ff; II, 1, 625-51 (1897); Neutestamentliche Apocryphen (Hennecke), I, 11-21 (1904).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=APOCRYPHAL+GOSPELS">APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS</a>`128';
isbe[4223]='Hebrews, Religion of the``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ISRAEL,+RELIGION+OF,+1">ISRAEL, RELIGION OF</a>`1';
isbe[4224]='Hebron (1)`he\'-brun (chebhron, "league" or "confederacy"; Chebron): One of the most ancient and important cities in Southern Palestine, now known to the Moslems as el Khalil (i.e. Khalil er Rahman, "the friend of the Merciful," i.e. of God, a favorite name for Abraham; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,23);">Jas 2:23</a>). The city is some 20 miles south of Jerusalem, situated in an open valley, 3,040 ft. above sea-level.<P>I. History of the City.<P>Hebron is said to have been rounded before Zoan (i.e. Tanis) in Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,22);">Nu 13:22</a>); its ancient name was Kiriath-arba, probably meaning the "Four Cities," perhaps because divided at one time into four quarters, but according to Jewish writers so called because four patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Adam were buried there. According to <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,13);">Jos 15:13</a> it was so called after Arba, the father of Anak.<P>1. Patriarchal Period:<P>Abram came and dwelt by the oaks of <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MAMRE">MAMRE</A> (which see), "which are in Hebron" Genesis (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',13,18);">13:18</a>); from here he went to the rescue of Lot and brought him back after the defeat of Chedorlaomer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,13);">14:13</A>f); here his name was changed to Abraham (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',17,15);">17:5</A>); to this place came the three angels with the promise of a son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,1);">18:1</A>f); Sarah died here (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',23,2);">23:2</a>), and for her sepulcher Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',23,17);">23:17</a>); here Isaac and Jacob spent much of their lives (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',35,27);">35:27</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',37,14);">37:14</a>); from here Jacob sent Joseph to seek his brethren (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',37,14);">37:14</a>), and hence, Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,1);">46:1</A>). In the cave of Machpelah all the patriarchs and their wives, except Rachel, were buried (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,30);">49:30</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',50,13);">50:13</a>).<P>2. Times of Joshua and Judges:<P>The spies visited Hebron and near there cut the cluster of grapes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,22);">Nu 13:22</a>f). <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HOHAM">HOHAM</a> (which see), king of Hebron, was one of the five kings defeated by Joshua at Beth-horon and slain at Makkedah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,3);">Jos 10:3</a>f). Caleb drove out from Hebron the "three sons of Anak" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',14,12);">Jos 14:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,14);">15:14</a>); it became one of the cities of Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',15,54);">Jos 15:54</a>), but was set apart for the Kohathite Levites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',21,10);">Jos 21:10</a>f), and became a city of refuge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',20,7);">Jos 20:7</a>). One of Samson\'s exploits was the carrying of the gate of Gaza "to the top of the mountain that is before Hebron" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',16,3);">Jud 16:3</a>).<P>3. The Days of the Monarchy:<P>David, when a fugitive, received kindness from the people of this city (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,31);">1Sa 30:31</a>); here Abner was treacherously slain by Joab at the gate (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,27);">2Sa 3:27</a>), and the sons of Rimmon, after their hands and feet had been cut off, were hanged "beside the pool" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',4,12);">2Sa 4:12</a>). After the death of Saul, David was here anointed king (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,3);">2Sa 5:3</a>) and reigned here 7 1/2 years, until he captured Jerusalem and made that his capital (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,5);">2Sa 5:5</a>); while here, six sons were born to him (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,2);">2Sa 3:2</a>). In this city Absalom found a center for his disaffection, and repairing there under pretense of performing a vow to Yahweh, he raised the standard of revolt (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,7);">2Sa 15:7</a>f). Josephus mistakenly places here the dream of Solomon (Ant., VIII, ii, 1) which occurred at Gibeon (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',3,4);">1Ki 3:4</a>). Hebron was fortified by Rehoboam (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',11,10);">2Ch 11:10</a>).<P>4. Later History:<P>Probably during the captivity Hebron came into the hands of Edom, though it appears to have been colonized by returning Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,25);">Ne 11:25</a>); it was recovered from Edom by Simon Maccabeus (1Macc 5:65; Josephus, Ant, XII, viii, 6). In the first great revolt against Rome, Simon bar-Gioras captured the city (BJ, IV, ix, 7), but it was retaken, for Vespasian, by his general Cerealis who carried it by storm, slaughtered the inhabitants and burnt it (ibid., 9).<P>During the Muslim period Hebron has retained its importance on account of veneration to the patriarchs, especially Abraham; for the same reason it was respected by the Crusaders who called it Castellum ad Sanctum Abraham. In 1165 it became the see of a Latin bishop, but 20 years later it fell to the victorious arms of Saladin, and it has ever since remained a fanatic Moslem center, although regarded as a holy city, alike by Moslem, Jew and Christian.<P>II. The Ancient Site.<P>Modern Hebron is a straggling town clustered round the Haram or sacred enclosure built above the traditional cave of <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MACHPELAH">MACHPELAH</A> (which see); it is this sacred spot which has determined the present position of the town all through the Christian era, but it is quite evident that an exposed and indefensible situation, running along a valley, like this, could not have been that of earlier and less settled times. From many of the pilgrim narratives, we can gather that for long there had been a tradition that the original site was some distance from the modern town, and, as analogy might suggest, upon a hill. There can be little doubt that the site of the Hebron of Old Testament history is a lofty, olive-covered hill, lying to the west of the present town, known as er Rumeidy. Upon its summit are cyclopian walls and other traces of ancient occupation. In the midst are the ruins of a medieval building known as Der el-Arba\'in, the "monastery of the forty" (martyrs) about whom the Hebronites have an interesting folklore tale. In the building are shown the so-called tombs of Jesse and Ruth. Near the foot of the hill are several fine old tombs, while to the north is a large and very ancient Jewish cemetery, the graves of which are each covered with a massive monolith, 5 and 6 ft. long. At the eastern foot of the hill is a perennial spring, \'Ain el Judeideh; the water rises in a vault, roofed by masonry and reached by steps. The environs of this hill are full of folklore associations; the summit would well repay a thorough excavation.<P>A mile or more to the northwest of Hebron is the famous oak of <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MAMRE">MAMRE</a> (which see), or "Abraham\'s oak," near which the Russians have erected a hospice. It is a fine specimen of the Holm oak (Quercus coccifera), but is gradually dying. The present site appears to have been pointed out as that of Abraham\'s tent since the 12th century; the earlier traditional site was at Ramet el Khalil.<P>See<a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MAMRE"> MAMRE</A>.<P>III. Modern Hebron.<P>Modern Hebron is a city of some 20,000 inhabitants, 85 percent of whom are Moslems and the remainder mostly Jews. The city is divided into seven quarters, one of which is known as that of the "glass blowers" and another as that of the "water-skin makers." These industries, with the manufacture of pottery, are the main sources of trade. The most conspicuous building is the Haram (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MACHPELAH">MACHPELAH</a>). In the town are two large open reservoirs the Birket el Qassasin, the "pool of the glass blowers" and Birket es Sultan, "the pool of the Sultan." This latter, which is the larger, is by tradition the site of the execution of the murderers of Ishbosheth (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',4,12);">2Sa 4:12</a>). The Moslem inhabitants are noted for their fanatical exclusiveness and conservatism, but this has been greatly modified in recent years through the patient and beneficent work of Dr. Paterson, of the U. F. Ch. of S. Med. Mission. The Jews, who number about 1,500, are mostly confined to a special ghetto; they have four synagogues, two Sephardic and two Ashkenazic; they are a poor and unprogressive community.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EBRON">EBRON</a>`117';
isbe[4225]='Hebron (2)`(chebhron, "league," "association"):<P>(1) The third son of Kohath, son of Levi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',6,18);">Ex 6:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,19,27);">Nu 3:19, 27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,2,18);">1Ch 6:2, 18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,12,19);">23:12, 19</a>).<P>(2) A son of Mareshah and descendant of Caleb (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,42,43);">1Ch 2:42-43</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KORAH">KORAH</a>`1';
isbe[4226]='Hebronites`he\'-brun-its (chebhroni): A family of Levites, descendants of Hebron, third son of Kohath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,27);">Nu 3:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,58);">26:58</a>, etc.)``1';
isbe[4227]='Hedge`hej:<P>(1) mecukhah, "a thorn hedge," only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',7,4);">Mic 7:4</a>; mesukkah, "a hedge" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',5,5);">Isa 5:5</a>); mesukhath chadheq, "a hedge of thorns" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,19);">Pr 15:19</a>).<P>(2) gadher, and geherah, translated "hedges" in the Revised Version (British and American) only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,40);">Ps 89:40</a>, elsewhere "fence." <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GEDERAH">GEDERAH</a> (which see) in the Revised Version margin is translated "hedges" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,23);">1Ch 4:23</a>).<P>(3) na\'atsuts, "thorn-hedges" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,19);">Isa 7:19</a>).<P>(4) phragmos, translated "hedge" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,33);">Mt 21:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,1);">Mr 12:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,23);">Lu 14:23</a>); "partition" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,14);">Eph 2:14</a>, which is its literal meaning. In the Septuagint it is the usual equivalent of the above Hebrew words.<P>Loose stone walls without mortar are the usual "fences" around fields in Palestine, and this is what gadher and gedherah signify in most passages. Hedges made of cut thorn branches or thorny bushes are very common in the plains and particularly in the Jordan valley.``117';
isbe[4228]='Hedgehog`hej\'-hog Septuagint echinos, "hedgehog," for qippodh, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,23);">Isa 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,11);">34:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,14);">Ze 2:14</a>, and for qippoz, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,15);">Isa 34:15</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PORCUPINE">PORCUPINE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BITTERN">BITTERN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=OWL">OWL</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SERPENT">SERPENT</a>`1';
isbe[4229]='Heed`hed: This word, in the sense of giving careful attention ("take heed," "give heed," etc.), represents several Hebrew and Greek words; chief among them shamar, "to watch"; blepo, "to look," horao, "to see." As opposed to thoughtlessness, disregard of God\'s words, of the counsels of wisdom, of care for one\'s ways, it is constantly inculcated as a duty of supreme importance in the moral and spiritual life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',4,9,15,23);">De 4:9, 15, 23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',27,9);">27:9</a> the King James Version, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',22,5);">Jos 22:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',23,11);">23:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',39,1);">Ps 39:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',16,6);">Mt 16:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',4,24);">Mr 4:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',13,33);">13:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,15);">Lu 12:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,10);">1Co 3:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',8,9);">8:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',10,12);">10:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',4,17);">Col 4:17</a>).``132';
isbe[4230]='Heel`hel (\'aqebh): "The iniquity of my heels" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',49,5);">Ps 49:5</a> the King James Version) is a literal translation, and might be understood to indicate the Psalmist\'s "false steps," errors or sins, but that meaning is very doubtful here. the Revised Version (British and American) gives "iniquity at my heels." the Revised Version margin gives a still better sense, "When the iniquity of them that would supplant me compasseth me about, even of them that trust in...riches"<22>treacherous enemies ever on the watch to trip up a man\'s heels (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',12,3);">Ho 12:3</a>). Of Judah it was said, "Thy heels (shall) suffer violence" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',13,22);">Jer 13:22</a>) through being "made bare" (the King James Version), and thus subject to the roughness of the road as she was led captive.<P>Figurative:<P>(1) Of the partial victory of the evil power over humanity, "Thou shalt bruise (m "lie in wait for") his heel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',3,15);">Ge 3:15</a>), through constant, insidious suggestion of the satisfaction of the lower desires. Or if we regard this statement as a part of the Protevangelium, the earliest proclamation of Christ\'s final, and complete victory over sin, the destruction of "the serpent" ("He shall bruise thy head"), then the reference is evidently to Christ\'s sufferings and death, even to all that He endured in His human nature.<P>(2) Of the stealthy tactics of the tribe of Dan in war, "An adder in the path, that biteth the horse\'s heels" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,17);">Ge 49:17</a>), by which it triumphed over foes of superior strength.<P>(3) Of violence and brutality, "Who...hath lifted up his heel against me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',41,9);">Ps 41:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,18);">Joh 13:18</a>), i.e. lifted up his foot to trample upon me (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,24);">Jos 10:24</a>).``91';
isbe[4231]='Hegai; Hege`he\'-ga-i, he\'-ge (heghay; Gai (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',2,8,15);">Es 2:8, 15</a>), and heghe\', Hege (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',2,3);">Es 2:3</a>)): One of the officers of the Persian king Ahasuerus; a chamberlain or eunuch (keeper of women), into whose custody the "fair young virgins" were delivered from whom the king intended to choose his queen in the place of the discredited Vashti.``1';
isbe[4232]='Hegemonides`heg-e-mon\'-i-dez, hej-e-mo-ni\'-dez (Hegemonides): The Syrian officer placed in command of the district extending from Ptolemais to the Gerrenians (2Macc 13:24). It is not easy to see how in the King James Version and even in Swete\'s revised text the word can be taken as a mere appellative along with strategon, the two being rendered "principal officer": one of the two could certainly be omitted (Swete, 3rd ed., 1905, capitalizes Hegemonides). In the Revised Version (British and American) the word is taken as the name of some person otherwise unknown.``1';
isbe[4233]='Heifer`hef\'-er (parah, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> (see following article [<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEIFER,+RED">HEIFER, RED</a>]) and <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,16);">Ho 4:16</a>; \'eghlah, elsewhere in the Old Testament; damalis, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,13);">Heb 9:13</a>):for the "heifer of three years old" in the King James Version, the Revised Version margin of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',15,5);">Isa 15:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',48,34);">Jer 48:34</a>, see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=EGLATH-SHELISHIYAH">EGLATH-SHELISHIYAH</A>. A young cow (contrast <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BULLOCK">BULLOCK</A>). The \'eghlah figures specifically in religious rites only in the ceremony of <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-9\');">De 21:1-9</a> for the cleansing of the land, where an unexpiated murder had been committed. This was not a sacrificial rite<74>the priests are witnesses only, and the animal was slain by breaking the neck<63>but sacrificial purity was required for the heifer. Indeed, it is commonly supposed that the rite as it now stands is a rededication of one that formerly had been sacrificial. In the sacrifices proper the heifer could be used for a peace offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',3,1);">Le 3:1</a>), but was forbidden for the burnt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',1,3);">Le 1:3</a>) or sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3,14);">Le 4:3, 14</a>) offerings. Hence, the sacrifice of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',16,2);">1Sa 16:2</a> was a peace offering. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,9);">Ge 15:9</a> the ceremony of the ratification of the covenant by God makes use of a heifer and a she-goat, but the reason for the use of the females is altogether obscure. Compare following article [<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEIFER,+RED">HEIFER, RED</a>].<P>Figuratively: The heifer appears as representing sleekness combined with helplessness in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',46,20);">Jer 46:20</a> (compare the comparison of the soldiers to \'stalled calves\' in the next verse). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,11);">Jer 50:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,11);">Ho 10:11</a>, the heifer is pictured as engaged in threshing. This was particularly light work, coupled with unusually abundant food (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',25,4);">De 25:4</a>), so that the threshing heifer served especially well for a picture of contentment. ("Wanton" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',50,11);">Jer 50:11</a>, however, is an unfortunate translation in the Revised Version (British and American).) Hosea, in contrast, predicts that the "heifers" shall be set to the hard work of plowing and breaking the sods. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',14,18);">Jud 14:18</a>, Samson uses "heifer" in his riddle to refer to his wife. This, however, was not meant to convey the impression of licentiousness that it gives the modern reader.``48';
isbe[4234]='Heifer, Red`In <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> a rite is described in which the ashes of a "red heifer" and of certain objects are mixed with running water to obtain the so-called "water for impurity." (Such is the correct translation of the American Standard Revised Version in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,9,13,20,21);">Nu 19:9, 13, 20-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,23);">31:23</a>. In these passages, the King James Version and the English Revised Version, through a misunderstanding of a rather difficult Hebrew term, have "water of separation"; Septuagint and the Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) have, "water of sprinkling." the English Revised Version margin, "water of impurity," is right, but ambiguous.) This water was employed in the removal of the uncleanness of a person or thing that had been in contact with a dead body, and also in removing ritual defilement from booty taken in war.<P>1. Origin and Significance of the Rite:<P>The general origin of the rite is clear enough, as is the fact that this origin lies back of the official sacrificial system of Israel. For the removal of impurity, ritual as well as physical, water, preferably running water (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,17);">Nu 19:17</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,5);">Le 14:5</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',15,13);">Le 15:13</a>), is the natural means, and is employed universally. But where the impurity was unusually great, mere water was not felt to be adequate, and various substances were mixed with it in order to increase its efficacy. So (among other things) blood is used in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,6,7);">Le 14:6-7</a>, and dust in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',5,17);">Nu 5:17</a> (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=WATER+OF+BITTERNESS">WATER OF BITTERNESS</a>). The use, however, of ashes in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,17);">Nu 19:17</a> is unique in the Old Testament, although parallels from elsewhere can be adduced. So e.g. in Ovid Fasti, iv.639-40, 725, 733, in the last of these references, "The blood of a horse shall be a purification, and the ashes of calves," is remarkably close to the Old Testament. The ashes were obtained by burning the heifer completely, "her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung" (the contents of the entrails) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,5);">Nu 19:5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,14);">Ex 29:14</a>). Here only in the Old Testament is blood burned for a ceremonial purpose, and here only is burning a preliminary; elsewhere it is either a chief act or serves to consume the remnants of a finished sacrifice<63><a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,12);">Le 4:12</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,3);">Nu 19:3</a> are altogether different.<P>The heifer is a female. For the regular sin offering for the congregation, only the male was permitted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,14);">Le 4:14</a>), but the female was used in the purificatory ceremony of <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,3);">De 21:3</a> (a rite that has several points of similarity to that of <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a>). An individual sin offering by one of the common people, however, required a female (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,28);">Le 4:28</a>), but probably only in order to give greater prominence to the more solemn sacrifices for which the male was reserved. A female is required again in the cases enumerated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',5,\'1-6\');">Le 5:1-6</a>, most of which are ritual defilements needing purification; a female was required at the purification of a leper (in addition to two males, <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,10);">Le 14:10</a>), and a female, with one male, was offered when a Nazirite terminated his vows (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,14);">Nu 6:14</a>). Some connection between purification and the sacrifice of a female may be established by this list, for even in the case of the Nazirite the idea may be removal of the state of consecration. But the reason for such a connection is anything but obvious, and the various explanations that have been offered are hardly more than guesses. The most likely is that purificatory rites originated in a very primitive stage when the female was thought to be the more sacred animal on account of its greater usefulness. Of the other requirements for the heifer she must be "red," i.e. reddish brown (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,2);">Nu 19:2</a>). Likeness in color to blood is at first sight the most natural explanation, but likeness in color to ripe grain is almost equally plausible. It may be noted that certain Egyptian sacrifices also required red cattle as victims (Plutarch, De Isid. 31). The heifer is to be "without spot" ("faultless"), "wherein is no blemish," the ordinary requirement for sacrifices. (The Jewish exegetes misread this "perfectly red, wherein is no blemish," with extraordinary results; see below.) But an advance on sacrificial requirements is that she shall be one "upon which never came yoke." This requirement is found elsewhere only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,3);">De 21:3</a> and in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,7);">1Sa 6:7</a> (that the animals in this last case were finally sacrificed is, however, not in point). But in other religions this requirement was very common (compare Iliad x.293; Vergil, Georg. iv.550-51; Ovid, Fasti iv.336).<P>2. Use of Cedar and Hyssop:<P>While the heifer was being burned, "cedar-wood, and hyssop, and scarlet" (i.e. scarlet wool or thread) were cast into the flames. The same combination of objects (although differently employed) is found at the cleansing of a leper (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,4);">Le 14:4</a>), but their meaning is entirely unknown. The explanations offered are almost countless. It is quite clear that hyssop was especially prized in purifications (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,7);">Ps 51:7</a>), but the use of hyssop as a sprinkler and the use of ashes of hyssop may be quite unrelated. Hyssop and cedar were supposed to have medicinal properties (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=CEDAR">CEDAR</A>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HYSSOP">HYSSOP</A>). Or the point may be the use of aromatic woods. For a mixture of cedar and other substances in water as a purificatory medium compare Fossey, Magie Assyrienne, 285. The scarlet wool offers still greater difficulties, apart from the color, but it may be noted that scarlet wool plays a part in some of the Babylonian conjurations (Assyrian Bibl., XII, 31). But, obviously, none of this leads very far and it may all be in the wrong direction. All that can be said definitely is that <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,4);">Le 14:4</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,6);">Nu 19:6</a> show that the combination of objects was deemed to have a high purificatory value.<P>3. Application and Sacredness of the Ashes:<P>The ashes, when obtained, were used in removing the greatest of impurities. Consequently, they themselves were deemed to have an extraordinarily "consecrated" character, and they were not to be handled carelessly. Their consecration extended to the rite by which they were produced, so that every person engaged in it was rendered unclean (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,7,8,10);">Nu 19:7-8, 10</a>), an excellent example of how in primitive religious thought the ideas of "holiness" and "uncleanness" blend. It was necessary to perform the whole ceremony "without the camp" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,3);">Nu 19:3</a>), and the ashes, when prepared, were also kept without the camp (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,9);">Nu 19:9</a>), probably in order to guard against their touch defiling anyone (as well as to keep them from being defiled). When used they were mixed with running water, and the mixture was sprinkled with hyssop on the person or object to be cleansed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'17-19\');">Nu 19:17-19</a>). The same water was used to purify booty (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,23);">Nu 31:23</a>), and it may also be meant by the "water of expiation" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',8,7);">Nu 8:7</a>.<P>4. Of Non-Priestly and Non-Israelitish Origin:<P>In addition to the similarities already pointed out between <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-9\');">De 21:1-9</a>, the rites resemble each other also in the fact that, in both, laymen are the chief functionaries and that the priests have little to do (in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-9\');">De 21:1-9</a> they are mere passive witnesses). This suggests a non-priestly origin. The title "sin-offering" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,9,17);">Nu 19:9, 17</a> (unless used in a unique sense) points to an original sacrificial meaning, although in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> the heifer is carefully kept away from the altar. Again, the correspondences with rites in other religions indicate a non-Israelitish origin. Such a ceremony may well have passed among the Israelites and have become prized by them. It contained nothing objectionable and seemed to have much of deep worth, and a few slight additions<6E>chiefly the sprinkling (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,4);">Nu 19:4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,6,17);">Le 4:6, 17</a>)<29>made it fit for adoption into the highest system. Some older features may have been eliminated also, but as to this, of course, there is no information. But, in any case, the ceremony is formed of separate rites that are exceedingly old and that are found in a great diversity of religions so that any elaborate symbolic interpretation of the details would seem to be without justification. The same result can be reached by comparing the countless symbolic interpretations that have been attempted in the past, for they differ hopelessly. As a matter of fact, the immense advance that has been gained in the understanding of the meaning of the Old Testament rites through the comparative study of religions has shown the futility of much that has been written on symbolism. That a certain rite is widely practiced may merely mean that it rests on a true instinct. To be sure, the symbolism of the future will be written on broader lines and will be less pretentious in its claims, but for these very reasons it will rest on a more solid basis. At present, however, the chief task is the collection of material and its correct historical interpretation.<P>5. Obscurity of Later History:<P>The later history of the rite is altogether obscure. As no provision was made in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',19,\'1-\');">Nu 19</a> for sending the ashes to different points, the purification could have been practiced only by those living near the sanctuary. Rabbinical casuistry still further complicated matters by providing that two black or white hairs from the same follicle would disqualify the heifer (see above), and that one on whom even a cloth had been laid could not be used. In consequence, it became virtually or altogether impossible to secure a proper animal, and the Mishnic statement that only nine had ever been found (Parah, iii.5) probably means that the rite had been obsolete long before New Testament times. Still, the existence of the tractate, Parah, and the mention in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,13);">Heb 9:13</a> show that the provisions were well remembered.<P>LITERATURE.<P>Baentsch (1903), Holzinger (1903), and (especially) Grey (1903) on Numbers; Kennedy in HDB; Edersheim, Temple and Ministry, chapter xviii (rabbinic traditions. Edersheim gives the best of the "typological" explanations).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a>`48';
isbe[4235]='Height; Heights`hit, The English terms represent a large number of Hebrew words (gobhah, marom, qomah, rum, etc.). A chief thing to notice is that in the Revised Version (British and American) "height" and "heights" are frequently substituted for other words in the King James Version, as "coast" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',12,23);">Jos 12:23</a>), "region" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,11);">1Ki 4:11</a>), "borders" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',11,2);">Jos 11:2</a>), "countries" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,11);">Jos 17:11</a>), "strength" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',95,4);">Ps 95:4</a>), "high places" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,18);">Isa 41:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',3,2,21);">Jer 3:2, 21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',7,29);">7:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',12,12);">12:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',14,6);">14:6</a>), "high palaces" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',78,69);">Ps 78:69</a>). On the other hand, for "height" in the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) has "stature" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',31,5,10);">Eze 31:5, 10</a>), "raised basement" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',41,8);">Eze 41:8</a>), etc. In the New Testament we have hupsoma, prop. of space (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,39);">Ro 8:39</a>), and hupsos of measure (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,18);">Eph 3:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',21,16);">Re 21:16</a>).``132';
isbe[4236]='Heir`ar:<P>1. The Word "Heir":<P>In the New Testament "heir" is the invariable translation of kleronomos (15 times), the technical equivalent in Greek, and of the compound sunkleronomos, "co-heir," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,17);">Ro 8:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,6);">Eph 3:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,9);">Heb 11:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,7);">1Pe 3:7</a> (in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,30);">Ga 4:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,14);">Heb 1:14</a>, contrast the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)). In the Old Testament "heir" and "to be heir" both represent some form of the common verb yarash, "possess," and the particular rendition of the verb as "to be heir" is given only by the context (compare e.g. the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,2);">Jer 49:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,15);">Mic 1:15</a>). Exactly the same is true of the words translated "inherit," "inheritance," which in by far the great majority of cases would have been represented better by "possess," "possession" (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=INHERITANCE">INHERITANCE</a> and OHL on ...). Consequently, when God is said, for instance, to have given Palestine to Israel as an \'inheritance\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',20,24);">Le 20:24</a>, etc.), nothing more need be meant than \'given as a possession.\' The Septuagint, however, for the sake of variety in its rendition of Hebrew words, used kleronomeo in many such cases (especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,7,8);">Ge 15:7-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,17);">22:17</a>), and thereby fixed on \'heir\' the sense of \'recipient of a gift from God.\' And so the word passed in this sense into New Testament Greek<65><a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,13,14);">Ro 4:13-14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,29);">Ga 3:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,7);">Tit 3:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,17);">Heb 6:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,7);">11:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,5);">Jas 2:5</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,6);">Eph 3:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,9);">Heb 11:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,7);">1Pe 3:7</a>. On the other hand, the literal meaning of the word is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,7);">Mr 12:7</a> (and parallels and <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,1);">Ga 4:1</a><3E>in the latter case being suggested by the transferred meaning in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,29);">3:29</A><3E>while in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,17);">Ro 8:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,7);">Ga 4:7</a>, the literal and transferred meanings are blended. This blending has produced the phrase "heirs of God," which, literally, is meaningless and which doubtless was formed without much deliberation, although it is perfectly clear. A similar blending has applied "heir" to Christ in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,2);">Heb 1:2</a> (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,17);">Ro 8:17</a> and perhaps <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,7);">Mr 12:7</a>) as the recipient of all things in their totality. But apart from these "blended" passages, it would be a mistake to think that sonship is always consciously thought of where "heir" is mentioned, and hence, too much theological implication should not be assigned the latter word.<P>2. Heir in Old Testament Law:<P>The heirs of property in the Old Testament were normally the sons and, chief among these, the firstborn.<P>(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'15-17\');">De 21:15-17</a> provides that the firstborn shall inherit a "double portion," whence it would appear that all the other sons shared equally. (It should be noted that in this law the firstborn is the eldest son of the father, not of the mother as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',13,2);">Ex 13:2</a>.) Uncertain, however, is what <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'15-17\');">De 21:15-17</a> means by "wife," and the practice must have varied. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,10);">Ge 21:10</a> the son of the handmaid was not to be heir with Isaac, but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',30,\'1-13\');">Ge 30:1-13</a> the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah are reckoned as legitimate children of Jacob. See <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=MARRIAGE">MARRIAGE</A>. Nor is it clear that <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'15-17\');">De 21:15-17</a> forbids setting aside the eldest son because of his own sin<69>compare the case of Reuben (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,3,4);">Ge 49:3-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',5,1);">1Ch 5:1</a>), although the son of a regular wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',29,32);">Ge 29:32</a>). The very existence of <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'15-17\');">De 21:15-17</a>, moreover, shows that in spite of the absence of formal wills, a man could control to some extent the disposition of his property after his death and that the right of the firstborn could be set aside by the father (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',26,10);">1Ch 26:10</a>). That the royal dignity went by primogeniture is asserted only (in a particular case) in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',21,3);">2Ch 21:3</a>, and both David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,\'11-13\');">1Ki 1:11-13</a>) and Rehoboam (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',11,\'21-23\');">2Ch 11:21-23</a>) chose younger sons as their successors. A single payment in the father\'s lifetime could be given in lieu of heritage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,6);">Ge 25:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',15,12);">Lu 15:12</a>), and it was possible for two brothers to make a bargain as to the disposition of the property after the father\'s death (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,\'31-34\');">Ge 25:31-34</a>).<P>(2) When there were sons alive, the daughters had no right of inheritance, and married daughters had no such right in any case. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,15);">Job 42:15</a> describes an altogether exceptional procedure.) Probably unmarried daughters passed under the charge of the firstborn, as the new head of the family, and he took the responsibility of finding them husbands. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',27,\'1-11\');">Nu 27:1-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',36,\'1-12\');">36:1-12</a> treat of the case where there were no sons<6E>the daughters inherited the estate, but they could marry only within the tribe, lest the tribal possessions be confused. This right of the daughters, however, is definitely stated to be a new thing, and in earlier times the property probably passed to the nearest male relatives, to whom it went in later times if there were no daughters. In extreme cases, where no other heirs could be found, the property went to the slaves (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,3);">Ge 15:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,23);">Pr 30:23</a>, noting that the meaning of the latter verse is uncertain), but this could have happened only at the rarest intervals. A curious instance is that of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,34,35);">1Ch 2:34-35</a>, where property is preserved in the family by marrying the daughter to an Egyptian slave belonging to the father; perhaps some adoption-idea underlies this.<P>(3) The wife had no claim on the inheritance, though the disposition made of her dowry is not explained, and it may have been returned to her. If she was childless she resorted to the Levirate marriage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',25,\'5-10\');">De 25:5-10</a>). If this was impracticable or was without issue she returned to her own family and might marry another husband (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,11);">Ge 38:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',22,13);">Le 22:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',1,8);">Ru 1:8</a>). The inferior wives (concubines) were part of the estate and went to the heir; indeed, possession of the father\'s concubines was proof of possession of his dignities (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,21,22);">2Sa 16:21-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,\'13-25\');">1Ki 2:13-25</a>). At least, such was the custom in the time of David and Solomon, but at a later period nothing is heard of the practice.<P>(4) The disposition of land is a very obscure question. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',36,4);">Nu 36:4</a> states explicitly that each heir had a share, but the continual splitting up of an estate through successive generations would have produced an impossible state of affairs. Possibly the land went to the eldest born as part of his portion, possibly in some cases it was held in common by the members of the family, possibly some member bought the shares of the others, possibly the practice differed at different times. But our ignorance of the facts is complete.<P>NOTE.<2E>The dates assigned by different scholars to the passages cited have an important bearing on the discussion.``48';
isbe[4237]='Helah`he\'-la (chel\'ah): A wife of Ashhur, father of Tekoa (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,5,7);">1Ch 4:5, 7</a>).``1';
isbe[4238]='Helam`he\'-lam (chelam, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,16);">2Sa 10:16</a>f; in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',16,17);">16:17</A> with the he of locale; Septuagint Hailam): A place near which David is said to have defeated the Aramean world under Hadarezer (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,16);">2Sa 10:16</a>). Its site is unknown. Cornill and others introduce it into the text of <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',47,16);">Eze 47:16</a> from the Septuagint Heliam). This would place it between the territories of Damascus and Hamath, which is not unreasonable. Some scholars identify it with Aleppo, which seems too far north.``1';
isbe[4239]='Helbah`hel\'-ba (chelbah): A place in the territory assigned to Asher (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,31);">Jud 1:31</A>). It may be identical with Mahalliba of Sennacherib\'s prism inscription. The site, however, has not been recovered.``1';
isbe[4240]='Helbon`hel\'-bon (chelbon; Chelbon, Chebron): A district from which Tyre received supplies of wine through the Damascus market (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',27,18);">Eze 27:18</a>); universally admitted to be the modern Halbun, a village at the head of a fruitful valley of the same name among the chalk slopes on the eastern side of Anti-Lebanon, 13 miles north-northwest of Damascus, where traces of ancient vineyard terracing still exist. Records contemporary with Ezekiel mention mat helbunim or the land of Helbon, whence Nebuchadnezzar received wine for sacrificial purposes (Belinno Cylinder, I, 23), while karan hulbunu, or Helbonian wine, is named in Western Asiatic Inscriptions, II, 44. Strabo (xv.735) also tells that the kings of Persia esteemed it highly. The district is still famous for its grapes<65>the best in the country<72>but these are mostly made into raisins, since the population is now Moslem. Helbon must not be confounded with Chalybon (Ptol. v.15, 17), the Greek-Roman province of Haleb or Aleppo.``23';
isbe[4241]='Helchiah`hel-ki\'-a.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HELKIAS">HELKIAS</a>`1';
isbe[4242]='Heldai`hel\'-da-i (chelday):<P>(1) A captain of the temple-service, appointed for the 12th month (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,15);">1Ch 27:15</a>). Same as Heled (cheledh) in parallel list (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,30);">1Ch 11:30</a>), and is probably also to be identified with Heleb, son of Baanah the Metophathite, one of David\'s heroic leaders (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,29);">2Sa 23:29</a>).<P>(2) One of a company of Jews who brought gifts of gold and silver from Babylon to assist the exiles under Zerubbabel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,10);">Zec 6:10</a>).``1';
isbe[4243]='Heleb`he\'-leb chelebh, (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,29);">2Sa 23:29</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HELDAI">HELDAI</a>`1';
isbe[4244]='Heled`he\'-led (cheledh, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,30);">1Ch 11:30</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HELDAI">HELDAI</a>`1';
isbe[4245]='Helek`he\'-lek chelekh): Son of Gilead the Manassite (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,30);">Nu 26:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,2);">Jos 17:2</a>). Patronymic, Helekites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,30);">Nu 26:30</a>).``1';
isbe[4246]='Helem`he\'-lem:<P>(1) helem; Septuagint Codex Vaticanus, Balaam, omitting "son," Codex Alexandrinus, huios Elam, "son of Elam" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,35);">1Ch 7:35</a>). A great-grandson of Asher, called Hotham in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',7,32);">1Ch 7:32</a>. The form "Elam" appears as the name of a Levite in 1Esdras 8:33.<P>(2) chelem, "strength," regarded by Septuagint as a common noun (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,14);">Zec 6:14</a>). One of the ambassadors from the Jews of the exile to Jerusalem; probably the person called Heldai in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,10);">Zec 6:10</a> is meant.``1';
isbe[4247]='Heleph`he\'-lef (cheleph): A place on the southern border of Naphtali (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,33);">Jos 19:33</a>); unidentified.``1';
isbe[4248]='Helez`he\'-lez (chelets "vigor"; Septuagint Selles, Chelles):<P>(1) <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,26);">2Sa 23:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,27);">1Ch 11:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,10);">27:10</a>. One of David\'s mighty men; according to <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,10);">1Ch 27:10</a>, he belonged to the sons of Ephraim and was at the head of the 7th course in David\'s organization of the kingdom.<P>(2) Septuagint Chelles, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,39);">1Ch 2:39</a>. A man of Judah of the clan of the Jerahmeelites.``1';
isbe[4249]='Heli`he\'-li (Helei for \'eli):<P>(1) The father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, in Luke\'s account of the genealogy of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,23);">Lu 3:23</a>).<P>(2) An ancestor of Ezra (2Esdras 1:2).``1';
isbe[4250]='Heliodorus`he-li-o-do\'-rus (Heliodoros): Treasurer of the Syrian king Seleucus IV, Philopator (187-175 BC), the immediate predecessor of Antiochus Epiphanes who carried out to its utmost extremity the Hellenizing policy begun by Seleucus and the "sons of Tobias." Greatly in want of money to pay the tribute due to the Romans as one of the results of the victory of Scipio over Antiochus the Great at Magnesia (190 BC), Seleucus learned from Apollonius, governor of Coele-Syria (Pal) and Phoenicia, of the wealth which was reported to be stored up in the Temple at Jerusalem and commissioned Heliodorus. (2Macc 3) to plunder the temple and to bring its contents to him. On the wealth collected in the Temple at this time, Josephus (Ant., IV, vii, 2) may be consulted. The Temple seems to have served the purposes of a bank in which the private deposits of widows and orphans were kept for greater security, and in 2Macc 3:15-21 is narrated the panic at Jerusalem which took place when Heliodorus came with an armed guard to seize the contents of the Temple (see Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church, III, 287). In spite of the protest of Onias, the high priest, Heliodorus. was proceeding to carry out his commission when, "through the Lord of Spirits and the Prince of all power," a great apparition appeared which caused him to fall down "compassed with great darkness" and speechless. When "quite at the last gasp" he was by the intercession of Onias restored to life and strength and "testified to all men the works of the great God which he had beheld with his eyes." The narrative given in 2Macc 3 is not mentioned by any other historian, though 4Macc refers to the plundering of the Temple and assigns the deed to Apollonius. Raffaelle used the incident in depicting, on the walls of the Vatican, the triumph of Pope Julius II over the enemies of the Pontificate.``79';
isbe[4251]='Heliopolis`he-li-op\'-o-lis.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ON">ON</a>`1';
isbe[4252]='Helkai`hel\'-ka-i, hel\'-ki, hel-ka\'-i (chelqay, perhaps an abbreviation for Helkiah, "Yah is my portion." Not in the Septuagint\'s Codex Vaticanus; Codex L: Chelkias (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,15);">Ne 12:15</a>)): The head of a priestly house in the days of Joiakim.``1';
isbe[4253]='Helkath`hel\'-kath (chelqath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,25);">Jos 19:25</a>); chelqath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',21,31);">Jos 21:31</a>); by a scribal error chuqoq (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,75);">1Ch 6:75</a>)): A town or district on the border of Asher, assigned to the Levites; unidentified.``1';
isbe[4254]='Helkath-Hazzurim`hel\'-kath-haz\'-u-rim, -ha-zu\'-rim (chelqath ha-tsurim; Meris ton epiboulon): The name as it stands means "field of the sword edges," and is applied to the scene of the conflict in which twelve champions each from the army of Joab and that of Abner perished together, each slaying his fellow (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,16);">2Sa 2:16</a>). Some, following Septuagint, would read chelqath ha-tsodhim, "field of the crafty," i.e. "of the ambush." Thenius suggested chelqath ha-tsarim, "field of the adversaries" (see also H. P. Smith, ICC, "Samuel," 271). Probably, however, the text as it stands is correct.``54';
isbe[4255]='Helkias`hel-ki\'-as (chilqiyah; Chelkias; the King James Version Chelcias):<P>(1) Father of Susanna (Susanna verses 2,29,63). According to tradition he was brother of Jeremiah, and he is identified with the priest who found the Book of the Law in the time of Josiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',22,8);">2Ki 22:8</a>).<P>(2) Ancestor of Baruch (Baruch 1:1).<P>(3) Father of Joiakim the high priest (Baruch 1:7). The name represents <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HILKIAH">HILKIAH</a> (which see).``1';
isbe[4256]='Hell`hel (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=SHEOL">SHEOL</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=HADES">HADES</a>; <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GEHENNA">GEHENNA</a>):<P>1. The Word in the King James Version:<P>The English word, from a Teutonic root meaning "to hide" or "cover," had originally the significance of the world of the dead generally, and in this sense is used by Chaucer, Spenser, etc., and in the Creed ("He descended into hell"); compare the English Revised Version Preface. Now the word has come to mean almost exclusively the place of punishment of the lost or finally impenitent; the place of torment of the wicked. In the King James Version of the Scriptures, it is the rendering adopted in many places in the Old Testament for the Hebrew word she\'ol (in 31 out of 65 occurrences of that word it is so translated), and in all places, save one (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,55);">1Co 15:55</a>) in the New Testament, for the Greek word Hades (this word occurs 11 times; in 10 of these it is translated "hell"; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,55);">1Co 15:55</a> reads "grave," with "hell" in the margin). In these cases the word has its older general meaning, though in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,23);">Lu 16:23</a> (parable of Rich Man and Lazarus) it is specially connected with a place of "torment," in contrast with the "Abraham\'s bosom" to which Lazarus is taken (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,22);">16:22</A>).<p>2. The Word in the Revised Version:<P>In the above cases the Revised Version (British and American) has introduced changes, replacing "hell" by "Sheol" in the passages in the Old Testament (the English Revised Version retains "hell" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,9,15);">Isa 14:9, 15</a>; the American Standard Revised Version makes no exception), and by "Hades" in the passages in the New Testament (see under these words).<P>3. Gehenna:<P>Besides the above uses, and more in accordance with the modern meaning, the word "hell" is used in the New Testament in the King James Version as the equivalent of Gehenna (12 times; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,22,29);">Mt 5:22, 29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,28);">10:28</a>, etc.). the Revised Version (British and American) in these cases puts "Gehenna" in the margin. Originally the Valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, Gehenna became among the Jews the synonym for the place of torment in the future life (the "Gehenna of fire," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,22);">Mt 5:22</a>, etc.; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GEHENNA">GEHENNA</A>).<P>4. Tartarus:<P>In yet one other passage in the New Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,4);">2Pe 2:4</a>), "to cast down to hell" is used (the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)) to represent the Greek tartaroo, ("to send into Tartarus"). Here it stands for the place of punishment of the fallen angels: "spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits (or chains) of darkness" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jud\',1,6);">Jude 1:6</a>; but also <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',25,41);">Mt 25:41</a>). Similar ideas are found in certain of the Jewish apocalyptic books (Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Apocrypha Baruch, with apparent reference to <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,\'1-4\');">Ge 6:1-4</a>; compare <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ESCHATOLOGY+OF+THE+OLD+TESTAMENT">ESCHATOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</a>).<P>On theological aspect, see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=PUNISHMENT,+EVERLASTING">PUNISHMENT, EVERLASTING</a>. For literature, see references in above-named articles, and compare article "Hell" by Dr. D. S. Salmond in HDB.``132';
isbe[4257]='Hellenism; Hellenist`hel\'-en-iz\'-m, hel\'-en-ist: Hellenism is the name we give to the manifold achievements of the Greeks in social and political institutions, in the various arts, in science and philosophy, in morals and religion. It is customary to distinguish two main periods, between which stands the striking figure of Alexander the Great, and to apply to the earlier period the adjective "Hellenic," that of "Hellenistic" to the latter. While there is abundant reason for making this distinction, it must not be considered as resting upon fortuitous changes occasioned by foreign influences. The Hellenistic age is rather the sudden unfolding of a flower whose bud was forming and maturing for centuries.<P>1. The Expansion of the Greek Peoples:<P>Before the coming of the Hellenic peoples into what we now call Greece, there existed in those lands a flourishing civilization to which we may give the name "Aegean." The explorations of archaeologists during the last few decades have brought it to light in many places on the continent, as well as on the islands of the Aegean and notably in Crete. When the Hellenic peoples came, it was not as a united nation, nor even as homogeneous tribes of a common race; though without doubt predominantly of kindred origin, it was the common possession of an Aryan speech and of similar customs and religion that marked them off from the peoples among whom they settled. When their southward movemerit from Illyria occurred, and by what causes it was brought about, we do not know; but it can hardly have long antedated the continuance of this migration which led to the settlement of the coast districts of Asia Minor and the islands of the Aegean from about the 13th to the 10th centuries BC. In the colonization of these new territories the Hellenic peoples became conscious of their kinship, partly because the several colonies received contingents from various regions of the motherland, partly because they were in common brought into striking contrast to the alien "Barbarians" who spoke other untintelligible languages. As the older communities on the mainland and on the islands began to flourish, they felt the need, arising from various causes, for further colonization. Among these causes we may mention the poverty of the soil in Greece proper, the restricting pressure of the strong tribes of Asia Minor who prevented expansion inland, a growing disaffection with the aristocratic regime in almost all Greek states and with the operation of the law of primogeniture in land tenure, and lastly the combined lure of adventure and the prospect of trade. Thus, it came about that in the 8th and 7th centuries BC, two great movements of colonial expansion set in, one toward the Hellespont and to the shores of the Pontus, or Black Sea, beyond, the other westward toward Southern Italy, Sicily, and beyond as far as Gades in Spain. To the 7th century belongs also the colonization of Naucratis in Egypt and of Cyrene in Libya. Then followed a period of relative inactivity during the 5th century, which was marked by the desperate conflict of the Greeks with Persia in the East and with Carthage in the West, succeeded by even more disastrous conflicts among themselves. With the enforced internal peace imposed by Macedonia came the resumption of colonial and military expansion in a measure before undreamed of. In a few years the empire of Alexander embraced Thrace, Asia Minor, Egypt, and Asia eastward beyond the Indus. The easternmost regions soon fell away, but Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt long continued under Greek rule, until Rome in the 1st century BC made good her claims to sovereignty in those lands.<P>2. The Hellenic State:<P>Throughout this course of development and expansion we speak of the people as Greeks, although it is evident that even such racial homogeneity as they may have had on coming into Greece must have been greatly modified by the absorption of conquered peoples. But the strong individuality of the Hellenic population manifested itself everywhere in its civilization. In the evolution from the Homeric kingship (supported by the nobles in council, from which the commonalty was excluded, or where it was supposed at most to express assent or dissent to proposals laid before it) through oligarchic or aristocratic rule and the usurped authority of the tyrants, to the establishement of democratic government, there is nothing surprising to the man of today. That is because Greek civilization has become typical of all western civilization. In the earlier stages of this process, moreover, there is nothing strikingly at variance with the institutions of the Hebrews, at least so far as concerns the outward forms. But there existed throughout a subtle difference of spirit which made it possible, even inevitable, for the Greeks to attain to democratic institutions, whereas to the Hebrews such a development was impossible, if not unthinkable. It is difficult to define this spirit, but one may say that it was marked from the first by an inclination to permit the free development and expression of individuality subordinated to the common good; by a corresponding recognition of human limitations over against one\'s fellow-man as over against Deity; by an instinctive dread of excess as inhuman and provoking the just punishment of the gods; and lastly by a sane refusal to take oneself too seriously, displaying itself in a certain good-humored irony even among men who, like Socrates and Epicurus, regarded themselves as charged with a sublime mission, in striking contrast with the Hebrew prophets who voiced the thunders of Sinai, but never by any chance smiled at their own earnestness. Even the Macedonians did not attempt to rule Greece with despotic sway, leaving the states in general in the enjoyment of their liberties; and in the Orient, Alexander and his successors, Roman as well as Greek, secured their power and extended civilization by the foundation and encouragement of Hellenic cities in extraordinary numbers. The city-state, often confederated with other city-states, displaced the organization of tribe or clan, thus substituting a new unit and a new interest for the old; and the centers thus created radiated Hellenic influence and made for order and good government everywhere. But in accordance with the new conditions the state took on a somewhat different form. While the city preserved local autonomy, the state became monarchical; and the oriental deification of the king reinforced by the Hellenic tendency to deify the benefactors of mankind, eventuated in modes of speech and thought which powerfully influenced the Messianic hopes of the Jews.<P>3. Hellenic Life:<P>The life of the Greeks, essentially urban and dominated by political interests fostered in states in which the individual counted for much, was of a type wholly different from the oriental. Although the fiction of consanguinity was cultivated by the Hellenic city-state as by the Semitic tribe, it was more transparent in the former, particularly in the newer communities formed in historical times. There was thus a powerful stimulus to mutual tolerance and concession which, supported as it was by the strong love of personal independence and the cultivation of individuality, led to the development of liberty and the recognition of the rights of man. A healthy social life was the result for those who shared the privileges of citizenship, and also, in hardly less degree, for those resident aliens who received the protection of the state. Women also, though not so free as men, enjoyed, even at Athens where they were most limited, liberties unknown to the Orientals. In the Hellenistic age they attained a position essentially similar to that of modern Europe. There were slaves belonging both to individuals and the state, but their lot was mitigated in general by a steadily growing humanity. The amenities of life were many, and were cultivated no less in the name of religion than of art, literature, and science.<P>4. Hellenic Art and Letters:<P>As in every phase of Greek civilization, the development of art and letters was free. Indeed their supreme excellence must be attributed to the happy circumstances which suffered them to grow spontaneously from the life of the people without artificial constraints imposed from within, or overpowering influences coming from without: a fortune which no other great movement in art or letters can boast. Greek art was largely developed in the service of religion; but owing to the circumstance that both grew side by side, springing from the heart of man, their reactions were mutual, art contributing to religion quite as much as it received. The creative genius of the Hellenic people expressed itself with singular directness and simplicity in forms clearly visualized and subject to the conditions of psychologically effective grouping in space or time. Their art is marked by the observance of a just proportion and by a certain natural restraint due to the preponderance of the intellectual element over the purely sensuous. Its most characteristic product is the ideal type in which only enough individuality enters to give to the typical the concreteness of life. What has been said of art in the narrower sense applies equally to artistic letters. The types thus created, whether in sculpture, architecture, music, drama, history, or oratory, though not regarded with superstitious reverence, commended themselves by the sheer force of inherent truth and beauty to succeeding generations, thus steadying the course of development and restraining the exuberant originality and the tendency to individualism. In the Hellenistic age, individualism gradually preponderated where the lessening power of creative genius did not lead to simple imitation.<P>5. Philosophy of Nature and of Conduct:<P>The traditional views of the Hellenic peoples touching Nature and conduct, which did not differ widely from those of other peoples in a corresponding stage of culture, maintained themselves down to the 7th century BC with comparatively little change. Along with and following the colonial expansion of Hellenism there came the awakening intellectual curiosity, or rather the shock of surprise necessary to convert attention into question. The mythology of the Greeks had contained a vague theology, without authority indeed, but satisfactory because adequate to express the national thought. Ethics there was none, morality being customary. But the extending horizon of Hellenic thought discovered that customs differed widely in various lands; indeed, it is altogether likely that the collection of strange and shocking customs which filled the quivers of the militant Sophists in the 5th century had its inception in the 6th and possibly the 7th century At any rate it furnished the fiery darts of the adversary until ethics was founded in reason by the quest of Socrates for the universal, not in conduct, but in judgment. As ethics arose out of the irreconcilable contradictions of conduct, so natural philosophy sprung from the contradictions of mythical theology and in opposition to it. There were in fact two strata of conceptions touching supernatural beings; one, growing out of a primitive animism, regarded their operations essentially from the point of view of magic, which refuses to be surprised at any result, be it never so ill-proportioned to the means employed, so long as the mysterious word was spoken or the requisite act performed; the other, sprung from a worship of Nature in her most striking phenomena, recognized an order, akin to the moral order, in her operations. When natural philosophy arose in the 6th century, it instinctively at first, then consciously, divested Nature of personality by stripping off the disguise of myth and substituting a plain and reasoned tale founded on mechanical principles. This is the spirit which pervades pre-Socratic science and philosophy. The quest of Socrates for universally valid judgments on conduct directed thought to the laws of mind, which are teleological, in contradistinction to the laws of matter, which are mechanical; and thus in effect dethroned Nature, regarded as material, by giving primacy to mind. Henceforth, Greek philosophy was destined, with relatively few and unimportant exceptions, to devote itself to the study of human conduct and to be essentially idealistic, even where the foundation, as with the Stoics, was ostensibly materialistic. More and more it became true of the Greek philosophers that they sought God, "if haply they might feel after him and find him," conscious of the essential unity of the Divine and the human, and defining philosophy as the endeavor to assimilate the soul to God.<P>6. Hellenic and Hellenistic Religion:<P>The Homeric poems present a picture of Greek life as seen by a highly cultivated aristocratic society having no sympathy with the commonalty. Hence, we are not to regard Homeric religion as the religion of the Hellenic peoples in the Homeric age. Our first clear view of the Hellenic commoner is presented by Hesiod in the 8th century. Here we find, alongside of the worship of the Olympians, evidences of chthonian cults and abundant hints of human needs not satisfied by the well-regulated religion of the several city-states. The conventionalized monarchy of Zeus ruling over his fellow-Olympians is known to be a fiction of the poets, having just as much<63>no more<72>foundation, in fact, as the mythical overlordship of Agamemnon over the assembled princes of the Achaens; while it caught the imagination of the Greeks and dominated their literature, each city-state possessed its own shrines sacred to its own gods, who might or might not be called by the names of Olympians. Yet the great shrines which attracted Greeks from every state, such as those of Zeus at Dodona (chiefly in the period before the 7th century) and Olympia, of Apollo at Delos and Delphi, and of Hera at Argos, were the favored abodes of Olympians. Only one other should be mentioned: that of Demeter at Eleusis. Her worship was of a different character, and the great repute of her shrine dates from the 5th century. If the Zeus of Olympia was predominantly the benign god of the sky, to whom men came in joyous mood to delight him with pomp and festive gatherings, performing feats of manly prowess in the Olympic games, the Zeus of Dodona, and the Delphian Apollo, as oracular deities, were visited in times of doubt and distress. The 7th and 6th centuries mark the advent<6E>or the coming into prominence<63>of deities whose appeal was to the deepest human emotions, of ecstatic enthusiasm, of fear, and of hope. Among them we must mention Dionysus, the god of teeming Nature (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=DIONYSUS">DIONYSUS</a>), and Orpheus. With their advent comes an awakening of the individual soul, whose aspiration to commune with Deity found little satisfaction in the general worship of the states. Private organizations and quasi-monastic orders, like those of the Orphics and Pythagoreans, arose and won countless adherents. Their deities found admission into older shrines, chiefly those of chthonian divinities, like that of Demeter at Eleusis, and wrought a change in the spirit and to a certain extent in the ritual of the "mysteries" practiced there. It was in these "mysteries" that the Christian Fathers, according to the mood or the need, polemic or apologetic, of the moment, saw now the propaedeutic type, now the diabolically instituted counterfeit, of the sacraments and ordinances of the church. The spirit and even the details of the observances of the "mysteries" are difficult to determine; but one must beware of accepting the hostile judgments of Christian writers who were in fact retorting upon the Greeks criticisms leveled at the church: both were blinded by partisanship and so misread the symbols.<P>If we thus find a true praeparatio evangelica in the Hellenistic developments of earlier Hellenic religion, there are parallel developments in the other religions which were adopted in the Hellenistic age. The older national religions of Persia and Egypt underwent a similar change, giving rise respectively to the worship of Mithra and of Isis, both destined, along with the chthonian mysteries of the Greeks, to be dangerous rivals for the conquest of the world of Christianity, itself a younger son in this prolific family of new religions. Space is wanting here for a consideration of these religious movements, the family resemblance of which with Christianity is becoming every day more apparent; but so much at least should be said, that while every candid student must admit the superiority of Christianity in moral content and adaptation to the religious nature of man, the difference in these respects was not at first sight so obvious that the successful rival might at the beginning of the contest have been confidently predicted.<P>As with other manifestations of the Hellenic spirit, so, too, in matters of religion, it was the free development of living institutions that most strikingly distinguishes the Greeks from the Hebrews. They had priests, but were never ruled by them; they possessed a literature regarded with veneration, and in certain shrines treasured sacred writings containing directions for the practice and ritual of the cults, but they were neither intended nor suffered to fix for all time the interpretation of the symbols. In the 5th and 4th centuries the leaders of Greek thought rebuked the activity of certain priests, and it was not before the period of Roman dominion that priests succeeded even in a small measure in usurping power, and sacred writings began to exercise an authority remotely comparable to that recognized among the Jews.<P>A most interesting question is that concerning the extent to which Greek civilization and thought had penetrated and influenced Judaism. During three centuries before the advent of Jesus, Hellenism had been a power in Syria and Judea. The earliest writings of the Hebrews showing this influence are Daniel and the Old Testament Apocrypha. Several books of the Apocrypha were originally written in Greek, and show strong influence of Greek thought. The Septuagint, made for the Jews of the Dispersion, early won its way to authority even in Palestine, where Aramaic had displaced Hebrew, which thus became a dead language known only to a few. New Testament quotations of the Old Testament are almost without exception taken from the Septuagint. Thus the sacred literature of the Jews was for practical purposes Greek. Though Jesus spoke Aramaic, He unquestionably knew some Greek. Yet there is no clear evidence of specifically Greek influence on this thought, the presuppositions of which are Jewish or generally those of the Hellenistic age. All the writings of the New Testament were originally composed in Greek, though their authors differed widely in the degree of proficiency in the use of the language and in acquaintance with Hellenic thought. Their debt to these sources can be profitably considered only in connection with the individual writers; but one who is acquainted with the Hebrew and Greek literature instinctively feels in reading the New Testament that the national character of the Jews, as reflected in the Old Testament, has all but vanished, remaining only as a subtle tone of moral earnestness and as an imaginative coloring, except in the simple story of the Synoptic Gospels. But for the bitterness aroused by the destruction of Jerusalem, it is probable that the Jews would have yielded completely to Hellenic influences.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GREECE,+RELIGION+IN+ANCIENT">GREECE, RELIGION IN ANCIENT</a>`75';
isbe[4258]='Helm`helm.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHIPS+AND+BOATS">SHIPS AND BOATS</a>`1';
isbe[4259]='Helmet`hel\'-met.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ARMS+ARMOR">ARMS, ARMOR</a>`1';
isbe[4260]='Helon`hel\'-on (chelon, "valorous"; the Septuagint\'s Codex Vaticanus, Chailon): The father of Eliab, the prince of the tribe of Zebulun (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',1,9);">Nu 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',2,7);">2:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',7,24,29);">7:24, 29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',10,16);">10:16</a>).``1';
isbe[4261]='Help`With the sense of that which brings aid, support, or deliverance, "help" (noun and vb.) represents a large variety of words in Hebrew and Greek (noun 7, verb 16). A principal Hebrew word is \'azar, "to help," with the corresponding nouns \'ezer, \'ezrah; a chief Greek word is boetheo (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,25);">Mt 15:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',9,22,24);">Mr 9:22, 24</a>, etc.). True help is to be sought for in Yahweh, in whom, in the Old Testament, the believer is constantly exhorted to trust, with the renouncing of all other confidences (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',20,2);">Ps 20:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',33,20);">33:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,5);">42:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',46,1);">46:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',115,9,10,11);">115:9-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',121,2);">121:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,10,13,14);">Isa 41:10, 13-14</a>, etc.). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,26);">Ro 8:26</a> it is said, "the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity," the verb here (sunantilambanetai) having the striking meaning of to "take hold along with one." In the story of Eden, Eve is spoken of as "a help meet" for Adam (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',2,18,20);">Ge 2:18, 20</a>). The idea in "meet" is not so much "suitability," though that is implied, as likeness, correspondence in nature (Vulgate, similem sibi). One like himself, as taken from him, the woman would be an aid and companion to the man in his tasks.``132';
isbe[4262]='Helpmeet`help\'-met.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HELP">HELP</a>`1';
isbe[4263]='Helps (1)`(antilempseis, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,28);">1Co 12:28</a>): In classical Greek the word antilempsis means "remuneration," the hold one has on something, then perception, apprehension. But in Biblical Greek it has an altruistic meaning. Thus, it is used in the Septuagint, both in the Old Testament Scriptures and in the Apocrypha (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,19);">Ps 22:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,19);">89:19</a>, 1Esdras 8:27; 2Macc 15:7). Thus, we obtain a clue to its meaning in our text, where it has been usually understood as referring to the deacons, the following word kuberneseis, translated "governments," being explained as referring to the presbyters.``42';
isbe[4264]='Helps (2)`(boetheiai, <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',27,17);">Ac 27:17</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHIPS+AND+BOATS">SHIPS AND BOATS</a>`1';
isbe[4265]='Helve`helv (\'ets "wood," "tree"): The handle or wooden part of an ax. "The head (margin "iron") slippeth from the helve" (margin "tree," <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',19,5);">De 19:5</a>). The marginal reading suggests that "the ax is supposed to glance off the tree it is working on."``1';
isbe[4266]='Hem`(kraspedon): The classic instance of the use of "hem" in the New Testament is <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,20);">Mt 9:20</a> the King James Version (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,36);">Mt 14:36</a>), where the woman "touched the hem of his (Christ\'s) garment." The reference is to the fringe or tassel with its traditional blue thread which the faithful Israelite was directed to wear on the corners of the outer garment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',15,37);">Nu 15:37</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',22,12);">De 22:12</a>). Great importance came to be attached to it, the ostentatious Pharisees making it very broad or large (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,5);">Mt 23:5</a>). Here the woman clearly thought there might be peculiar virtue in touching the tassel or fringe of Jesus\' garment. Elsewhere the word is rendered <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=BORDER;+BORDERS">BORDER</a> (which see).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DRESS">DRESS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FRINGES">FRINGES</a>`47';
isbe[4267]='Hemam`he\'-mam (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,22);">Ge 36:22</a> the King James Version and the English Revised Version).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEMAN">HEMAN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOMAM">HOMAM</a>`1';
isbe[4268]='Heman`he\'-man (heman, "faithful"): The name of two men in the Old Testament.<P>(1) A musician and seer, a Levite, son of Joel and grandson of the prophet Samuel; of the family of the Kohathites (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,33);">1Ch 6:33</a>), appointed by David as one of the leaders of the temple-singing (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',15,17);">1Ch 15:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',5,12);">2Ch 5:12</a>). He had 14 sons (and 3 daughters) who assisted their father in the chorus. Heman seems also to have been a man of spiritual power; is called "the king\'s seer in matters of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',25,5);">1Ch 25:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',35,15);">2Ch 35:15</a>).<P>(2) One of the noted wise men prior to, or about, the time of Solomon. He was one of the three sons of Mahol (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,31);">1Ki 4:31 (Hebrew 5:11)</a>); also called a son of Zerah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',2,6);">1Ch 2:6</a>).<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',88,\'1-\');">Ps 88</a> is inscribed to Heman the Ezrahite, who is probably to be identified with the second son of Zerah.``137';
isbe[4269]='Hemath`he\'-math.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HAMMATH">HAMMATH</a>`1';
isbe[4270]='Hemdan`hem\'-dan (chemdan, "pleasant"): A descendant of Seir, the Horite (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,26);">Ge 36:26</a>). Wrongly translated "Amram" by the King James Version in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,41);">1Ch 1:41</a> (the Revised Version (British and American) "Hamran"), where the transcribers made an error in one vowel and one consonant, writing (chamran), instead of (chemdan).``1';
isbe[4271]='Hemlock`hem\'-lock.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GALL">GALL</a>`1';
isbe[4272]='Hen (1)`hen (chen, "favor"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,14);">Zec 6:14</a>, English Versions of the Bible reads, "And the crowns shall be to Helem...and to Hen the son of Zephaniah." But as this person is called Josiah in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,10);">Zec 6:10</a>, the Revised Version, margin "and for the kindness of the son of Zephaniah" is probably right, but the text is uncertain.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSIAH">JOSIAH</a>`1';
isbe[4273]='Hen (2)`(ornis): Mentioned in the accounts of the different disciples in describing the work of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,37);">Mt 23:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',13,34);">Lu 13:34</a>).``1';
isbe[4274]='Hena`he\'-na (hena\'; Ana): Named in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,13);">2Ki 19:13</a>, as one of the cities destroyed by Sennacherib along with Sepharvaim. It does not appear in a similar connection in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',17,24);">17:24</a>. The text is probably corrupt. No reasonable identification has been proposed. Cheyne (Encyclopaedia Biblica, under the word) says of the phrase "Hena and Ivah" that "underlying this is a witty editorial suggestion that the existence of cities called h-n-\' and \'-w-h respectively has passed out of mind (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',9,6);">Ps 9:6 (Hebrew 7)</a>), for hena\' we\'iwwah, clearly means \'he has driven away and overturned\' (so Targum, Symmachus)." He would drop out h-n-\'. Hommel (Expositors Times, IX, 330) thinks that here we have divine names; Hena standing for the Arabic star-name al-han\'a, and Ivvah for al-\'awwa\'u.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IVAH">IVAH</a>`54';
isbe[4275]='Henadad`hen\'-a-dad (chenadhadh, "favor of Hadad"; Septuagint Henaad; Henadad; Henadab; Henalab (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,9);">Ezr 3:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,18,24);">Ne 3:18, 24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,9);">10:9</a>)): One of the heads of the Levites in the post-exilic community.``1';
isbe[4276]='Henna`hen\'-a (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',1,14);">So 1:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',4,13);">4:13</a>): An aromatic plant.``1';
isbe[4277]='Henoch`he\'-nok (chanokh; Henoch; in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,3);">1Ch 1:3</a> the King James Version the Revised Version (British and American), "Enoch"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,4);">Ge 25:4</a>, the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) "Hanoch"; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',1,33);">1Ch 1:33</a>, the King James Version "Henoch," the Revised Version (British and American) "Hanoch"): The name of a Midianite, a descendant of Abram.``1';
isbe[4278]='Hepher`(chepher):<P>(1) Septuagint Hopher (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',12,17);">Jos 12:17</a>), a Canaanitish town mentioned between Tappuah and Aphek, unidentified.<P>(2) In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,10);">1Ki 4:10</a> a district connected with Socoh, and placed by Solomon under the direction of Benhesed of Arubboth, unidentified.``1';
isbe[4279]='Hepher; Hepherites`he\'-fer, he\'-fer-its (chepher, chephri):<P>(1) Septuagint Hopher (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,32);">Nu 26:32</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',27,1);">27:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,2);">Jos 17:2</a>f), the head of a family or clan of the tribe of Manasseh. The clan is called the Hepherites in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,32);">Nu 26:32</a>.<P>(2) Septuagint Hephal (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,6);">1Ch 4:6</a>), a man of Judah.<P>(3) Septuagint Hopher (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',11,36);">1Ch 11:36</a>), one of David\'s heroes.``1';
isbe[4280]='Hephzibah`hef\'-zi-ba (chephtsi-bhah, "my delight is in her"):<P>(1) Septuagint Hopseiba, Hapseiba, Hophsiba, the mother of Manasseh (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',21,1);">2Ki 21:1</a>).<P>(2) The new name of Zion (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',62,4);">Isa 62:4</a>); Septuagint translates Thelema emon, "my delight."``1';
isbe[4281]='Herakles`her\'-a-klez (Herakles).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HERCULES">HERCULES</a>`1';
isbe[4282]='Herald`her\'-ald: The word occurs once (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',3,4);">Da 3:4</a>) as the translation of the Aramaic word karoz (compare kerux): "Then the herald cried aloud."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GAMES">GAMES</a>`1';
isbe[4283]='Herb`hurb, urb:<P>(1) yaraq, "green thing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',10,15);">Ex 10:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',15,6);">Isa 15:6</a>); a garden of herbs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,10);">De 11:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',21,2);">1Ki 21:2</a>); "(a dinner, the margin portion of) herbs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,17);">Pr 15:17</a>).<P>(2) \'esebh; compare Arabic \'ushb, "herbage," "grass," etc.; "herbs yielding seed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,11);">Ge 1:11</a>); "herbage" for food (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,30);">Ge 1:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',14,6);">Jer 14:6</a>); translated "grass" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,15);">De 11:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,2);">Am 7:2</a>); "herbs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,25);">Pr 27:25</a>, etc.).<P>(3) deshe\', translated "herb" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,26);">2Ki 19:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,25);">Pr 27:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,27);">Isa 37:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,14);">66:14</a> the King James Version), but generally <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GRASS">GRASS</a> (which see).<P>(4) chatsir, vegetation generally, but translated <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=GRASS">GRASS</A> (which see).<P>(5) \'oroth, \'owroth (plural only), "green plants" or "herbs." In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',4,39);">2Ki 4:39</a> the Talmud interprets it to mean "colewort," but it may mean any edible herbs which had survived the drought. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',26,19);">Isa 26:19</a> the expression "dew of herbs" is in the margin translated "dew of light" which is more probable (see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=DEW">DEW</A>), and the translation "heat upon herbs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',18,4);">Isa 18:4</a> the King James Version) is in the Revised Version (British and American) translated "clear heat in sunshine."<P>(6) botane (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,7);">Heb 6:7</a>).<P>(7) lachana = yaraq (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,32);">Mt 13:32</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BITTER+HERBS">BITTER HERBS</a>`117';
isbe[4284]='Hercules`hur\'-ku-lez (Herakles): The process of Hellenizing the Jews which began at an earlier date was greatly promoted under Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BC). Jason, who supplanted his brother Onias in the office of high priest by promising Antiochus an increase of tribute, aided the movement by setting up under the king\'s authority a Greek palaestra for the training of youth in Greek exercises, and by registering the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch (2Macc 4:8f). Certain of these Antiochians of Jerusalem Jason sent to Tyre, where games were held every five years in honor of Hercules, that is, the national Tyrian deity Melcart, identified with Baal of Old Testament history. According to Josephus (Ant., VII, v, 3) Hiram, king of Tyre in the days of Solomon, built the temple of Hercules and also of Astarte. Jason s deputies carried 300 drachmas of silver for the sacrifice of Hercules, but they were so ashamed of their commission that they "thought it not right to use the money for any sacrifice" and "on account of present circumstances it went to the equipment of the galleys" (2Macc 4:18-20).``79';
isbe[4285]='Herd`hurd.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CATTLE">CATTLE</a>`1';
isbe[4286]='Herdsman`hurdz\'-man (boqer; the King James Version, the English Revised Version "herdman"): A cowherd (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,14);">Am 7:14</a>). The same word is used in Syria today. ro\'eh, has its equivalent in the language of Syria and Palestine (Arabic ra\'i), and is a general term for any kind of a herdsman (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',13,7,8);">Ge 13:7-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,20);">26:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',21,7);">1Sa 21:7</a>). noqedh, occurs in one passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',1,1);">Am 1:1</a>); literally it means one who spots or marks the sheep, hence, a herdsman. Spotting the wool with different dyes is still the method of distinguishing between the sheep of different flocks. The herdsman is seldom the owner of the sheep, but a hireling.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHEEP">SHEEP</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SHEEP+TENDING">SHEEP TENDING</a>`133';
isbe[4287]='Here`her, in composition:`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEREAFTER">Hereafter</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEREBY">Hereby</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEREOF">Hereof</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HERETOFORE">Heretofore</A>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HEREWITH">Herewith</A>;`1';
isbe[4288]='Hereafter`her-aft\'-er (here (this present) and after) represents Hebrew \'achar, "hinder part," "end" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,23);">Isa 41:23</a>), "the things that are to come hereafter" (\'achor after, behind the present), with den, "this," \'achare dhen, Aramaic (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',2,29,45);">Da 2:29, 45</a>), \'achar, "after," "behind," "last" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',20,39);">Eze 20:39</a>), Greek ap\' arti, "from now" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,64);">Mt 26:64</a>), "Hereafter ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven," which does not mean "at a future time" according to the more modern usage of "hereafter," but (as the Greek) "from now," the Revised Version (British and American) "henceforth"; Tyndale and the chief versions after him have "hereafter," but Wycliff has "fro hennes forth." <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,51);">Joh 1:51</a>, "Hereafter ye shall see the heaven opened," etc., where "hereafter" has the same meaning; it is omitted by the Revised Version (British and American) after a corrected text (Wycliff also omits); eti, "yet," "still," "any more" "any longer" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,30);">Joh 14:30</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "I will no more speak much with you," Wycliff, "now I schal not"); meketi, "no more," "no longer" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,14);">Mr 11:14</a>, "no man eat fruit of thee hereafter," the Revised Version (British and American) "henceforward"); apo tou nun, "from now" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,69);">Lu 22:69</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "From henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God," Wycliff "aftir this tyme"); meta tauta (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,7);">Joh 13:7</a>, "Thou shalt know (the Revised Version (British and American) "understand") hereafter," Wycliff "aftirward").``1';
isbe[4289]='Hereby`her-bi\', represents bezo\'th, "in or by this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',42,15);">Ge 42:15</a> "Hereby ye shall be proved"); ek toutou, "out of this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,6);">1Joh 4:6</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "by this"); en touto, "in this," "by this means" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,4);">1Co 4:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',2,3,5);">1Joh 2:3, 5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,16,19,24);">3:16, 19, 24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,2,13);">4:2, 13</a>).``1';
isbe[4290]='Heredity`he-red\'-i-ti:<P>1. Physiological Heredity:<P>Heredity, in modern language, is the law by which living beings tend to repeat their characteristics, physiological and psychical, in their offspring, a law familiar in some form to even the most uncultured peoples. The references to it in the Bible are of various kinds.<P>Curiously enough, little mention is made of physiological heredity, even in so simple a form as the resemblance of a son to his father, but there are a few references, such as, e.g., those to giants with giants for sons (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',21,\'18-22\');">2Sa 21:18-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',20,\'4-8\');">1Ch 20:4-8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',6,4);">Ge 6:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,33);">Nu 13:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,28);">De 1:28</a>, etc.). Moreover <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',28,\'59-61\');">De 28:59-61</a> may contain a thought of hereditary diseases (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',5,27);">2Ki 5:27</a>). On the psychical side the data are almost equally scanty. That a son and his father may differ entirely is taken for granted and mentioned repeatedly (especially in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,\'5-20\');">Eze 18:5-20</a>). Even in the case of the king, the frequent changes of dynasty prevented such a phrase as "the seed royal" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,1);">2Ki 11:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',41,1);">Jer 41:1</a>) from being taken very seriously. Yet, perhaps, the inheritance of mechanical dexterity is hinted at in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,\'20-22\');">Ge 4:20-22</a>, if "father" means anything more than "teacher." But, in any case, the fact that "father" could have this metaphorical sense, together with the corresponding use of "son" in such phrases as "son of Belial" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',19,22);">Jud 19:22</a> the King James Version), "son of wickedness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',89,22);">Ps 89:22</a>), "sons of the prophets" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',7,14);">Am 7:14</a> margin, etc.), "son of the wise,...of ancient kings" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,11);">Isa 19:11</a>; this last phrase may be meant literally), shows that the inheritance of characteristics was a very familiar fact.<P>2. Hebrew Conception of Heredity:<P>The question, however, is considerably complicated by the intense solidarity that the Hebrews ascribed to the family. The individual was felt to be only a link in the chain, his "personality" (very vaguely conceived) somehow continuing that of his ancestors and being continued in that of his descendants. After death the happiness (or even existence; see <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=DEATH">DEATH</A>) of this shade in the other world depended on the preservation of a posterity in this. Hence, slaying the sons of a dead man was thought to affect him directly, and it would be a great mistake to suppose that an act such as that of <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',21,\'1-9\');">2Sa 21:1-9</a>, etc., was simply to prevent a blood-feud. Nor was it at all in point that the children might repeat the qualities of the father, however much this may have been realized in other connections. Consequently, it is impossible to tell in many cases just how much of a modern heredity idea is present.<P>The most important example is the conception of the position of the nations. These are traced back to single ancestors, and in various cases the qualities of the nation are explained by those of the ancestor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',9,\'22-27\');">Ge 9:22-27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,20,21);">21:20-21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,\'1-\');">49</a>, etc.). The influences that determine national characteristics are evidently thought to be hereditary, and yet not all of them are hereditary in our sense; e.g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',27,\'1-\');">Ge 27</a>, the condition of the descendants of Jacob and Esau is conceived to have been fixed by the nature of the blessings (mistakenly) pronounced by Isaac. On the other hand, Ezra (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',9,11,12);">9:11,12</a>) thinks of the danger of intermarrying with the children of a degenerate people in an entirely modern style, but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',23,\'3-6\');">De 23:3-6</a> the case is not so clear. There a curse pronounced on the nations for their active hostility is more in point than moral degeneracy (however much this may be spoken of elsewhere, <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,\'1-3\');">Nu 25:1-3</a>, etc.), and it is on account of the curse that the taint takes ten generations to work itself out, while, in the case of Edomite or Egyptian blood, purity was attained in three. Hence, it is hard to tell just how <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',20,5,6);">Ex 20:5-6</a> was interpreted. The modern conception of the effect of heredity was surely present in part, but there must have been also ideas of the extension of the curse-bearing individuality that we should find hard to understand.<P>3. Abraham\'s Children:<P>The chiefest question is that of the Israelites. Primarily they are viewed as the descendants of Abraham, blessed because he was blessed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,\'15-18\');">Ge 22:15-18</a>, etc.). This was taken by many with the utmost literalness, and physical descent from Abraham was thought to be sufficient (especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,9);">Mt 3:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,\'31-44\');">Joh 8:31-44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,\'6-13\');">Ro 9:6-13</a>), or at least necessary (especially <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,59);">Ezr 2:59</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',9,2);">9:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,61);">Ne 7:61</a>), for salvation. Occasionally this descent is stated to give superior qualities in other regards (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',6,13);">Es 6:13</a>). But a distinction between natural inheritance of Abraham\'s qualities and the blessing bestowed by God\'s unbounded favor and decree on his descendants must have been thoroughly recognized, otherwise the practice of proselytizing would have been impossible.<P>4. Heredity and the New Testament:<P>In the New Testament the doctrine of original sin, held already by a certain school among the Jews (2Esdras 7:48), alone raises much question regarding heredity (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,14);">1Co 7:14</a>). Otherwise the Old Testament concepts are simply reversed: where likeness of nature appears, there is (spiritual) descent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',4,12);">Ro 4:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',3,7);">Ga 3:7</a>, etc.). None the less, that the Israel "after the flesh" has a real spiritual privilege is stated explicitly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',3,1,2);">Ro 3:1-2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',11,26);">11:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',11,13);">Re 11:13</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SON;+SONS">SON</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BLESSING">BLESSING</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CURSE">CURSE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FAMILY">FAMILY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SALVATION">SALVATION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SIN+(1)">SIN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TRADITION">TRADITION</a>`48';
isbe[4291]='Herein`her-in\', Hebrew bezo\'th, "in" or "by this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',34,22);">Ge 34:22</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "on this condition"); en touta (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,37);">Joh 4:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,30);">9:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,8);">15:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,16);">Ac 24:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,10);">2Co 8:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',4,10,17);">1Joh 4:10, 17</a>).``1';
isbe[4292]='Hereof`her-ov\', Greek haute, "this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,26);">Mt 9:26</a>); houtos, "this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,3);">Heb 5:3</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "thereof").``1';
isbe[4293]='Heres`he\'-rez, he\'-res:<P>(1) har-cherec, "Mount Heres" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,34);">Jud 1:34</A>f), a district from which the Amorites were not expelled; it is mentioned along with Aijalon and Shallbim. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',19,41);">Jos 19:41</a>f we have then two towns in association with Ir-shemesh and many authorities consider that as cherec = shemesh, i.e. the sun, and har, being perhaps a copyist\'s error for \'ir, "city," we have in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',1,34);">Jud 1:34</a> a reference to Beth-shemesh, the modern \'Ain Shems. Conder thinks that Batn Harasheh, northeast of Aijalon, a prominent hill, may be the place referred to. Budde thinks Har-heres may be identified with the Bit-Ninib (Ninib being the fierce morning sun) of the Tell el-Amarna Letters; this place was in the district of Jerusalem.<P>(2) ma\'aleh he-charec, "the ascent of Heres" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,13);">Jud 8:13</a>, the King James Version "before the sun was up"), the place from which Gideon returned to Succoth after his defeat of Zebah and Zalmunna. the Revised Version (British and American) is probably a great improvement on the King James Version, but both the text and the topography are uncertain.<P>(3) \'ir ha-cherec, "City of Heres" EVm, "City of Destruction" (cherem) English Versions of the Bible, or "City of the sun" cherec) English Versions, margin. This is the name of one of the "five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan, and swear to Yahweh of hosts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,18);">Isa 19:18</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=IR-HA-HERES">IR-HA-HERES</a>`117';
isbe[4294]='Heresh`he\'-resh (cheresh; the Septuagint\'s Codex Vaticanus, Rharaiel; Codex Alexandrinus, Hares): A Levite (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,15);">1Ch 9:15</a>)``1';
isbe[4295]='Heresy`her\'-e-si, her\'-e-si (hairesis, from verb haireo, "to choose"): The word has acquired an ecclesiastical meaning that has passed into common usage, containing elements not found in the term in the New Testament, except as implied in one passage. In classical Greek, it may be used either in a good or a bad sense, first, simply for "choice," then, "a chosen course of procedure," and afterward of various schools and tendencies. Polybius refers to those devoting themselves to the study of Greek literature as given to the Hellenike hairesis. It was used not simply for a teaching or a course followed, but also for those devoting themselves to such pursuit, namely, a sect, or assembly of those advocating a particular doctrine or mode of life. Thus, in Acts, the word is used in the Greek, where the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) have "sect," "sect of the Sadducees" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,17);">Ac 5:17</a>), "sect of the Nazarenes" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,5);">Ac 24:5</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,5);">Ac 26:5</a> the Pharisees are called "the straitest hairesis (sect)." The name was applied contemptuously to Christianity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,14);">Ac 24:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,22);">28:22</a>). Its application, with censure, is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,19);">1Co 11:19</a> m; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,20);">Ga 5:20</a> margin, where it is shown to interfere with that unity of faith and community of interests that belong to Christians. There being but one standard of truth, and one goal for all Christian life, any arbitrary choice varying from what was common to all believers, becomes an inconsistency and a sin to be warned against. Ellicott, on <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,20);">Ga 5:20</a>, correctly defines "heresies" (King James Version, the English Revised Version) as "a more aggravated form of dichostasia" (the American Standard Revised Version "parties") "when the divisions have developed into distinct and organized parties"; so also <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,19);">1Co 11:19</a>, translated by the Revised Version (British and American) "factions." In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,1);">2Pe 2:1</a>, the transition toward the subsequent ecclesiastical sense can be traced. The "destructive heresies" (Revised Version margin, the English Revised Version margin "sects of perdition") are those guilty of errors both of doctrine and of life very fully described throughout the entire chapter, and who, in such course, separated themselves from the fellowship of the church.<P>In the fixed ecclesiastical sense that it ultimately attained, it indicated not merely any doctrinal error, but "the open espousal of fundamental error" (Ellicott on <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,10);">Tit 3:10</a>), or, more fully, the persistent, obstinate maintenance of an error with respect to the central doctrines of Christianity in the face of all better instruction, combined with aggressive attack upon the common faith of the church, and its defenders. Roman Catholics, regarding all professed Christians who are not in their communion as heretics, modify their doctrine on this point by distinguishing between Formal and terial Heresy, the former being unconscious and unintentional, and between different degrees of each of these classes (Cath. Encyclopedia, VII, 256ff). For the development of the ecclesiastical meaning, see Suicer\'s Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, I, 119-23.``84';
isbe[4296]='Hereth, the Forest of`he\'-reth (ya\'-ar chareth; Septuagint polis Sareik; the King James Version Hareth): David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,5);">1Sa 22:5</a>) was told by the prophet Gad to depart from Mizpah of Moab and go to the land of Judah, and he "came into the forest of Hereth." The Septuagint has "city" instead of forest; see also Josephus, Ant, VI, xii, 4. The village Kharas, on an ancient high road, 3 miles southeast of Aid el ma, probably David\'s stronghold <a href="study/isbe/search.html?string=ADULLAM">ADULLAM</a> (which see), may possibly answer to the place (PEF, III, 305, Sh XXI). "Horesh" has been suggested as an alternative reading.``117';
isbe[4297]='Heretic; Heretical`her\'-e-tik, her\'-e-tik, he-ret\'-i-kal (hairetikos): Used in <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,10);">Tit 3:10</a>, must be interpreted according to the sense in which Paul employs the word "heresy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',11,19);">1Co 11:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',5,20);">Ga 5:20</a>) for "parties" or "factions." According to this, the Scriptural meaning of the word is no more than "a factious man" (American Standard Revised Version), an agitator who creates divisions and makes parties. Weizsacker translates it into German ein Sektierer, "a sectarist." The nature of the offense is described in other words in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',2,6,11);">2Th 2:6, 11</a>.``1';
isbe[4298]='Heretofore`her-too-for\', Hebrew temol, "yesterday," "neither heretofore, nor since" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,10);">Ex 4:10</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',5,7,8,14);">Ex 5:7-8, 14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',3,4);">Jos 3:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',2,11);">Ru 2:11</a>); \'ethmol shilshom, "yesterday," "third day" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',4,7);">1Sa 4:7</a>, "There hath not been such a thing heretofore.")``1';
isbe[4299]='Hereunto`her-un-too\', Greek eis touto, "unto," "with a view to this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,21);">1Pe 2:21</a>, "For hereunto were ye called"): "hereunto" is supplied (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',2,25);">Ec 2:25</a>, "Who else can hasten hereunto more than I" the Revised Version (British and American) "who can have enjoyment," margin "hasten thereto").``1';
isbe[4300]='Herewith`her-with\', Hebrew ba-zo\'th, bezo\'th, "in," "by," or "with this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,29);">Eze 16:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',3,10);">Mal 3:10</a>, "Prove me now herewith, saith Yahweh").<P>The Revised Version (British and American) has "herein" for "to do this" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',4,22);">Ezr 4:22</a>); for "in these things" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',14,18);">Ro 14:18</a>); "of them that have sinned heretofore" for "which have sinned already" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,21);">2Co 12:21</a>); "hereunto" for "thereunto" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,9);">1Pe 3:9</a>); "herewith" for "thus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,3);">Le 16:3</a>).``185';
</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