exlim/blb
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
blb/BLB/study/isbe/7000.html

114 lines
422 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[7001]='Plead`pled: In modern non-legal English is a synonym of "pray" or "beseech," but in legal phraseology "plea," "plead," and "pleading" have a great variety of technical meanings, with "present a case before the court" as the idea common to all. All the uses of "plead" in English Versions of the Bible are connected with this legal sense, so that outside of the set phrase "plead a cause" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',24,15);">1Sa 24:15</a>, etc.) there is hardly a use of the word in the King James Version, the English Revised Version, or the American Standard Revised Version that is clear modern English The most obscure instances are due to The King James Version\'s employment of "plead" to translate the niphal of shaphat. Shaphat means "judge," so its niphal means "bring oneself into a case to be judged," "enter into controversy with," and so "plead" in the legal sense. Hence, "None pleadeth in truth" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',59,4);">Isa 59:4</a>) means "none of their lawsuits are honest." Accordingly, when God is said to "plead with" man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,16);">Isa 66:16</a> the King James Version, the English Revised Version, etc.), the meaning is that God states His side of the case and not at all that He supplicates man to repent. And this statement by God is a judicial act that of course admits of no reply. Hence, the Revised Version (British and American) has changed "plead with" into "enter into judgment with" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,35);">Jer 2:35</a>, and the American Standard Revised Version has carried this change into all the other passages (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,31);">Jer 25:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',17,20);">Eze 17:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',20,35,36);">20:35,36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',38,22);">38:22</a>), with "execute judgment" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',66,16);">Isa 66:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,2);">Joe 3:2</a>. The same verb form occurs also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',43,26);">Isa 43:26</a>: "Let us plead together," where "Let us present our arguments on both sides" would be a fair paraphrase. Otherwise "plead" usually represents ribh, for which the Revised Version (British and American) gives "strive" in place of "plead" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',35,1);">Ps 35:1</a>, and "contend" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,19);">Job 13:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',23,6);">23:6</a> (the American Standard Revised Version also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,31,32);">Jud 6:31,32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,13);">Isa 3:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,9);">Jer 2:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',12,1);">12:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',2,2);">Ho 2:2</a>, retaining "plead" only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,17);">Isa 1:17</a> and in the phrase "plead a cause"). yakhach, is rendered "plead" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',19,5);">Job 19:5</a> ("plead against me my reproach," where the meaning is "convict me of"), in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',6,2);">Mic 6:2</a> the King James Version and the English Revised Version (the American Standard Revised Version "contend"), and <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,21);">Job 16:21</a> the King James Version (the Revised Version (British and American) "maintain the right"). "Plead" is used also for din, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',30,13);">Jer 30:13</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,9);">Pr 31:9</a> the King James Version (the Revised Version (British and American) "minister justice to"), and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',5,28);">Jer 5:28</a> the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "judge"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',22,16);">Jer 22:16</a>, the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) "judge"). the Revised Version (British and American) would have done vastly better if the use of "plead" had been avoided altogether.<P>Pleadings (i.e. "arguments") occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',13,6);">Job 13:6</a> (for ribh), and "plea" (din, in a specific legal sense) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,8);">De 17:8</a>. the King James Version uses "implead" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',19,38);">Ac 19:38</a> for egkaleo, the Revised Version (British and American) "accuse," literally, "call into court"; compare also "pleaded the cause" in 2Macc 4:44 (literally, "argued the case") and 4:47, the Revised Version (British and American) "pleaded" (literally, "spoken," the King James Version "told their cause").``48';
isbe[7002]='Pleasure`plezh\'-ur (chephets, ratson; eudokia, hedone: "Pleasure" is the translation of various Hebrew words, chiefly of chephets, "inclination," hence, "pleasure," "delight" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,21);">Job 21:21</a>, "What pleasure hath he in his house?" the American Standard Revised Version "what careth he for"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,3);">Job 22:3</a>, "Is it any pleasure to the Almighty?"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',111,2);">Ps 111:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',5,4);">Ec 5:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,1);">12:1</a>; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',44,28);">Isa 44:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',46,10);">46:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',48,14);">48:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',53,10);">53:10</a>, it has the sense of will or purpose, "He shall perform all my pleasure," etc.); of ratson, "delight," "acceptance," "good will" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,11);">Ezr 10:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,37);">Ne 9:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,8);">Es 1:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,18);">Ps 51:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,21);">103:21</a>, etc.); nephesh, "soul," "desire" is translated "pleasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',23,24);">De 23:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',105,22);">Ps 105:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',34,16);">Jer 34:16</a>).<P>In the New Testament "pleasure" is the translation of eudokia, "good thought or will," "good pleasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,14);">Lu 2:14</a> the Revised Version margin; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,5,9);">Eph 1:5,9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,13);">Php 2:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',1,11);">2Th 1:11</a> the Revised Version (British and American) "every desire of goodness," margin "Greek: \'good pleasure of goodness.\' Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',10,1);">Ro 10:1</a>").<P>"To take pleasure or to have pleasure" is eudokeo (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,10);">2Co 12:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',2,12);">2Th 2:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,6,8,38);">Heb 10:6,8,38</a>); eudokeo is once translated "good pleasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,32);">Lu 12:32</a>, "It is your father\'s good pleasure to give you the kingdom"); the neuter participle of dokeo, "to think," etc.<2E>meaning "it seems good to me"<22>to dokoun, is translated "pleasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,10);">Heb 12:10</a>, "after their pleasure," the Revised Version (British and American) "as seemed good to them"); hedone, "sweetness," "pleasure," occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',8,14);">Lu 8:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',3,3);">Tit 3:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,13);">2Pe 2:13</a> (referring to the lower pleasures of life); thelema, "wish," "will" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,11);">Re 4:11</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "because of thy will"); charis, "favor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',24,27);">Ac 24:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',25,9);">25:9</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "favor"); spatalao "to live voluptuously" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,6);">1Ti 5:6</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "she that giveth herself to pleasure"); suneudokeo, "to think well with," "to take pleasure with others" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,32);">Ro 1:32</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "consent with"); truphao, "to live luxuriously" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,5);">Jas 5:5</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "lived delicately").<P>The verb "to pleasure" occurs in 2Macc 2:27 as the translation of eucharistia, the Revised Version (British and American) "gratitude"; 12:11, ophelesein, the Revised Version (British and American) "to help."``185';
isbe[7003]='Pledge`plej (verbs chabhal (10 times), \'arabh (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,23);">2Ki 18:23</a> equals <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,8);">Isa 36:8</a>); nouns chahal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,12,16);">Eze 18:12,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',33,15);">33:15</a>), chabcholah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,7);">Eze 18:7</a>), \'arubbah), (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,18);">1Sa 17:18</a>), erabhon (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,17,18,20);">Ge 38:17,18,20</a>); also abhot (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,\'10-13\');">De 24:10-13</a>) and (the Revised Version (British and American) only) abhtit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',2,6);">Hab 2:6</a>)): All these words have about the same meaning.<P>(1) The "pledge" is, as in modern English, security given for future payment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',38,\'17-24\');">Ge 38:17-24</a>) or conduct (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',2,6);">Hab 2:6</a>, where the conquered nations have given guaranties of their subserviency to the Chaldeans; the King James Version\'s "thick clay" here rests on a misreading of the Hebrew). In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,23);">2Ki 18:23</a> (equals <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,8);">Isa 36:8</a>) the "pledge" is a wager (so the Revised Version margin). Rabshakeh mockingly dares Hezekiah to stake a "pledge" that he can produce 2,000 men for the defense of Jerusalem, although the mighty Assyrian host has that number of horses alone. The general point of the obscure passage <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',20,16);">Pr 20:16</a> (equals <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,13);">27:13</A>) is that he who guarantees strangers needs a guaranty himself. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',17,18);">1Sa 17:18</a> is uncertain and the text may be corrupt. If not, the "pledge" is some (prearranged?) token of the welfare of David\'s brethren.<P>(2) Most of the occurrences of "pledge," however, deal with the debts of the very poor, who had no property that they could spare even temporarily. Consequently, the exaction of a pledge from such persons worked genuine hardship, and to take a pledge at all was a cruel act (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,3);">Job 24:3</a>), although of course the dishonesty of withholding a pledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,7);">Eze 18:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',33,15);">33:15</a>) was worse. Lowest in the scale was the creditor who took the garment the borrower was wearing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',2,8);">Am 2:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',22,6);">Job 22:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,9);">24:9</a> margin), and special legislation controlled this practice. A garment (the outer "cloak" (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DRESS">DRESS</a>) not worn while doing manual labor) so taken must be restored at night (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,26);">Ex 22:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,12,13);">De 24:12,13</a>), for it was the usual covering of the sleeper. (Apparently, though, the creditor regained custody of it in the daytime until the debt was paid.) A widow\'s clothing, however, was entirely exempt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,17);">De 24:17</a>), as was the handmill used for bread-making (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,6);">De 24:6</a>). The lender had no right of entry into the borrower\'s house to obtain the pledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,10,11);">De 24:10,11</a>), but it is not said that he could not dictate what he would accept; indeed, the contrary is inconceivable.<P>(3) the American Standard Revised Version gives "pledge" for the King James Version and the English Revised Version "faith" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,12);">1Ti 5:12</a>.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EARNEST">EARNEST</a>`48';
isbe[7004]='Pleiades`pli\'-a-dez, ple\'-ya-dez, ple\'-a-dez.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTROLOGY">ASTROLOGY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASTRONOMY">ASTRONOMY</a>`1';
isbe[7005]='Pleroma`ple-ro\'-ma.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FULLNESS">FULLNESS</a>`1';
isbe[7006]='Plow`plou (charash; arotrioo): No implement of the Bible is more frequently illustrated today than the plow. This is partly because there is every reason to believe that the plows still used throughout Egypt, Palestine, and Syria are counterparts of the ancient ones. The first plows were probably an adaptation of the ancient Egyptian hoe, where the handle was lengthened in order that animals might be hitched to it. To make it easier to break up the ground, it was pointed, and handles were added by which it could be guided. The ancient plow probably varied in type in different sections of the country, as it does today. In one form a young tree Of oak or other strong wood of a diameter of 3 or 4 inches is cut off just below a good-sized branch and again 15 or 20 inches above. The upper end of the severed trunk is pointed and forms the share. Between this and the side branch is fitted a brace. The branch is cut off 10 or 12 ft. from the trunk and forms the pole. A lighter stick, about 3 ft. long, projects upward from the share and forms the handle. The plow used in Syria is of slightly different construction. The handle and share are one continuous piece, so cut that there is a slight bend at the middle. The share is pointed and is used bare in the plains, or in more stony regions is shod with iron. The pole is of 2 pieces joined end to end. The thicker end of the pole is notched, so that it may be attached firmly to the share. The whole plow is so light that it can be easily carried on a man\'s shoulder. These plows literally scratch the soil, as the Hebrew word implies. They do not turn over the ground as the modern implement does. The plowman guides the plow with one hand, and with the other sometimes goads the oxen, and at other times with the chisel end of his goad breaks away the lumps of earth or other material which impedes the progress of his plow.<P>In addition to the words which are found above, the following terms occur: \'abhadh (literally, "to serve"), "worked" or "plowed" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,4);">De 21:4</a>); palach (literally, "to break open," <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',141,7);">Ps 141:7</a>).<P>One special law is mentioned in connection with plowing, namely that an ox and an ass should not be yoked together (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',22,10);">De 22:10</a>), a prohibition which is utterly disregarded today. Oxen were principally used for plowing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,14);">Job 1:14</a>). Often several yokes of oxen followed each other plowing parallel furrows across the field, a sight still common on the plains of Syria (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',19,19);">1Ki 19:19</a>). Plowing was done by bond servants (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',17,7);">Lu 17:7</a>; compare \'abhadh, <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,4);">De 21:4</a>). Plowing cannot be done before the rains (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',14,4);">Jer 14:4</a>); on the other hand the soil is too sticky to plow in the winter time (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',20,4);">Pr 20:4</a>). The law requiring one day of rest in every seven days included plowing time (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,21);">Ex 34:21</a>).<P>Figurative: "The plowers plowed upon my back" typified deep affliction (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',129,3);">Ps 129:3</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',141,7);">Ps 141:7</a>). "Plow iniquity" is urged in the sense of "plant iniquity." Doing evil was sure to bring evil consequences (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,8);">Job 4:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',3,12);">Mic 3:12</a>). As surely as planting comes after plowing, so surely will Yahweh carry out His decree of destruction (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,\'23-25\');">Isa 28:23-25</a>). "Judah shall plow," i.e. become enslaved (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,11);">Ho 10:11</a>); compare "Foreigners shall be your plowmen" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,5);">Isa 61:5</a>). "Will one plow there with oxen?" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',6,12);">Am 6:12</a>), "neither plowing nor harvest" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',45,6);">Ge 45:6</a>) are figures of desolation. Zion plowed as a field, i.e. utterly destroyed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',26,18);">Jer 26:18</a>). The plowman shall overtake the reaper, i.e. the soil shall be so fertile as to require no rest<73>typical of great abundance (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',9,13);">Am 9:13</a>). No opportunity to plow because of lack of rain is a desolate picture of drought (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',14,4);">Jer 14:4</a>). As the plowman expects to share in the fruits of the harvest, so might an apostle expect his temporal needs to be provided for (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,10);">1Co 9:10</a>). "If ye had not plowed with my heifer," i.e. used my wife, was Samson\'s reply to those who had secured the answer to his riddle from her (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',14,18);">Jud 14:18</a>). "Beat their swords into plowshares" (or hoes) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,4);">Isa 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',4,3);">Mic 4:3</a>) typified peace; "beat your plowshares into swords"<22>war (<a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',3,10);">Joe 3:10</a>). "Having put his hand to the plow, and looking back," i.e. longing for evil things when one has set his face toward doing what is right, unfits a man for the kingdom of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,62);">Lu 9:62</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',19,26);">Ge 19:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',3,13);">Php 3:13</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=YOKE">YOKE</a>`133';
isbe[7007]='Plucking off the Hair`pluk\'-ing.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HAIR">HAIR</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PUNISHMENTS">PUNISHMENTS</a>`1';
isbe[7008]='Plumb-Line; Plummet`plum\'-lin, plum\'-et, plum\'-it.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TOOLS">TOOLS</a>`1';
isbe[7009]='Pochereth-Hazzebaim`pok\'-e-reth, po\'-ke-reth, po-ke\'-reth, -ha-ze-ba\'-im (pokhereth hatstsebhayim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,57);">Ezr 2:57</a>), or pokhereth ha-tsebhayim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,59);">Ne 7:59</a>), "binder (feminine) of the gazelles"): Name of the head of a post-exilic family. The first word is a feminine Kal participle; compare qoheleth ("preacher"), the Hebrew title of the Book of Ecclesiastes. BDB suggests that the feminine is that of office. King James Version has "Pochereth of Zebaim" in Ezra, but Ryle (Cambridge Bible, 235) notes that "of" is not in the 1611 edition``1';
isbe[7010]='Poet`po\'-et (poietes, "a maker"): Occurs in this sense only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',17,28);">Ac 17:28</a>, where Paul quotes from the general expression of Greek mythology. The quotation if intended to be exact is probably from Aratus, as the words of Paul in his speech at Athens precisely agree with the opening words of the Phaenomena by Aratus. A similar but not identical expression is found in the Hymn to Zeus by Cleanthes. Aratus in his poem endeavors to posit Jupiter as the father and controller of all things, and worthy to be worshipped. In both his poem and that of Cleanthes, but especially in the latter, there is a true and lofty note of spiritual devotion. Paul takes this praise and devotion offered by the Greek poets to their unknown or fictitious gods and bestows it upon the one true God whom he declared unto the people of Athens.``158';
isbe[7011]='Poetry, Hebrew`po\'-et-ri:<P><b>I. IS THERE POETRY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT?</b><P>Poetry Defined:<P class="in15">1. In Matter, Concrete and Imaginative<P class="in15">2. In Form, Emotional and Rhythmical<P><b>II. NEGLECT OF HEBREW POETRY: CAUSES</b><P><b>III. CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREW POETRY, EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL</b><P class="in15">1. External or Formal Characteristics<P class="in30">(1) Vocabulary<P class="in30">(2) Grammar<P class="in30">(3) Rhythm<P class="in30">(4) Parallelism<P class="in30">(5) Other Literary Devices<P class="in30">(6) Units of Hebrew Poetry<P class="in30">(7) Classification of Stichs or Verses<P class="in15">2. Internal or Material Characteristics<P class="in30">(1) Themes of Hebrew Poetry<P class="in30">(2) Species of Hebrew Poetry<P><b>IV. POETICAL WRITINGS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT</b><P class="in15">1. The Poetical Books in the Narrow Sense<P class="in15">2. Customary Division of the Poetical Books<P class="in15">3. Poetry in Non-poetical Books<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>By Hebrew poetry in the present article is meant that of the Old Testament. There is practically no poetry in the New Testament, but, in the Old Testament Apocrypha, Sirach is largely poetical and Wisdom only less so. Post-Biblical Hebrew poetry could not be discussed here.<P>I. Is There Poetry in the Old Testament?<P>Poetry Defined:<P>It is impossible to answer this question without first of all stating what poetry really is. The present writer submits the following as a correct definition: "Poetry is verbal composition, imaginative and concrete in matter, and emotional and rhythmic in form." This definition recognizes two aspects of poetry, the formal and the material.<P>1. In Matter Concrete and Imaginative<P>The substance of poetry must be concrete<74>it is philosophy that deals with the abstract; and it has to be the product more or less of the creative imagination.<P>2. In Form Emotional and Rhythmical<P>It is of the essence of poetry that, like music, it should be expressed in rhythmical but not necessarily in metrical form. Moreover, the language has to be such as will stir up the aesthetic emotions. Adopting this account of poetry as criticism, it may unhesitatingly be affirmed that the Hebrew Scriptures contain a goodly amount of genuine poetry; compare the Psalms, Job, Canticles, etc. It is strange but true that poetical is older than prose written composition. An examination of the literature of the ancient Indians, Babylonians, Hebrews, Greeks and Arabs makes this quite certain.<P>II. Neglect of Hebrew Poetry: Causes.<P>Notwithstanding the undoubted fact that poetry is largely represented in the Bible, it is noteworthy that this species of Bible literature was almost wholly ignored until the 18th century. We may perhaps ascribe this fact mainly to two causes:<P>(1) Since the Bible was regarded as preeminently, if not exclusively, a revelation of the divine mind, attention was fixed upon what it contained, to the neglect of the literary form in which it was expressed. Indeed it was regarded as inconsistent with its lofty, divine function to look upon it as literature at all, since in this last the appeal is made, at least to a large extent, to the aesthetic and therefore carnal man. The aim contemplated by Bible writers was practical<61>the communication of religious knowledge<67>not literary, and still less artistic. It was therefore regarded as inconsistent with such a high purpose that these writers should trouble themselves about literary embellishment or beautiful language, so long as the sense was clear and unambiguous. It was in this spirit and animated by this conception that toward the middle of the 19th century. Isaac Taylor of Ongar (The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry,1861,56ff) and Keil of Dorpat (Introduction to the Old Testament,1881,I, 437) denied on a priori grounds the presence of epic and dramatic poetry in the Bible. How, they exclaimed, could God countenance the writing of fiction which is untruth<74>and the epic and the drama have both? Matthew Arnold rendered invaluable service to the cause of Bible science when he fulminated against theologians, Jewish and Christian, for making the Bible a mere collection of proof texts, an arsenal whence religious warriors might get weapons with which to belabor their opponents. "The language of the Bible is fluid...and literary, not rigid, fixed, scientific" (Preface to the first edition of Literature and Dogma). The Bible contains literature, poetical and prose, equal as literature to the best, as Matthew Arnold, Carlyle, and Froude (on Job) held. The neglect of this aspect of the Scriptures made theologians blind to the presence and therefore ignorant of the character of Bible poetry.<P>(2) Another factor which led to the neglect of the poetical element in the Old Testament is the undoubted fact that Biblical Hebrew poets were less conscious as poets than western poets, and thought much less of the external form in which they expressed themselves. Bible poetry lacks therefore such close adherence to formal rules as that which characterizes Greek, Arabic or English poetry. The authors wrote as they felt and because they felt, and their strong emotions dictated the forms their words took, and not any objective standards set up by the schools. Hebrew poetry is destitute of meter in the strict sense, and also of rhyme, though this last occurs in some isolated cases (see below, III, 1, (4), c and e). No wonder then that western scholars, missing these marks of the poetry which they knew best, failed for so long to note the poetry which the Old Testament contains.<P>III. Characteristics of Hebrew Poetry: External and Internal.<P>The definition of poetry accepted in I, above, implies that there are marks by which poetry can be distinguished from prose. This is equally true of Hebrew poetry, though this last lacks some of the features of the poetry of western nations.<P>1. External or Formal Characteristics:<P>(1) Vocabulary.<P>There are several Hebrew words which occur most frequently and in some cases exclusively in poetry. In the following list the corresponding prose word is put in parenthesis: millah, "word" (= dabhar); enosh, "man" (=\' ish); orach, "way" (= derekh); chazah, "to see" (= ra\'ah); the prepositions ele, "to," adhe, "unto," ale, "upon," and minni, "from," instead of the shorter forms el, adh, al, and min. The pronoun zu, rare in prose, has in poetry the double function of a demonstrative and a relative pronoun in both genders. The negative bal, is used for lo\'. For the inseparable prepositions "b", "k", "l" ("in," "as," "to") the separate forms bemo, kemo and lemo are employed.<P>(2) Grammar.<P>(a) Accidence:<P>The pronominal suffixes have peculiar forms in poetry. For -m, -am, -em ("their," "them") we find the longer forms -mo, -amo, -emo. For the plural ending of nouns -n (-in) takes the place of -m (-im), as in Aramaic (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,2);">Job 4:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,11);">12:11</a>), and frequently obsolete case endings are preserved, but their functions are wholly lost. Thus, we have the old nominative ending -o in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',50,10);">Ps 50:10</a>, etc.; the old genitive ending -i in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',1,21);">Isa 1:21</a>, and the accusative -ah in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',3,3);">Ps 3:3</a>.<P>(b) Syntax:<P>The article, relative pronoun, accusative singular \'eth and also the "waw-consecutive" are frequently omitted for the sake of the rhythm. There are several examples of the last in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',112,10);">Ps 112:10</a>ff. The construct state which by rule immediately precedes nouns has often a preposition after it. The jussive sometimes takes the place of the indicative, and the plural of nouns occurs for the singular.<P>(3) Rhythm.<P>Rhythm (from rhuthmos) in literary composition denotes that recurrence of accented and unaccented syllables in a regular order which we have in poetry and rhetorical prose. Man is a rhythmic animal; he breathes rhythmically, and his blood circulates<65>outward and inward<72>rhythmically. It may be due to these reflex rhythms that the more men are swayed by feeling and the less by reflection and reasoning, the greater is the tendency to do things rhythmically. Man walks and dances and sings and poetizes by the repetition of what corresponds to metrical feet: action is followed by reaction. We meet with a kind of rhythm in elevated and passionate prose, like that of John Ruskin and other writers. Preachers when mastered by their theme unconsciously express themselves in what may be called rhythmic sentences. Though, however, rhythm may be present in prose, it is only in poetry as in music that it recurs at intervals more or less the same. In iambic poetry we get a repetition of a short and long syllable, as in the following lines:<P class="in15">"With ravished ears<br>The monarch hears,<br>Assumes the gods,<br>Affects the nods."<p class="in30"><3E>Dryden.<P>(4) Parallelism.<P>What is so called is a case of logical rhythm as distinguished from rhythm that is merely verbal. But as this forms so important a feature of Bible poetry, it must be somewhat fully discussed. What since Bishop Lowth\'s day has been called parallelism may be described as the recurring of symetrically constructed sentences, the several members of which usually correspond to one another. Lowth (died 1787), in his epochmaking work on Hebrew poetry (De Sacra poesi Hebraeorum prelectiones, English translation by G. Gregory), deals with what he (following Jebb) calls Parallelismus membrorum (chapter X). And this was the first serious attempt to expound the subject, though Rabbi Asariah (Middle Ages), Ibn Ezra (died 1167 AD), D. Kimchi (died 1232) and A. de Rossi (1514-1578) called attention to it. Christian Schoettgen (died 1751) (see Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae) anticipated much of what Lowth has written as to the nature, function and value of parallelism. The first to use the word itself in the technical sense was Jebb (Sacred Lit., 1820). For the same thing Ewald used the expression Sinnrhythmus, i.e. sense rhythm, a not unsuitable designation.<P>(a) Kinds of Parallelism: Lowth distinguished three principal species of parallelism, which he called synonymous, antithetic and synthetic.<P>(i) The Synonymous:<P>In this the same thing is repeated in different words, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',36,5);">Ps 36:5</a>:<P class="in15">\'Yahweh,<br> (i.) Thy lovingkindness (reaches) to the heavens,<br>(ii.) Thy faithfulness (reaches) to the clouds.\'<P>Omitting "Yahweh," which belongs alike to both members, it will be seen that the rest of the two half-lines corresponds word for word: "thy lovingkindness" corresponding to "thy faithfulness," and "to the heavens" answering to "to the clouds" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',15,1);">Ps 15:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',24,\'1-3\');">24:1-3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',25,5);">25:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,7);">1Sa 18:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',6,4);">Isa 6:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',13,7);">13:7</a>).<P>(ii) Antithetic Parallelism:<P>In which the second member of a line (or verse) gives the obverse side of the same thought, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,1);">Pr 10:1</a>:<P class="in15">\'A wise son gladdens his father,<br>But a foolish son grieves his mother\'<P>(See <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,3);">Pr 11:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',37,9);">Ps 37:9</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,1);">Pr 10:1</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',20,8);">Ps 20:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',30,6);">30:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,7);">Isa 54:7</a>ff). Sometimes there are more than two corresponding elements in the two members of the verse, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',29,27);">Pr 29:27</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,5);">10:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',16,9);">16:9</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,27);">27:2</A>.<P>(iii) Synthetic Parallelism:<P>Called also constructive and epithetic. In this the second member adds something fresh to the first, or else explains it, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,8);">Ps 19:8</a> f:<P class="in15">\'The precepts of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart:<br>The commandments of Yahweh are pure, enlightening the eyes.<br>The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring forever:<br>The judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether.<br>More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold;<br>Sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb\'<P>(See <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',1,7);">Pr 1:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',3,5,7);">3:5,7</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',1,3);">Ps 1:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',15,4);">15:4</a>). In addition to the three principal species of parallelism noticed above, other forms have been traced and described.<P>(iv) Introverted Parallelism:<P>(Jebb, Sacred Lit., 53): in which the hemistichs of the parallel members are chiastically arranged, as in the scheme ab ba. Thus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,15);">Pr 23:15</a> f:<P class="in15">(a) \'My son, if thy heart be wise<P class="in30">(b) My heart shall be glad, even mine:<P class="in30">(b) Yea, my reins shall rejoice<P class="in15">(a) When thy lips speak right things\'<P>(Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,4,12);">Pr 10:4,12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',13,24);">13:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,17);">21:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,3);">Ps 51:3</a>).<P>(v) Palilogical Parallelism:<P>In which one or more words of the first member are repeated as an echo, or as the canon in music, in the second. Thus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Nah\',1,2);">Na 1:2</a>:<P class="in15">\'Yahweh is a jealous God and avenges:<br>Yahweh avenges and is full of wrath;<br>Yahweh takes vengeance upon His adversaries,<br>And He reserves wrath for his enemies\'<P>(Compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,3,6,11,15,23,27);">Jud 5:3, 6f; 11f; 15f; 23,27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',72,2,12,17);">Ps 72:2,12,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',121,\'1-\');">121</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',124,\'1-\');">124</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',126,\'1-\');">126</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',2,7);">Isa 2:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',24,5);">24:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',6,4);">Ho 6:4</a>).<P>(vi) Climactic or Comprehensive Parallelism:<P>In this the second line completes the first. Thus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',29,1);">Ps 29:1</a>:<P class="in15">"Give unto Yahweh, O ye mighty ones,<P class="in15">Give unto Yahweh glory and strength"<P>(see <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,6);">Ex 15:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',29,8);">Ps 29:8</a>).<P>(vii) Rhythmical Parallelism:<P>(De Wette, Franz Delitzsch): thus, <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',138,4);">Ps 138:4</a>:<P class="in15">"All the kings of the earth shall give thee thanks...<br>For they have heard the words of thy mouth."<P>See <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',15,3);">Pr 15:3</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',16,37,10;">16:7,10</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',17,13,15);">17:13,15</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',19,20);">19:20</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,23,25);">21:23,25</A>.<P>Perfect parallelism is that in which the number of words in each line is equal. When unequal, the parallelism is called imperfect. Ewald (see Die poetischen Bucher des alten Bundes, I, 57-92; Die Dichter des alten Bundes, I, 91ff, 2d edition of the former) aimed at giving a complete list of the relations which can be expressed by parallelism, and he thought he had succeeded. But in fact every kind of relation which can be indicated in words may be expressed in two or more lines more or less parallel. On the alleged parallelism of strophes see below.<P>(b) Parallelism as an Aid to Exegesis and Textual Criticism:<P>If in Lowth\'s words parallelism implies that "in two lines or members of the same period things for the most part shall answer to things, and words to words," we should expect obscure or unknown words to derive some light from words corresponding to them in parallel members or clauses. In not a few cases we are enabled by comparison of words to restore with considerable confidence an original reading now lost. The formula is in a general way as follows: ab: cx. We know what a, b and c mean, but are wholly in the dark as to the sense of x. The problem is to find out what x means. We have an illustration in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,28);">Jud 5:28</a>, which may be thus literally translated:<P class="in15">"Through the window she looked,<br>And Sisera\'s mother x through the x."<P>Here we have two unknown, each, however, corresponding to known terms. The Hebrew verb accompanying "Sisera\'s mother" is watteyabbebh, English Versions of the Bible "and...cried." But no such verb (yabhabh) is known, for the Talmud, as usually, follows the traditional interpretation. We want a verb with a meaning similar to "looked." If we read wattabbet, we have a form which could easily be corrupted into the word in the Massoretic Text, which gives a suitable sense and moreover has the support of the Targums of Onqelos and Jonathan, and even of the Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus and Lucian). What about the other Hebrew word untranslated above (\'eshnabh)? This occurs in but one other passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',7,6);">Pr 7:6</a>), where it stands as in the present passage in parallelism with challon, "window" (probably <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',7,6);">Pr 7:6</a> is dependent). We get no help from etymology or in this case from the VSS, but parallelism had suggested to our translators the meaning "lattice," a kind of eastern window, and something of the kind must be meant. The verb shanabh, "to be cool," may possibly suggest the rendering "window," i.e. a hole in the wall to secure coolness in the house. Glass windows did not exist in Palestine, and are rare even now. There are innumerable other examples in the Old Testament of the use of parallelism in elucidating words which occur but once, or which are otherwise difficult to understand, and frequently a textual emendation is suggested which is otherwise supported.<P>(c) Prevalence and Value of Parallelism:<P>Two statements anent [concerning] parallelism in the Old Testament may be safely made:<P>(i) That it is not a characteristic of all Old Testament poetry. Lowth who had so much to do with its discovery gave it naturally an exaggerated place in his scheme of Hebrew poetry, but it is lacking in the largest part of the poetry of the Old Testament, and it is frequently met with in elevated and rhetorical prose.<P>(ii) That it pervades other poetry than that of the Old Testament. It occurs in Assyria (see A. Jeremias, Die bab-assyr. Vorstellung vom Leben nach dem Tode), in Egypt (Georg Ebers, Nord u. Sud, I), in Finnish, German and English Indeed, A. Wuttke (Der deutsche Volks-Aberglaube der Gegenwart, 1869, 157) and Eduard Norden (Die antike Kunstprosa,1898,II, 813) maintain that parallelism is the most primitive form of the poetry of all nations. It must nevertheless be admitted that in the Old Testament parallelism has in proportion a larger place than in any other literature and that the correspondence of the parts of the stichs or verses is closer.<P>(5) Other Literary Devices.<P>Old Testament poetry has additional features which it shares with other oriental and with western poetry. Owing to a lack of space these can be hardly more than enumerated.<P>(a) Alliteration:<P>E.g. "Round and round the rugged rocks." We have good examples in the Hebrew of <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',6,8);">Ps 6:8</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',27,17);">27:17</a>.<P>(b) Assonance:<P>E.g. "dreamy seamy" (see for Bible examples the Hebrew of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,17);">Ge 49:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',14,14);">Ex 14:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',3,2);">De 3:2</a>).<P>(c) Rhyme:<P>There are so few examples of this in the Hebrew Scriptures that no one can regard it as a feature in Hebrew poetry, though in Arabic and even in post-Biblical Hebrew poetry it plays a great part. We have Biblical instances in the Hebrew text of <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,23);">Ge 4:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',10,\'8-11\');">Job 10:8-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',16,12);">16:12</a>.<P>(d) Acrostics:<P>In some poems of the Old Testament half-verses, verses, or groups of verses begin with the successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. We have such alphabetical acrostics in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',9,\'1-\');">Psalms 9</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',34,\'1-\');">34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',37,\'1-\');">37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,10);">Pr 31:10</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',1,\'1-\');">La 1-4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',5,\'1-\');">La 5</a>, where the number of verses agrees with that of the Hebrew alphabet, though the letters of that alphabet do not introduce the verses.<P>(e) Meter:<P>The view of the present writer may be stated as follows: That the poetry of the Hebrew is not in the strict sense metrical, though the writers under the influence of strong emotion express themselves rhythmically, producing often the phenomena which came later to be codified under metrical rules. Thinking and reasoning and speaking preceded psychology, logic, and grammar, and similarly poetry preceded prosody. In the Old Testament we are in the region of the fact, not of the law. Poets wrote under strong impulse, usually religious, and without recognizing any objective standard, though all the time they were supplying data for the rules of prosody. Those who think that Old Testament poets had in their minds objective rules of meter have to make innumerable changes in the text. Instead of basing their theory on the original material, they bring their a priori theory and alter the text to suit it. It can be fearlessly said that there is not a single poem in the Old Testament with the same number of syllables, or feet, or accents in the several stichs or hemistichs, unless we introduce violent changes into the Massoretic Text, such as would be resented in classical and other ancient literature. It is important, before coming to any definite conclusion, to take into consideration the fact that the poetry of the Old Testament belongs to periods separated by many centuries, from the Song of Deborah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,\'1-\');">Jud 5</a>), the earliest Hebrew poem, down to the last hymns in the Psalter. In the oldest specimens of Hebrew poetry there is a naive simplicity which excludes the idea of conscious art. In the latest the poet is much more conscious, and his poetry more artistic. It would be manifestly unfair to propound a theory of poetry based on the poetry of Keats and Tennyson and to apply it to the productions of Anglo-Saxon and Old English poetry. Bound up in the one volume called the Bible there is a literature differing widely in age, aim and authorship, and it needs care in educing a conception of Hebrew poetry that will apply to all the examples in the Old Testament. The later psalm-acrostic, etc., many of them made up of bits of other psalms, seem to have sprung from a more conscious effort at imitation. If, however, there were among the ancient Hebrews, as there was among the ancient Greeks, a code of prosody, it is strange that the Mishna and Gemara\' should be wholly silent about it. And if some one system underlies our Hebrew Bible, it is strange that so many systems have been proposed. It should be remembered too that the oldest poetry of every people is nonmetrical.<P>The following is a brief statement of the views advocated:<P>(i) Philo and Josephus, under the influence of Greek models and desiring to show that Hebrew was not inferior to pagan literature, taught that Hebrew poetry had meter, but they make no attempt to show what kind of meter this poetry possesses.<P>(ii) Calmet, Lowth, and Carpzov held that though in the poetry of the Hebrew Bible as originally written and read there must have been metrical rules which the authors were conscious of following, yet, through the corruption of the text and our ignorance of the sounds and accentuation of primitive Hebrew, it is now impossible to ascertain what these metrical rules were.<P>(iii) In their scheme of Hebrew meter Bickell and Merx reckon syllables as is done in classical poetry, and they adopt the Syriac law of accentuation, placing the tone on the penultimate. These writers make drastic changes in the text in order to bolster up their theories.<P>(iv) The dominant and by far the least objectionable theory is that advocated by Ley, Briggs, Duhm, Buhl, Grimme, Sievers, Rothstein and most modern scholars, that in Hebrew prosody the accented syllables were alone counted. If this principle is applied to Job, it will be found that most of the Biblical verses are distichs having two stichs, each with three main accents. See, for an illustration, <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,16);">Job 12:16</a>: (immo \'oz wethushiyah: lo shoghegh umashgeh\': \'Strength and effectual working belong to (literally, "are with") him, he that errs and he that causes to err\'). Man\'s rhythmical instincts are quite sufficient to account for this phenomenon without assuming that the poet had in mind an objective standard. Those who adopt this last view and apply it rigidly make numerous textual changes. For an examination of the metrical systems of Hubert Grimme, who takes account of quantity as well as accent, and of Eduard Sievers who, though no Hebrew scholar, came to the conclusion after examining small parts of the Hebrew Bible that Hebrew poetry is normally anapaestic, see W.H. Cobb, Criticism of Systems of Hebrew Metre, 152ff, 169ff. Herder, De Wette, Hupfeld, Keil, Nowack, Budde, Doller, and Toy reject all the systems of Hebrew meter hitherto proposed, though Budde has a leaning toward Ley\'s system.<P>(f) Budde\'s Qinah Measure:<P>Though Budde takes up in general a negative position in regard to Hebrew meter, he pleads strenuously for the existence of one specific meter with which his name is associated. This is what he calls the qinah measure (from qinah, "a lamentation"). In this each stich is said to consist of one hemistich with three beats or stress syllables and another having two such syllables, this being held to be the specific meter of the dirge (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',1,1);">La 1:1</a>, etc.). Ley and Briggs call it "pentameter" because it is made up of five (3 plus 2) feet (a foot in Hebrew prosody being equal to an accented syllable and the unaccented syllables combined with it). See Budde\'s full treatment of the subject in ZATW, 60,152, "Das heb. Klagelied." It must, however, be borne in mind that even Herder (died 1803) describes the use in elegies of what he calls, anticipating Ley and Briggs, the "pentameter" (see Geist der ebraischen Poesie,1782,I, 32f; English translation. The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry, 1833, I, 40). But the present writer submits the following criticisms: (i) Budde is inconsistent in rejecting all existing theories of meter and yet in retaining one of his own, which is really but part of the system advocated by Bellermann, Ley and Briggs. (ii) He says, following Herder, that it is the measure adopted by mourning women (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,16);">Jer 9:16</a>), but we have extremely few examples of the latter, and his statement lacks proof. (iii) There are dirges in the Old Testament not expressed in the qinah measure. David\'s lament over Saul and Jonathan is more hexametric and tetrametric than pentametric, unless we proceed to make a new text (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',1,19);">2Sa 1:19</a>). (iv) The qinah measure is employed by Hebrew poets where theme is joyous or indifferent; see <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,\'1-\');">Ps 119</a>, which is a didactic poem.<P>(6) Units of Hebrew Poetry.<P>In western poetry the ultimate unit is usually the syllable, the foot (consisting of at least two syllables) coming next. Then we have the verse-line crowned by the stanza, and finally the poem.<P>According to theory of Hebrew poetry adopted by the present writer, the following are the units, beginning with the simplest:<P>(a) The Meter:<P>This embraces the accented (tone) syllable together with the unaccented syllable preceding or succeeding it. This may be called a "rhythmic foot."<P>(b) The Stich or Verse:<P>In Job and less regularly in Psalms and Canticles and in other parts of the Old Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,\'19-24\');">Nu 23:19-24</a>) the stich or verse consists commonly of three toned syllables and therefore three meters (see above for sense of "meter"). It is important\' to distinguish between this poetical sense of "verse" and the ordinary meaning<6E>the subdivision of a Bible chapter. The stich in this sense appears in a separate line in some old manuscripts.<P>(c) Combinations of Stichs (Verses):<P>In Hebrew poetry a stich hardly ever stands alone. We have practically always a distich (couplet, <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',18,5);">Job 18:5</a>), a tristich (triplet, <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,\'24-26\');">Nu 6:24-26</a>), a tetrastich (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',24,23);">Ge 24:23</a>), or the pentastich.<P>(d) Strophe:<P>Kosters (Stud. Krit.,1831,40-114, "Die Strophen," etc.) maintained that all poems in the Hebrew Scriptures are naturally divisible into strophes (stanzas) of similar, if not equal, length. Thus <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,\'1-\');">Ps 119</a> is arranged in strophes named after the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, each one containing eight Scripture verses, or sixteen metrical verses or stichs, most of the stichs having three meters or rhythmical feet. But though several Biblical poems are composed in strophes, many are not.<P>(e) Song:<P>This (shirah) is made up of a series of verses and in some cases of strophes.<P>(f) Poem:<P>We have examples of this (shir) in the Books of Job and Canticles which consist of a combination of the song.<P>(7) Classification of Stichs or Verses.<P>Stichs may be arranged as follows, according to the number of meters (or feet) which they contain:<P>(a) the trimeter or tripod with three meters or feet; Bickell holds that in Job this measure is alone used;<P>(b) the tetrameter or tetrapod, a stich with four meters or feet;<P>(c) the pentameter or pentapod, which has five meters or feet: this is Budde\'s qinah measure (see III, 1, (4));<P>(d) the hexameter or hexapod: this consists of six meters or feet, and is often hard to distinguish from two separate trimeters (or tripods).<P>2. Internal or Material Characteristics:<P>Our first and most original authority on the internal characteristics of Hebrew poetry is that great German theologian and man of letters, J.G. Herder, the pastor and friend of Goethe and Schiller at Weimar. In his Vom Geist der ebraischen Poesie, 1782 (The Spirit of Poetry, translated by James Marsh, U.S.A., 1833), he discusses at length and with great freshness those internal aspects of the poetry of the Old Testament (love of Nature, folklore, etc.) which impressed him as a literary man. Reference may be made also to George Gilfillian\'s Bards of the Bible, 1851 (popular), and Isaac Taylor\'s Spirit of Hebrew Poetry. It is a strange but striking and significant coincidence that not one of these writers professed much if any knowledge of the Hebrew language. They studied the poetry of the Old Testament mainly at least in translations, and were not therefore diverted from the literary and logical aspects of what is written by the minutiae of Hebrew grammar and textual criticism, though only a Hebrew scholar is able to enter into full possession of the rich treasures of Hebrew poetry.<P>(1) Themes of Hebrew Poetry.<P>It is commonly said that the poetry of the ancient Hebrews is wholly religious. But this statement is not strictly correct.<P>(a) The Old Testament does not contain all the poetry composed or even written by the Hebrews in Bible times, but only such as the priests at the various sanctuaries preserved. We do not know of a literary caste among the Hebrews who concerned themselves with the preservation of the literature as such.<P>(b) Within the Bible Canon itself there are numerous poems or snatches of poems reflecting the everyday life of the people.<P>We have love songs (Canticles), a wedding song (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',45,\'1-\');">Ps 45</a>), a harvest song (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',65,\'1-\');">Ps 65</a>), parts of ditties sung upon discovering a new well (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,17);">Nu 21:17</a>f), upon drinking wine, and there are references to war songs (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,14);">Nu 21:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,13);">Jos 10:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',1,18);">2Sa 1:18</a>).<P>(2) Species of Hebrew Poetry.<P>Biblical poetry may be subsumed under the following heads: (a) folklore, (b) prophetical, (c) speculative, (d) lyrical.<P>(a) Folklore:<P>"Poetry," said J. G. Hamann (died 1788), "is the mother tongue of the human race." In both folk-music and folk-poetry, each the oldest of its class, the inspiration is immediate and spontaneous. We have examples of folk-songs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',11,\'1-9\');">Ge 11:1-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',19,24);">19:24</a> f.<P>(b) Prophetic Poetry:<P>This poetry is the expression of the inspiration under which the seer wrote. One may compare the oracular utterances of diviners which are invariably poetical in form as well as in matter. But one has to bear in mind that the heathen diviner claimed to have his messages from jinns or other spirits, and the means he employed were as a rule omens of various kinds. The Old Testament prophet professed to speak as he was immediately inspired by God (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DIVINATION">DIVINATION, VIII</a>). Duhm thinks that the genuine prophecies of Jeremiah are wholly poetical, the prose parts being interpolations. But the prophet is not merely or primarily a poet, though it cannot be doubted that a very large proportion of the prophecies of the Old Testament are poetical in form and substance.<P>(c) Philosophical Poetry:<P>This expression is intended to include such poetry as is found in the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament and the Apocrypha (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WISDOM+LITERATURE">WISDOM LITERATURE</a>). The so-called didactic poetry, that of the proverbs or parables (mashal), also comes in here.<P>(d) Lyrical Poetry:<P>This includes the hymns of the Psalter, the love songs of Canticles and the many other lyrics found in the historical and prophetical writings. In these lyrics all the emotions of the human soul are expressed.<P>Does the Old Testament contain specimens of epic and dramatic poetry? The answer must depend on which definition of both is adopted.<P>(a) Epic Poetry:<P>The present writer would define an epic poem as a novel with its plot and development charged, however, with the passion and set out in the rhythmic form of poetry. There is no part of the Old Testament which meets the requirements of this definition, certainly not the Creation, Fall and Deluge stories, which De Wette (Beitrage, 228ff, Einleitung, 147) and R.G. Moulton (Literary Study of the Bible, chapter ix) point to as true epics, and which Ewald (Dichter des alten Bundes, I, 87ff) held rightly to have in them the stuff of epics, though not the form.<P>(b) Dramatic Poetry:<P>Defining dramatic poetry as that which can be acted on a stage, one may with confidence say that there is no example of this in the Old Testament. Even the literary drama must have the general characteristics of that which is actable. Franz Delitzsch and other writers have pointed to Job and Canticles as dramatic poems, but the definition adopted above excludes both.<P>IV. Poetical Writings of the Old Testament.<P>1. The Poetical Books in the Narrow Sense:<P>According to the Massoretes or editors of our present Hebrew Bible, there are but three poetical books in the Old Testament, Job, Proverbs, and Psalms, known in Jewish circles by the mnemonic abbreviation \'emeth, the three consonants forming the initial letters of the Hebrew names of the above books. These three books have been supplied by the Massoretes with a special system of accents known as the poetical accents, and involving a method of intoning in the synagogue different from that followed when the prose books are read. But these accentual marks cannot be traced farther back than the 7th or 8th century of our era.<P>2. Customary Division of the Poetical Books:<P>It is customary to divide the poetical books of the Old Testament into two classes, each containing three books:<P>(1) those containing lyrical poetry (shir, or shirah), i.e. Psalms, Canticles, Lamentations;<P>(2) those containing for the most part didactic poetry (mashal), i.e. Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes.<P>3. Poetry in Non-poetical Books:<P>There is a large amount of poetry in the Old Testament outside the books usually classed as poetical:<P>(a) poetry in the prophetical books (see above, III, 2);<P>(b) poetry in the historical books including the Pentateuch (see Michael Heilprin, The Historical Poetry of the Hebrews, 2 volumes, 1879-80).<P>We have examples in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,23,49);">Ge 4:23f; 49</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,\'1-\');">Ex 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,14,\'27-30\');">Nu 21:14f; 27-30</a> (JE); <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,\'1-\');">Nu 23</a>f (Balaam\'s songs); <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,\'1-\');">De 32</a>f (song and blessing of Moses); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',10,\'12-14\');">Jos 10:12-14</a> (JE); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,\'1-\');">Jud 5</a> (Deborah\'s Song); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',9,\'8-15\');">9:8-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'1-10\');">1Sa 2:1-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',1,1);">2Sa 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,33);">3:33</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,\'1-\');">2Sa 23</a> (= <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',18,\'1-\');">Ps 18</a>), etc.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The most important books and articles on the subject have been mentioned during the course of the foregoing article. There is a full list of works dealing with Hebrew meter in W.H. Cobb, Criticism o.f Systems of Hebrew Metre, 19ff. The first edition of Ewald\'s still valuable "Essay on Hebrew Poetry" prefixed to his commentary on the Psalms was published in English in the Journal of Sacred Literature (1848), 74ff, 295ff. In 1909 J.W. Rothstein issued a suggestive treatise on Hebrew rhythm (Grundzuge des heb. Rhythmus...nebst lyrischen Texten mit kritischem Kommentar, 8vo plus vi plus 398), reviewed by the present writer in Review of Theology and Philosophy (Edinburgh), October, 1911. Early Religious Poetry of the Hebrews by E.G. King (Cambridge University Press) contains a good, brief, popular statement of the subject, though it makes no pretense to originality. In The Poets of the Old Testament,1912,Professor A.R. Gordon gives an excellent popular account of the poetry and poetical literature of the Old Testament.``33';
isbe[7012]='Poetry, New Testament`No one questions the presence of poetry of a high order in the Old Testament. The Study of the Old Testament as the literature of the ancient Hebrews has been critically made, and the attention of even the ordinary reader of the Scriptures called to the beauty and wealth of its poetic passages. The message of the New Testament is so vitally spiritual and concerned with religion that but little attention has been paid to it as literature. Naturally it would be strange if the poetic inspiration which runs like a tide through the prophetic and post-exilic periods of the Old Testament should altogether cease under the clearer spiritual dispensation of the New Testament. The fact is that it does not cease, but that under every fundamental rule for poetic utterance, save that of rhyme, the New Testament is seen to be rich in imaginative vision, in religion touched by emotion, and in poetic expression. The Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, and the Epistle of James, all afford examples of lofty poetic utterance, while the message of Jesus is saturated with words which readily lend themselves to song. In fact it is thought by some that Jesus was no less careful of the form than of the content of His message, and that all the finer types of Hebrew poetry found in the Old Testament can be matched from His sayings, even when tested by the same rules.<P>In the Gospels that of Luke gives us our best examples of poetry. "No sooner have we passed through the vestibule of his Gospel than we find ourselves within a circle of harmonies" (Burton, in the Expositor\'s Bible). From the poetic utterances of Mary, Elisabeth, Zacharias, Simeon, and the Angels, the church gains her Magnificat, Beatitude, Benedictus, Nunc Dimittis and Glorias.<P>The utterances of John the Baptist are filled with a rugged desert vision and an expression which reveals a form of poesy in no wise to be mistaken for prose.<P>Paul presents many of his ideas in harmonious and beautiful forms. He knew the secular poets of his day, and has immortalized Cleanthes\' Hymn to Zeus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',17,28);">Ac 17:28</a>). He also quotes from Epimenides and the Athenian dramatist Menander (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,33);">1Co 15:33</a>). Paul knew the poetry of the Hebrews, and enriches his own message with many quotations from it. He was acquainted with the Christian hymnology of his own times, as is seen in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,14);">Eph 5:14</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',3,16);">1Ti 3:16</a>. He offers also original flashes of poetic inspiration and utterance, a good example of which is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,\'31-37\');">Ro 8:31-37</a>.<P>Who could doubt the poetic imagery of James? He might almost be called the poet of social justice and of patient waiting under affliction for the will of God to come to men.<P>When one comes to the words of Jesus he discovers that in a very true sense His speech answers to the requirements for Hebrew poetry. Examples of synonymous, antithetic, synthetic and causal parallelism are the rule rather than the exception in the utterances of Jesus. For the synonymous form see <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',10,24);">Mt 10:24</a>; for the antithetic see <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,41);">Lu 6:41</a>; for the synthetic and causal forms see <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,23);">Lu 9:23</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,7);">Mt 6:7</a>. Not alone are these forms of Hebrew poetry found in the words of Jesus, but also the more involved and sustained poetic utterances (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,\'31-32\');">Lu 7:31-32</a>).<P>No one can question the deep emotional quality, the vivid imagination and spiritual idealism of Jesus. That the form of His speech is adequately set to poetic inspiration and conforms to the laws for Hebrew poetry has not been so freely acknowledged. Independently of theory advanced in Did Jesus Write His Own Gospel? (William Pitt MacVey), every student of the literature of the New Testament must be grateful for the chapter on "The Poems of Jesus."<P>Spirituality and poetry have a kinship, and the interpretation of any message is aided by the adequate knowledge of its form. When the New Testament has thus been carefully studied as literature, it will be seen, not only that Jesus was a poet, but that the entire New Testament, if not as rich as the Old Testament in poetic passages, is sufficiently poetic to receive treatment as such in religious encyclopedias.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FAITHFUL+SAYINGS">FAITHFUL SAYINGS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POETRY,+HEBREW">POETRY, HEBREW</a>`158';
isbe[7013]='Points`points: The word occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',5,16);">Ec 5:16</a>, "In all points (\'ummah) as he came, so shall he go"<22>a man leaves the world in all regards as helpless as he entered it, no matter what he may have gained or accomplished during his life.<P>Also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,15);">Heb 4:15</a>, "In all points (kata panta, "in all things," as in His human nature (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,14);">Heb 2:14</a>), so in His human experience (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,17,18);">Heb 2:17,18</a>)) tempted like as we are, yet without sin." He successfully resisted temptation at all points of His nature, in body, soul, and spirit. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPTATION+OF+CHRIST">TEMPTATION OF CHRIST</a>. Westcott (in loc.) thinks that the reference is not so much to Christ issuing out of all His trials without the least stain of sin, as to "a limitation of His temptation. Man\'s temptations come in many cases from previous sin. Such temptations had necessarily no place in Christ. He was tempted as we are, sharing our nature, yet with this exception, that there was no sin in Him to become the spring of trial." Whichever interpretation is adopted there is profound insight into the things of the soul in joining sinlessness with fullness of experience of temptation.``91';
isbe[7014]='Poison`poi\'-z\'-n (chemah, ro\'-sh; thumos, ios): Residents in Palestine must, from the first, have been acquainted with venomous serpents. Six species of these are widely diffused in the land, and at least three of them are fairly common in places. Besides, there are scorpions, centipedes and the large spider, which are as much dreaded by the fellahin as are the serpents, not to speak of the minor but very serious discomforts of mosquitoes, sandflies and ticks, some of which were credited with lethal powers. In <span class="noTag">The Wisdom of Solomon 16:9</span> the Revised Version (British and American) we read that "the bites of locusts and flies did slay, and there was not found a healing for their life." There are also many poisonous plants, such as belladonna, henbane, thorn apple, and the opium poppy. None of these is mentioned in the Bible; the only names found there are the hemlock (Conium maculatum) of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',10,4);">Ho 10:4</a>, the poisonous gourd (Citrullus colocynthis) of <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',4,39);">2Ki 4:39</a>, and the grapes of gall, probably the fruit of Calotropis procera, the apples of Sodom of Josephus (BJ, IV, viii, 4). Some, however, believe that these are poppyheads. Poisonous waters are referred to at Marah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,23);">Ex 15:23</a>) and Jericho (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',2,19);">2Ki 2:19</a>). There are no direct records of any person dying of poison except in 2Macc 10:13, where the suicide of Ptolemy Macron is related. our Lord\'s promise in the appendix to <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',16,18);">Mr 16:18</a> shows, however, that poisons were known and might be administered by way of ordeal, as was the unknown "water of jealousy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',5,17);">Nu 5:17</a>). In this connection the story in Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 39) is interesting, that "Justus surnamed Barsabbas, though he drank a deadly poison, suffered no injury, through the grace of the Lord." The passages in which poisonous serpents are mentioned are <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,24);">De 32:24</a>, where serpents (the Revised Version (British and American) "crawling things") of the dust, probably Cerastes hasselquistii, the little horned vipers, are mentioned, and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',32,33);">De 32:33</a>: "poison of serpents, and the cruel venom of asps." The asp may be the cobra Naia haje, not uncommon on the borders of the wilderness to the south. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',58,4);">Ps 58:4</a> mentions the poison of serpents. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',140,3);">Ps 140:3</a>, "They have sharpened their tongue like a serpent; adders\' poison is under their lips," indicates, what is still a common belief, that the forked tongue of the snake is the poison-bearer. This is referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',3,8);">Jas 3:8</a>. That it was the fang and not the tongue which carried the poison was known to Pliny (xi.62). This verse of <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',140,\'1-\');">Ps 140</a> is given in Paul\'s composite quotation in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',3,13);">Ro 3:13</a>. There may be a reference to the giving of an intoxicant poison in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',2,15);">Hab 2:15</a>, where the Revised Version (British and American) reads "that addest thy venom." The prophets speak in several places of God\'s wrath as a cup of trembling (the Revised Version (British and American) "staggering"), e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,17,22);">Isa 51:17,22</a>, probably suggested by the fact that chemah primarily means "fury" and is used in that sense in more than a hundred passages. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',12,2);">Zec 12:2</a> Jerusalem is to be such a "cup of reeling unto all the peoples round about."<P>The semamith, "lizard" (the King James Version "spider"), mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,28);">Pr 30:28</a> Septuagint kalabotes) was formerly regarded as poisonous and it is still much disliked by the fellahin, as they believe that it makes mocking gestures mimicking them at their prayers. They are really not poisonous. It is doubtful whether the lizard mentioned by Agur is really this stellion; the description better fits the gecko.``107';
isbe[7015]='Pole`pol: <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',21,8,9);">Nu 21:8,9</a> the King James Version for nes, Revised Version "standard."``1';
isbe[7016]='Policy`pol\'-i-si: Literally "method of government," and so "ability to manage affairs." In a bad sense, "cunning," "craft," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,25);">Da 8:25</a> (sekhel, "understanding"); in a good sense in 1Macc 8:4 (boule, "counsel"); also in the King James Version 2Macc 13:18; 14:29,31 (methodos, strategema, strategeo), where the Revised Version has "stratagem." Policies occurs in Judith 11:8 the King James Version for panourgema, lit. "readiness for anything," here in a good sense; Revised Version "subtil devices."``1';
isbe[7017]='Polished`pol\'-isht.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CORNER+STONE">CORNER-STONE</a>`1';
isbe[7018]='Poll`pol: The word (on the derivation of which see Skeat, Concise Etymological Dictionary of the English Language, 360) has been eliminated as a verb in the American Standard Revised Version. In the King James Version and English Revised Version it represents the Hebrew verbs kacam, literally "to shear" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,20);">Eze 44:20</a>), gazaz, literally, "to pull out," "to uproot," thence "to shear the sheep," figuratively, "to destroy an enemy" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,16);">Mic 1:16</a>), galach, in Piel, literally, "to make bald or roundheaded" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,26);">2Sa 14:26</a>) and qatsats, "to cut off" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,26);">Jer 9:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,23);">25:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,32);">49:32</a>). The Hebrew noun is gulgoleth. As will be seen from the above enumeration, the Hebrew verb differ considerably in etymology, while Revised Version has not tried to distinguish. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',1,16);">Mic 1:16</a> we have a reference to the oriental custom of cutting or tearing one\'s hair as a sign of mourning for one\'s relatives. "Make thee bald, and cut off thy hair (King James Version and English Revised Version "poll thee," Hebrew gazaz) for the children of thy delight: enlarge thy baldness as the eagle (margin "vulture"); for they are gone into captivity from thee." The priests, the sons of Zadok, are instructed to abstain from outward resemblance to heathen patterns of priesthood: "Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only cut off the hair (the King James Version and the English Revised Version, "poll," Hebrew kacam) of their heads" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,20);">Eze 44:20</a>). The Piel form of galach is employed in the description of the annual hair-cutting of Absalom (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',14,26);">2Sa 14:26</a>). Thrice we find the verb "to poll" as the translation of Hebrew qatsats, where the American Standard Revised Version materially improves the translation by adopting the marginal version of the King James Version (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',9,26);">Jer 9:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',25,23);">25:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',49,32);">49:32</a>).<P>The noun (gulgoleth, lit. "head") is translated "poll" in the phrase "by the poll," "by their polls" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',1,2,18,20,22);">Nu 1:2,18,20,22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,47);">3:47</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,3,14);">1Ch 23:3,14</a>). The expression has its origin in the numbering of persons by their heads, in the same way in which we speak of head-tax, etc.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HAIR">HAIR</a>`106';
isbe[7019]='Pollution`po-lu\'-shun (ga\'al, "to pollute"; alisgema, "contamination"): In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',1,7);">Mal 1:7</a>, "Ye offer polluted bread," i.e. not actually unclean, but worthless, common (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,62);">Ezr 2:62</a>), bread here being used metonymically for sacrificial offerings generally (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,6);">Le 21:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,11);">Mt 6:11</a>). The phrase in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,20);">Ac 15:20</a>, "the pollutions of idols," is explained in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,29);">15:29</A> by "things sacrificed (the King James Version "meats offered") to idols."``1';
isbe[7020]='Pollux`pol\'-uks.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CASTOR+AND+POLLUX">CASTOR AND POLLUX</a>`1';
isbe[7021]='Polygamy`po-lig\'-a-mi:<P>1. Meaning of the Term<P>2. Origin of Polygamy<P>3. The Old Testament and Polygamy<P>4. Polygamy Unnatural<P class="in15">The Eunuch<P>5. Weakness of Polygamy<hr /><P>1. Meaning of the Term:<P>Polygamy has been and is the open blazon by the human race of sex vice. The very term is a misnomer. Since man became moralized he has apprehended that the proper marriage relation between the sexes is monogamy. Whatever may have been the practice, since man could ask himself, What is right? he has known that ap\' arches ("from the beginning," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,4);">Mt 19:4</a>), au fond, at bottom, marriage is the choice of one man and one woman of each other for a life family relation. La Rochefoucauld said: "Hypocrisy is a sort of homage which vice pays to virtue." There is hypocrisy beneath the word polygamy. It is an attempt to cover up by the term "plural marriage" what is not marriage and cannot be marriage. There is no particular need of defining what the condition is, so long as we can look upon it as a violation and negation of the marriage relation. The very use of the term from any language covering a like condition is attempt<70><P clas="in15">"To steal the livery of the court of heaven<br>To serve the Devil in."<P>Polygamy is a general term and might mean a multiplicity of partners in the family relation by one of either sex. But it does not. Polygamy practically means exactly "polygyny" (gune), i.e. it describes a many-wived man. The correlative term "polyandry" describes the condition of a woman who has many men in family relation with herself. They are all husbands to her, as in polygamy all the women are wives to one man. But polyandry in historic times has had so little illustration that it may be dismissed as so exceptional as to be worthy of no further notice here.<P>Why polygamy has captured the whole position philologically covered by polygyny is readily apparent. The might of the physically strongest has dictated the situation. Man has on the average one-fourth more muscular force than woman. When it comes to wrong in sex relation, man has that advantage, and it has given him the field covered by the word "polygamy." There he is master and woman is the victim.<P>2. Origin of Polygamy:<P>It is plainly evident that polygamy is primarily largely the outcome of tribal wars. When men had separated into clans and had taken up different places of abode, collisions would soon occur between them. What would happen in such cases would be what we know did happen in North America soon after its first settlement by Europeans, to wit, the destruction of the Hurons by the Iroquois. The great majority of the men were massacred; the women and children, driven to the abode of the conquerors, disappearing there mainly in concubinage and slavery. What shall be done with this surplus of women? Here again the might of the strongest comes to the front. The chief or the most heroic fighter would assert his right to choice of captives, and thus concubinage or what is the same thing<6E>polygamy<6D>would be set up. Successes in further wars come and add other women to be distributed. Of course to the sheik or king there soon comes the seraglio and the harem. Polygamous practices will come in in other ways. The prisoner of war becomes property and passes from hand to hand by gift or sale. So woman<61>the weaker party<74>endures what comes to her as slave, concubine. We have now no longer the "helpmeet" originally destined for man<61>"bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh"<22>for whom he would "leave his father and his mother" and to whose single self he would "cleave" for life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',2,18,24);">Ge 2:18,24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,5,6);">Mt 19:5,6</a>). Monogamy, with its unity in labor, thought and feeling, with its immeasurable modifying influences of moral, ideal and spiritual cast, is gone. Woman is reduced to the position of ministrant to man\'s unmodified sensuality.<P>3. The Old Testament and Polygamy:<P>The complications introduced into morals by polygamy are not often considered. But the Bible sets them forth in plainness. The marriage of Abraham and Sarah seems to have been an original love match, and even to have preserved something of that character through life. Still we find Sarah under the influence of polygamous ideas, presenting Abraham with a concubine. Yet afterward, when she herself had a son, she induced Abraham to drive out into the wilderness this concubine and her son. Now Abraham was humane and kind, and it is said "The thing was very grievous in Abraham\'s sight" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,11);">Ge 21:11</a>). But he was in the toils of polygamy, and it brought him pain and retribution. A Divine direction may be hard to bear.<P>The conditions of Jacob\'s marriages were such that it is hard to say whether any of his children were of any other than of polygamous origin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',35,\'22-26\');">Ge 35:22-26</a>). Where the family idea and affection went, in such mixed condition, is evidenced by the unblushing sale, for slavery in Egypt, of one of the brothers by the others (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',37,28);">Ge 37:28</a>).<P>David was a singer of sweet and noble songs and wanted to be a righteous man with his whole heart. Yet, probably in common with all the military leaders and kings of the earth of his day, he had a polygamous career. His retributions ran along an extended line. There was a case of incest and murder among his children (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',13,\'1-\');">2Sa 13</a>). The son in whom he had most hope and pride organized treason against his throne, and lost his life in the attempt. David left his kingdom to Solomon, of whom much might be said, but of whom this can be said<69>evidently originally a man bright, keen-witted, wise, yet in his old age he went to pieces by the wiles of the women with whom he had loaded his harem. Partly by his extravagance in his polygamous life, and partly in attempt to build temples in distant places for the religions represented by the inmates of his harem, he bankrupted his nation. As a consequence his kingdom was divided at his death, and there was never again a united Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',11,12);">1Ki 11:12</a>). Polygamy may be justly charged with these untoward results.<P>4. Polygamy Unnatural:<P>It can be demonstrated scientifically, even mathematically, that polygamy is a moral wrong. Statistics show that births are substantially equally divided between the sexes. Excess seems slightly on the side of males. When this fact is considered and also the fact of the wide prevalence of polygamy, it would seem that polygamy (polygyny) is a greater crime against Nature than polyandry. To put out of view for a moment the wrong to woman in denying to her the rights and privileges of monogamous marriage, the interference with the rights of man to such marriage looms up in vast proportion. Every harem is the denial to men of the right to seek among its inmates wives according to the dictates of their own hearts.<P>The Eunuch.<P>But we are not done with the crime against man. Given a harem, and he who set it up has made, or there brought, the eunuch. The lord of the harem must be served by emasculated men. A search in history will reveal an amount of this wickedness that is past belief. The eunuch has been everywhere among all nations and peoples and tongues. They have not only been servitors to women in harems, but they have acquired such influence with their masters that they have sometimes even dictated the policy of government. They have been the secret cabinet that has had the last word in public affairs. They have sometimes held public positions and shown therein astonishing ability. Witness Narses, the brilliant general of the emperor Justinian.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EUNUCH">EUNUCH</a>.<P>5. Weakness of Polygamy:<P>Gibbon noticed the fact that nations began to decline in power when their policies were dictated and managed by eunuchs. But that is taking a symptom for the disease. There are weaknesses behind that weakness. We have found woman in muscular strength equal to three-fourths of a man. If we claim nothing more for woman than that ratio through the whole scale of her potencies, what would be thought of a nation that should try to reduce that three-fourths of potency as nearly to zero as it could? This is what polygamy has done<6E>reduced woman as nearly to a cipher as it could in all the departments of her being. She has been held to the lowest and most primitive industrial pursuits. She has been deprived of intellectual development. She has been debarred from society, permitted to look at it only through a home lattice, or, if abroad, through a swathod face. The harem of sheik or sultan has fixed the condition of woman in province or nation<6F>set the bounds to her life. The highest office assigned her has been breeder of children, and for one-half of them<65>the daughters<72>she could have no possible hope or ambition.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WOMAN">WOMAN</a>.<P>Where in such degradation is the "helpmeet" for man in all his problems? This condition is reflected back over man. What possible appeal can there be to him for thought and energy except to repeat the same dull round exhibited in his daily life? Polygamous nations have never been industrial inventors, have contributed little to science. They have usually ruined the fertility of the lands they have occupied. They have been heavily weighted with the lethargy of a system that appeals to nothing but the most primitive instincts and vices of man.<P>The monogamous have been the forceful nations. Rome conquered the world while she was monogamous, and lost control of it when she dropped to the moral level of the sex corruption of the peoples that she had conquered. The Teuton trundled into and over Europe in ox-carts mounted on solid wood trucks. But his cart carried one wife, and now all polygamy is held under the trained guns of the Tenton.<P>There may seem to be two exceptions<6E>the establishment of the Mogul empire in India and the subjugation of Western Asia and Eastern Europe by the Turk. That in both cases there was great success in war is granted. They were authorized by their religion to exhibit the frenzy of bloodshed and indulge in lust. Indeed, enjoyment of the latter was a bright hope for the life to come. But when they had possession of a country, and massacres and ravishing were over, what then? For what is mankind indebted to them?<P>A Lyric.<P>A lyric has been put in the hand of the present writer by a friend who wrote it at the last date of the title. It is one of the lyrics of the centuries in its synthesis of history and in its insight into the forces physical, moral and immoral at work in the Mogul empire of India. Notice the dates. The text will show what took place between.<P>THE MOGUL 1525-1857<P class="in15">A war steed coursed out the wind-swept north,<br>Jarring the crags with hoofs of fire,<br>Snuffing far battle with nostril wide,<br>Neighing the joy of fierce desire.<br><br>The crisping herbage of arid plains<br>Had toughened his sinews like bands of steel;<br>The snow-fed waters of Zarafshan<br>Had nerved the might of a northern will.<br><br>The war steed grazed in the fertile meads,<br>Drinking the waters of indolent streams:<br>He rested at eve on bloom-dight beds,<br>Toyed with by maidens in the goldening gleams.<br><br>They charmed his ear with dalliant song:<br>They closed his eyes in witchery\'s glee:<br>They fed him the vineyards\' wildering draught<68><br>He slept in the breath of the lotus tree.<br><br>White bones lie strewn on the flowering mead,<br>In flesh-rank grass grown high and dark.<br>The carrion bird hath flown<77>hath died<65><br>Riseth the war-horse? Neigheth? Hark!<p class="in45">- JOSIAH TORREY READE, Amherst, 1856.<P>The above lyric may be taken as the epitaph of any polygamous nation. The last words are significant<6E>"Neigheth? Hark!" Would the old war steed arise? "Hark!" The Sepoy rebellion was on! We "hearkened," but the rebellion went to pieces and an end was put to the Mogul empire. We have listened for half a century and heard no sound. We hear mutterings now, but the end will be as before<72>even if the "war-horse" riseth and is victorious. He will then again lie down in "flesh-rank grass grown high and dark," and the "carrion bird" will fly from his "white bones." Streams cannot rise higher than their fountains. The causes remaining, the same effects will follow.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DIVORCE">DIVORCE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FAMILY">FAMILY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MARRIAGE">MARRIAGE</a>`22';
isbe[7022]='Pomegranate`pom\'-gran-at, pom-gran\'-at, pum\'-gran-at (rimmon (tree and fruit); the Hebrew name is similar to the Arabic, Aramaic and Ethiopic; rhoa):<P>1. A Tree Characteristic of Palestine: One of the most attractive and most characteristic of the fruit trees of Syria, probably indigenous to Persia, Afghanistan and the neighborhood of the Caucasus, but introduced to Palestine in very ancient times. The spies brought specimens of figs and pomegranates, along with grapes, from the Vale of Eshcol (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',13,23);">Nu 13:23</a>). Vines, figs and pomegranates are mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',20,5);">Nu 20:5</a>) as fruits the Israelites missed in the wilderness; the promised land was to be one "of wheat and barley, and vines and fig-trees and pomegranates" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',8,8);">De 8:8</a>), a promise renewed in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,19);">Hag 2:19</a>. In the lamentation in <a onClick="return mV(\'Joe\',1,11,12);">Joe 1:11,12</a> we have the pomegranate, the palm tree and the apple tree represented as withered, "for joy is withered away from the sons of men."<P>2. The Fruit:<P>The pomegranate tree, Punica granatum (Natural Order, Granateae) occurs usually as a shrub or small tree 10-15 ft. high, and is distinguished by its fresh green, oval leaves, which fall in winter, and its brilliant scarlet blossoms (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',7,12);">So 7:12</a>). The beauty of an orchard of pomegranates is referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',4,13);">So 4:13</a>. The fruit which is ripe about September is apple-shaped, yellow-brown with a blush of red, and is surmounted by a crown-like hard calyx; on breaking the hard rind, the white or pinkish, translucent fruits are seen tightly packed together inside. The juicy seeds are sometimes sweet and sometimes somewhat acid, and need sugar for eating. The juice expressed from the seeds is made into a kind of syrup for flavoring drinks, and in ancient days was made into wine: "I would cause thee to drink of spiced wine, of the juice (margin "sweet wine") of my pomegranate" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',8,2);">So 8:2</a>). The beauty of a cut section of pomegranate<74>or one burst open naturally, when fully ripe<70>may have given rise to the comparison in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',4,3);">So 4:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',6,7);">6:7</a>: "Thy temples are like a piece of a pomegranate." The rind of the pomegranate contains a very high percentage of tannic acid, and is employed both as a medicine and for tanning, particularly in making genuine morocco leather.<P>Whether the pomegranate tree in Migron under which Saul is said (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',14,2);">1Sa 14:2</a>) to have abode with his 600 men was really a tree or a place, Rimmon, is doubtful.<P>3. The Pomegranate in Art:<P>A large number of references to the pomegranate are to the use of the form of the fruit in ornamentation, in which respect it appears among the Hebrews to have something of the position of the lotus bud as a decorative motive in Egypt. It was embroidered in many colors on the skirts of Aaron\'s garments, together with golden bells (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,33);">Ex 28:33</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,24,25,26);">39:24-26</a> compare Ecclesiasticus 45:9). Hiram of Tyre introduced the pomegranate into his brass work ornamentation in the temple: "So he made the pillars; and there were two rows round about upon the one network, to cover the capitals that were upon the top of the pillars" (margin "So the Syriac The Hebrew has \'pomegranates\'")(<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,18);">1Ki 7:18</a>). "And the pomegranates were two hundred, in rows round about upon the other capital" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,20);">1Ki 7:20</a> compare also 1Ki 7:42; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,17);">2Ki 25:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',3,16);">2Ch 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,13);">4:13</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=RIMMON">RIMMON</a>`117';
isbe[7023]='Pommel`pum\'-el (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,12,13);">2Ch 4:12,13</a>): the Revised Version (British and American) reads "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BOWL">bowl</a>" (which see).``1';
isbe[7024]='Pond``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CISTERN">CISTERN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POOL">POOL</a>`1';
isbe[7025]='Ponder`pon\'-der: Occurs in the King James Version 5 times in the Book of Proverbs and nowhere else in the Old Testament. In each case it means "to consider carefully," "to weigh mentally." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',4,26);">Pr 4:26</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',5,21);">5:21</A>, the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "make level." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',5,6);">Pr 5:6</a>, it drops out entirely in the Revised Version (British and American). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,2);">Pr 21:2</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',24,12);">24:12</A>, "weigh" is substituted for "ponder." The one New Testament passage is <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,19);">Lu 2:19</a>; here the Revised Version (British and American) has "pondering" where the King James Version has "and pondered."``1';
isbe[7026]='Pontius`pon\'-shi-us, pon\'-ti-us.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PILATE">PILATE</a>`1';
isbe[7027]='Pontus`pon\'-tus (Pontos): Was an important province in the northeastern part of Asia Minor, lying along the south shore of the Black Sea. The name was geographical, not ethnical, in origin, and was first used to designate that part of Cappadocia which bordered on the "Pontus," as the Euxine was often termed. Pontus proper extended from the Halys River on the west to the borders of Colchis on the east, its interior boundaries meeting those of Galatia, Cappadocia and Armenia. The chief rivers besides the Halys were the Iris, Lycus and Thermodon. The configuration of the country included a beautiful but narrow, riparian margin, backed by a noble range of mountains parallel to the coast, while these in turn were broken by the streams that forced their way from the interior plains down to the sea; the valleys, narrower or wider, were fertile and productive, as were the wide plains of the interior such as the Chiliokomon and Phanaroea. The mountain slopes were originally clothed with heavy forests of beech, pine and oak of different species, and when the country was well afforested, the rainfall must have been better adequate than now to the needs of a luxuriant vegetation.<P>The first points in the earliest history of Pontus emerge from obscurity, much as the mountain peaks of its own noble ranges lift their heads above a fog bank. Thus, we catch glimpses of Assyrian culture at Sinope and Amisus, probably as far back as the 3rd millennium BC. The period of Hittite domination in Asia Minor followed hard after, and there is increasing reason to suppose that the Hittites occupied certain leading city sites in Pontus, constructed the artificial mounds or tumuli that frequently meet the eyes of modern travelers, hewed out the rock tombs, and stamped their character upon the early conditions. The home of the Amazons, those warrior priestesses of the Hittites, was located on the banks of the Thermodon, and the mountains rising behind Terme are still called the "Amazon Range"; and the old legends live still in stories about the superior prowess of the modern women living there.<P>As the Hittite power shrunk in extent and force, by the year 1000 BC bands of hardy Greek adventurers appeared from the west sailing along the Euxine main in quest of lands to exploit and conquer and colonize. Cape Jason, which divides the modern mission fields of Trebizond and Marsovan, preserves the memory of the Argonants and the Golden Fleece. Miletus, "greatest of the Ionic towns," sent out its colonists, swarm after swarm, up through the Bosphorus, and along the southern shore of the Black Sea. They occupied Sinope, the northern-most point of the peninsula with the best harbor and the most commanding situation. Sinope was in Paphlagonia, but politically as well as commercially enjoyed intimate relations with the Pontic cities. Settlers from Sinope, reinforced by others from Athens direct, pressed on and founded Amisus, the modern Samsoun, always an important commercial city. Another colony from Sinope founded Trebizond, near which Xenophon and the Ten Thousand reached the sea again after they had sounded the power of Persia and found it hollow at Cunaxa. Among the cities of the interior, picturesque Amasia in the gorge of the Iris River witnessed the birth of Strabo in the 1st century BC, and to the geographer Strabo, more than to any other man, is due our knowledge of Pontus in its early days. Zille, "built upon the mound of Semiramis," contained the sanctuary of Anaitis, where sacrifices were performed with more pomp than in any other place. Comana, near the modern Tokat, was a city famous for the worship of the great god Ma. Greek culture by degrees took root along the coast; it mixed with, and in turn was modified by, the character of the older native inhabitants.<P>When the Persians established their supremacy in Asia Minor with the overthrow of Lydia, 546 BC, Pontus was loosely joined to the great empire and was ruled by Persian satraps. Ariobarzanes, Mithradates and Pharnaces are the recurring names in this dynasty of satraps which acquired independence about 363 and maintained it during the Macedonian period. The man that first made Pontus famous in history was Mithradates VI, surnamed Eupator. Mithradates was a typical oriental despot, gifted, unscrupulous, commanding. Born at Sinope 136 BC and king at Amasia at the age of twelve, Mithradates was regarded by the Romans as "the most formidable enemy the Republic ever had to contend with." By conquest or alliance he widely extended his power, his chief ally being his son-in-law Dikran, or Tigranes, of Armenia, and then prepared for the impending struggle with Rome. The republic had acquired Pergamus in 133 BC and assumed control of Western Asia Minor. There were three Roman armies in different parts of the peninsula when war broke out, 88 BC. Mithradates attacked them separately and over-threw them all. He then planned and executed a general massacre of all the Romans in Asia Minor, and 80,000 persons were cut down. Sulla by patient effort restored the fortunes of Rome, and the first war ended in a drawn game; each party had taken the measure of its antagonist, but neither had been able to oust the other. The second war began in the year 74, with Lucullus as the Roman general. Lucullus took Amisus by siege, chased Mithradates to Cabira, modern Niksar, scattered his army and drove the oriental sultan out of his country. Subsequently on his return to Rome, Lucullus carried from Kerasoun the first cherries known to the western world. In the third war the hero on the Roman side was the masterful Pompey, appointed in 66 BC. As a result of this war, Mithradates was completely vanquished. His dominions were finally and permanently incorporated in the territories of the Roman republic. The aged king, breathing out wrath and forming impossible plans against his lifelong enemies, died in exile in the Crimea from poison administered by his own hand.<P>Most of Pontus was for administrative purposes united by the Romans with the province of Bithynia, though the eastern part subsisted as a separate kingdom under Polemon and his house, 36 BC to 63 AD, and the southwestern portion was incorporated with the province of Galatia. It was during the Roman period that Christianity entered this province. There were Jews dwelling in Pontus, devout representatives of whom were in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,9);">Ac 2:9</a>). Paul\'s associates, Aquila and Priscilla, were originally from here (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,2);">Ac 18:2</a>). The sojourners of the Dispersion are included in the address of the first Epistle of Peter together with the people of four other provinces in Asia Minor (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,1);">1Pe 1:1</a>). Local traditions connect the apostles Andrew and Thaddeus with evangelistic labors in this region. They are said to have followed the great artery of travel leading from Caesarea Mazaca to Sinope. Pliny, governor of Bithynia and Pontus 111-113 AD, found Christians under his authority in great numbers (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BITHYNIA">BITHYNIA</a>), and Professor Ramsay argues that Pliny\'s famous letters, Numbers 96 and 97, written to the emperor Traian on the subject of the treatment of Christians under his government (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PERSECUTION">PERSECUTION</a>), were composed in view of conditions in Amisus (Church in Roman Empire, 224, 225).<P>The Roman empire in the East was gradually merged into the Byzantine, which is still known to the local inhabitants as the empire of "Roum," i.e. Rome. Pontus shared the vicissitudes of this rather unfortunate government until, in 1204, a branch of the Byzantine imperial family established in Pontus a separate small state with its capital at Trebizond. Here the house of the Grand Comneni, sheltered between the sea and the mountain ranges, maintained its tinsel sovereignty to and beyond the fall of Constantinople. In 1461 Trebizond was taken by Mohammed the Conqueror, since which date Pontus, with its conglomerate population of Turks, Armenians, Greeks and fragments of other races, has been a part of the Ottoman empire.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ASIA+MINOR,+ARCHAEOLOGY+OF">ASIA MINOR, ARCHAEOLOGY OF</a>`191';
isbe[7028]='Pool; Pond; Reservoir`pool, pond, rez\'-er-vwar, rez\'-er-vwar (1) berekhah, "pool"; compare Arabic birkat, "pool"; compare berakhah, "blessing," and Arabic barakat, "blessing"; (2) agham, "pool," "marsh," "reeds"; compare Arabic \'ajam, "thicket," "jungle"; (3) miqwah, "reservoir," the King James Version "ditch" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',22,11);">Isa 22:11</a>); (4) miqweh, "pond," the King James Version "pool" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',7,19);">Ex 7:19</a>); miqweh ha-mayim, English Versions of the Bible "gathering together of the waters" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',1,10);">Ge 1:10</a>); miqweh-mayim, "a gathering of water," the King James Version "plenty of water" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',11,36);">Le 11:36</a>); (5) kolumbethra, "pool," literally, "a place of diving," from kolumbao, "to dive"): Lakes (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LAKE">LAKE</a>) are very rare in Syria and Palestine, but the dry climate, which is one reason for the fewness of lakes, impels the inhabitants to make artificial pools or reservoirs to collect the water of the rain or of springs for irrigation and also for drinking. The largest of these are made by damming water courses, in which water flows during the winter or at least after showers of rain. These may be enlarged or deepened by excavation. Good examples of this are found at Diban and Madeba in Moab. Smaller pools of rectangular shape and usually much wider than deep, having no connection with water courses, are built in towns to receive rain from the roofs or from the surface of the ground. These may be for common use like several large ones in Jerusalem, or may belong to particular houses. These are commonly excavated to some depth in the soil or rock, though the walls are likely to rise above the surface. Between these and cylindrical pits or cisterns no sharp line can be drawn.<P>The water of springs may be collected in large or small pools of masonry, as the pool of Siloam (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,7);">Joh 9:7</a>). This is commonly done for irrigation when the spring is so small that the water would be lost by absorption or evaporation if it were attempted to convey it continuously to the fields. The pool (Arabic, birkat) receives the trickle of water until it is full. The water is then let out in a large stream and conducted where it is needed. (In this way by patient labor a small trickling spring may support much vegetation.)<p>\'Agham does not seem to be used of artificial pools, but rather of natural or accidental depressions containing water, as pools by the Nile (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',7,19);">Ex 7:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',8,5);">8:5</a>), or in the wilderness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',107,35);">Ps 107:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',114,8);">114:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,23);">Isa 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',35,7);">35:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,18);">41:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',42,15);">42:15</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',19,10);">Isa 19:10</a> the rendering of the King James Version, "all that make sluices and ponds for fish," would be an exception to this statement, but the Revised Version (British and American) has "all they that work for hire shall be grieved in soul." Miqweh occurs with \'agham in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',7,19);">Ex 7:19</a> of the ponds and pools by the Nile. Berekhah is used of "the pool of Gibeon" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',2,13);">2Sa 2:13</a>), "the pool in Hebron" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',4,12);">2Sa 4:12</a>), "the pool of Samaria" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',22,38);">1Ki 22:38</a>), "the pools in Heshbon" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',7,4);">So 7:4</a>), "the pool of Shelah," the King James Version "Shiloah" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,15);">Ne 3:15</a>); compare "the waters of Shiloah" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',8,6);">Isa 8:6</a>). We read in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',2,6);">Ec 2:6</a>, "I made me pools of water, to water therefrom the forest where trees were reared." There is mention of "the upper pool" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',18,17);">2Ki 18:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',7,3);">Isa 7:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',36,2);">36:2</a>), "the lower pool" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',22,9);">Isa 22:9</a>), "the king\'s pool" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,14);">Ne 2:14</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',22,11);">Isa 22:11</a> has, "Ye made also a reservoir (miqwah) between the two walls for the water of the old pool (berekhah)." Kolumbethra is used of the pool of Bethesda (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,2,4,7);">Joh 5:2,4,7</a>) and of the pool of Siloam (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',9,7,11);">Joh 9:7,11</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CISTERN">CISTERN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NATURAL+FEATURES">NATURAL FEATURES</a>`37';
isbe[7029]='Pools of Solomon`poolz.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CISTERN">CISTERN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POOL">POOL</a>`1';
isbe[7030]='Poor`poor (\'ebhyon, dal, \'ani, rush; ptochos):<P>I. In the Old Testament.<P>The poor have great prominence in the Bible; it is said, indeed, that there should be no poor among the Hebrews because Yahweh should so greatly bless them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,4);">De 15:4</a> the Revised Version (British and American) and the King James Version margin); but this was only to be realized on certain conditions of obedience (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,5);">De 15:5</a>), and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,11);">De 15:11</a> it is said,"the poor will never cease out of the land"; but they were to see to it that none was left in destitution. The very foundation of the Hebrew religion was God\'s pity on a poor and oppressed people.<P>1. The Terms Employed:<P>The words for "poor" are chiefly \'ebhyon, "desirous," "needy," "poor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,6);">Ex 23:6</a>, etc.); dal, "moving," "swaying," hence, weak, poor, lowly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,3);">Ex 23:3</a>, etc.); dallah, "poverty," "weakness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,12);">2Ki 25:12</a>, etc.); rush, perhaps "to shake," "tremble," "to be poor," "impoverished" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',18,23);">1Sa 18:23</a>, etc.); \'ani, also \'anaw, "poor," "oppressed," from \'anah, "to bend" or "bow down (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,25);">Ex 22:25</a>, etc.); \'aneh, Aramaic (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',4,27);">Da 4:27</a>), chelekhah, "wretchedness" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,8,14);">Ps 10:8,14</a>); yarash, "to make poor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,7);">1Sa 2:7</a>); machsor, "want" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,17);">Pr 21:17</a>); micken, "a needy one" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',4,13);">Ec 4:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',9,15,16);">9:15 bis, 16</a>).<P>2. Representations:<P>(1) Generally.<2E>God (Yahweh and \'Elohim) is represented as having a special care for "the poor," which was illustrated in the deliverance of the nation from Egyptian poverty and bondage and was never to be forgotten by them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,22);">De 24:22</a>); as punishing the oppressors of the poor and rewarding those who were kind to them; God Himself was the Protector and Saviour of the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,23);">Ex 22:23</a>): "If thou afflict them at all, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; and my wrath shall wax hot," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,9);">De 15:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,15);">24:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,8);">1Sa 2:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,16);">Job 31:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',9,18);">Ps 9:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',12,5);">12:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',19,17);">Pr 19:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',25,4);">Isa 25:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',5,8);">Ec 5:8</a>, "one higher than the high regardeth," etc.).<P>(2) Liberality to the poor is specially enjoined (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,7);">De 15:7</a>f), and they were to beware of self-deception and grudging in this (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,9,10);">De 15:9,10</a>).<P>(3) Special provisions were made on behalf of the poor:<P>(a) Every third year a tithe was to be given "unto the Levite, to the sojourner, to the fatherless and to the widow" that Yahweh might bless them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,28,29);">De 14:28,29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,12);">26:12</a>f);<P>(b) the poor were to have the free use of all that grew spontaneously in field or vineyard during the Sabbatic year (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,10);">Ex 23:10</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,5,6);">Le 25:5,6</a>);<P>(c) each year the gleanings of the fields and vineyards should belong to the poor, the corners of fields were to be left for them, and if a sheaf was forgotten it should remain (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,9,10);">Le 19:9,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',23,22);">23:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,19);">De 24:19</a>);<P>(d) fruit and ripe grain in a field might be eaten by any hungry person, but none should be carried away (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',23,24,25);">De 23:24,25</a>);<P>(e) in the Feast of Weeks the poor were to participate (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',16,\'9-12\');">De 16:9-12</a>);<P>(f) every seventh year there should be a "release" of debts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,1);">De 15:1</a>f); in the seventh year of servitude the Hebrew bond-servant should go free (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,2);">Ex 21:2</a>), or in the Jubilee, if that came first, on which occasion<6F>the fiftieth year<61>property that had been sold returned to its owner or his family (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,\'8-17\');">Le 25:8-17</a>);<P>(g) they were to lend readily to the poor, and no interest or increase was to be taken from their brethren (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',22,25);">Ex 22:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,\'35-37\');">Le 25:35-37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,7);">De 15:7</a>f); in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,39);">Le 25:39</a>, no poor Hebrew was to be made a bond-servant, and, if a hired servant, he was not to be ruled with rigor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,43);">25:43</A>); his hire was to be given him daily (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,13);">Le 19:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,15);">De 24:15</a>); no widow\'s raiment was to be taken in pledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,17);">De 24:17</a>), nor the handmill, nor the upper millstone so essential for daily life (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,6);">De 24:6</a>), a man\'s garment should be returned to him before sundown, and no house should be entered to seize or fetch any pledge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,\'10-13\');">De 24:10-13</a>); breach of these laws should be sin and their observance righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,13,15);">De 24:13,15</a>, etc.; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ALMS,+ALMSGIVING">ALMS, ALMSGIVING</a>);<P>(h) justice was to be done to the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',23,6);">Ex 23:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',27,19);">De 27:19</a>, "Cursed be he that wresteth the justice due to the sojourner, fatherless, and widow"); (i) offerings were graduated according to means (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',5,7);">Le 5:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',12,8);">12:8</a>).<P>(4) Definite penalties were not always attached to those laws, and the prophets and psalmists have many complaints of the unjust treatment and oppression of the poor, contrary to the will of God, and frequent exhortations to justice and a due regard for them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,2,9);">Ps 10:2,9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',12,5);">12:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',14,6);">14:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',3,14,15);">Isa 3:14,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',2,34);">Jer 2:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,49);">Eze 16:49</a>, "the iniquity of...Sodom"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,12,17);">Eze 18:12,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',22,29);">22:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',2,7);">Am 2:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',4,1);">4:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',3,14);">Hab 3:14</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',20,19);">Job 20:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',24,9,14);">24:9,14</a>, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,31);">Pr 14:31</a>).<P>(5) The duty of caring for the poor is frequently and strongly set forth and divine promises attached to its fulfillment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',41,1);">Ps 41:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',72,12);">72:12</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',17,5);">Pr 17:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',22,9);">22:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,3,17);">28:3,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',58,7);">Isa 58:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',22,16);">Jer 22:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',18,17);">Eze 18:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',4,27);">Da 4:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',7,10);">Zec 7:10</a>, etc.; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,12,16);">Job 29:12,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,25);">30:25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,19);">31:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',112,9);">Ps 112:9</a>).<P>(6) The day of the divine manifestation, the times of the Messiah, should bring deliverance and rejoicing to the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',72,\'12-15\');">Ps 72:12-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',11,4);">Isa 11:4</a>, "With righteousness shall he judge the poor," etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,30);">Isa 14:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,19);">29:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">61:1</a> the Revised Version margin).<P>(7) The equality of rich and poor before God and the superiority of the righteous poor to the ungodly rich, etc., are maintained (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',19,1,22);">Pr 19:1,22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',22,1,2);">22:1,2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',4,13);">Ec 4:13</a>).<P>(8) Ways in which men can willfully make themselves poor are mentioned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',6,11);">Pr 6:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,4);">10:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',12,24);">12:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',13,4,18);">13:4,18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,23);">14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',20,13);">20:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,5,17);">21:5,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,21);">23:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,19);">28:19</a>).<P>3. The Godly Poor:<P>The chief words given above all mean poor, literally, but \'ani (rendered also "afflicted") may also denote Israel as a nation in its afflictions and low estate, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',68,10);">Ps 68:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,17);">Isa 41:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,13);">49:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',51,21);">51:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',54,11);">54:11</a>; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',3,12);">Ze 3:12</a>, it is "the ideal Israel of the future." Dr. Driver remarks (art. "Poor," HDB) that such passages show that \'ani (as also its frequent parallel \'ebhyon, and, though somewhat less distinctly, dal) came gradually "to denote the godly poor, the suffering righteous, the persons who, whether \'bowed down\' or \'needy\' or \'reduced,\' were the godly servants of Yahweh." The humble poor became in fact distinguished as the line in which faithfulness to Yahweh was maintained and spiritual religion developed. The less frequent word \'anaw, often translated "meek," "humble," is regarded (see Driver in the place cited.) as having from the first a moral and religious significance. It is used of Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',12,3);">Nu 12:3</a>) and occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,12,17);">Ps 10:12,17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,26);">22:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',25,9);">25:9</a>, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',3,34);">Pr 3:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',16,19);">16:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,19);">Isa 29:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,7);">32:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">61:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',2,7);">Am 2:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,3);">Ze 2:3</a>.<P>II. In the New Testament.<P>In the New Testament ptochos, "trembling," "poor," "beggar," is almost exclusively the word translated "poor." It does not occur very frequently, but we see the same regard for the poor maintained as we have in the Old Testament; besides, the new principle of love and the example of Him who "though he was rich, yet for your sakes...became poor" (ptocheuo, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,9);">2Co 8:9</a>) necessarily carry in them this regard even more fully than in the Old Testament. Jesus announced His mission (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,18);">Lu 4:18</a>) by quoting <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>, "to preach good tidings (the King James Version "the gospel") to the poor" (or meek or humble); He gave as a proof of His Messiahship the fact that "the poor have the gospel (or good news of the Kingdom) preached to them" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,5);">Mt 11:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,22);">Lu 7:22</a>); according to <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,20);">Lu 6:20</a>, He pronounced a beatitude on the pious "poor" because the kingdom of God was theirs; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,3);">Mt 5:3</a> it is "the poor in spirit" (the humble); we have the injunction to "give to the poor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,21);">Mt 19:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,21);">Mr 10:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,22);">Lu 18:22</a>) who are "always with you" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,11);">Mt 26:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,7);">Mr 14:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,8);">Joh 12:8</a>), which does not mean that there must always be "the poor," but that, in contrast with Himself who was soon to leave them, the poor should remain and kindness could be shown to them at any time, which was His own practice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',13,29);">Joh 13:29</a>); we are enjoined to call not the rich or well-to-do to our entertainments, but the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,13);">Lu 14:13</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,21);">Lu 14:21</a>); Zaccheus cited in his favor the fact that he gave \'half of his goods to the poor\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,8);">Lu 19:8</a>); special notice was taken by Jesus of the poor widow\'s contribution (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,3);">Lu 21:3</a>). The first church showed its regard for the poor in the distribution of goods "according as any man had need" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,45);">Ac 2:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,32);">4:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,1);">6:1</a>); when the council at Jerusalem freed the Gentiles from the yoke of Judaism, they made it a condition, Paul says, "that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,10);">Ga 2:10</a>); contributions were accordingly made "for the poor among the saints that are at Jerus" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,26);">Ro 15:26</a>), and it was in conveying such contributions that Paul got into the circumstances that led to his arrest. God\'s ability and will to provide for those who give to the poor is quoted from <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',112,9);">Ps 112:9</a> (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,9);">2Co 9:9</a>); James specially rebukes certain Christians of his day for their partiality for the rich and their dishonor of the poor (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,\'5-9\');">Jas 2:5-9</a>), and John asks how, in the man who "hath the world\'s goods, and beholdeth his brother in need, and shutteth up his compassion from him," the love of God can dwell (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,17,18);">1Joh 3:17,18</a>).<P>Ptochos is translated "beggar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,20,22);">Lu 16:20,22</a>) and "beggarly" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,9);">Ga 4:9</a>); penes, "one who works for his daily bread," "a poor man," is the word in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,9);">2Co 9:9</a>; the poor widow of <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',12,42);">Mr 12:42</a> is described in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,2);">Lu 21:2</a> as penichros, "very poor."<P>III. In the Apocrypha.<P>In the Apocrypha the poor are often mentioned; God\'s regard for them (Ecclesiasticus 21:5 (ptochos); 35:12,13); their oppression and wrongs (The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 2:10</span> (penes); Ecclesiasticus 13:3,19,23 (ptochos); Baruch 6:28); the duty of care for and of giving to the poor (Tobit 4:7 (ptochos); Ecclesiasticus 29:8 (tapeinos); 29:9 (penes); 34:20-22); of justice and kindness to such (Ecclesiasticus 4:1,5,8; 7:32; 10:23 (ptochos)); "poor" in the sense of pitiable occurs in 2Macc 4:47 (talaiporos), the Revised Version (British and American) "hapless."<P>IV. The Revised Version (British and American) Changes.<P>For "the poor of this world" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,5);">Jas 2:5</a>) the Revised Version (British and American) has "them that are poor as to the world"; for "The poor...shall trust in it" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,32);">Isa 14:32</a>), "In her shall the afflicted...take refuge"; instead of "Whereas also he that is born in his kingdom becometh poor" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',4,14);">Ec 4:14</a>), "Yea, even in his kingdom he was born poor"; "poor" for "humble" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',9,12);">Ps 9:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,12);">10:12</a>, margin "meek"), for "lowly" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',16,19);">Pr 16:19</a>, margin "meek").``185';
isbe[7031]='Poplar`pop\'-lar (libhneh, "whiteness"; sturakinos, "storax" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',30,37);">Ge 30:37</a>), leuke, "poplar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,13);">Ho 4:13</a>) (libhneh is so similar to the Arabic libna, the storax, that the latter certainly has the first claim to be the true translation)): "Jacob took him rods of fresh poplar," margin "storax tree" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',30,37);">Ge 30:37</a>). "They...burn incense upon the hills, under oaks and poplars and terebinths, because the shadow thereof is good" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,13);">Ho 4:13</a>). In the latter reference the conjunction of the shrub, storax, with two great trees like the oak and terebinth<74>even though they all grow in the mountains<6E>is strange. The storax cannot give a shade comparable with these trees. Had we other evidence of the storax being a sacred tree among the Hebrews, it might explain the difficulty.<P>The storax, Styrax officinalis (Natural Order Styraceae), is a very common shrub in Palestine which occasionally attains the height of 20 feet. The under surfaces of its oval leaves are covered with whitish hairs, and it has many beautiful pure-white flowers like orange blossoms<6D>hence, its name "whiteness."<P>The poplar, the traditional translation in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,13);">Ho 4:13</a>, flourishes in many parts of Palestine. The white poplar, Populus alba, Arabic Haur, is common everywhere; Euphratica occurs especially in the Jordan valley; the black poplar, P. nigra, and the Lombardy poplar, P. pyramidalis<69>probably an importation<6F>are both plentiful in the plain of Coele-Syria, around Damascus and along the river banks of Syria.``117';
isbe[7032]='Poratha`po-ra\'-tha, por\'-a-tha (pora-tha\'): One of the sons of Haman (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',9,8);">Es 9:8</a>). The etymology is uncertain; perhaps from the Persian purdata, "given by fate."``1';
isbe[7033]='Porch`porch: Chiefly in the Old Testament \'alam, used of the temples of Solomon and Ezekiel (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE">TEMPLE</a>); once micderon, a "vestibule," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',3,23);">Jud 3:23</a>. In the New Testament, the word occurs in connection with the high priest\'s palace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,71);">Mt 26:71</a>, pulon; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,68);">Mr 14:68</a>, proaulion), and as the rendering of stoa, a "portico," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,2);">Joh 5:2</a> (pool of Bethesda); and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,23);">Joh 10:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,11);">Ac 3:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,12);">5:12</a>.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PORCH,+PORTICO,+SOLOMON\'s">PORCH, PORTICO, SOLOMON\'S</a>`1';
isbe[7034]='Porch, Portico, Solomon\'s`por\'-ti-ko, (he stoa he kaloumene Solomontos): This important element of Herod\'s temple, preserving in its name a traditional connection with Solomon, is thrice referred to in the New Testament, namely, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,23);">Joh 10:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,11);">Ac 3:11</a>, "the porch that is called Solomon\'s"; and <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,12);">Ac 5:12</a>. In these passages the Greek word stoa is translated "porch" but in the Revised Version margin of <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,11);">Ac 3:11</a> more correctly "portico". In architecture a "porch" is strictly an exterior structure forming a covered approach to the entrance of a building; a "portico" is an ambulatory, consisting of a roof supported by columns placed at regular intervals<6C>a roofed colonnade. The portico bearing Solomon\'s name was that running along the eastern wall in the Court of the Gentiles of Herod\'s temple. It had double columns, while that on the south known as the Royal Portico had four rows (compare Josephus, Ant, XV, xi, 3; BJ, V, v, and see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TEMPLE,+HEROD\'S">TEMPLE, HEROD\'S</a>). The portico was the scene of Christ\'s teaching at the Feast of the Dedication (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,23);">Joh 10:23</a>), and was flocked to by the multitude after the healing of the lame man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,11);">Ac 3:11</a>). There the apostles preached and wrought other miracles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,12);">Ac 5:12</a>).``17';
isbe[7035]='Porcius Festus`por\'-shus.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FESTUS">FESTUS</a>`1';
isbe[7036]='Porcupine`por\'-ku-pin (qippodh (<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>) the King James Version "bittern," the Revised Version (British and American) "porcupine"; Septuagint echinos "hedgehog"; qippoz (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,15);">Isa 34:15</a>), the King James Version "great owl," the English Revised Version "arrow-snake," the American Standard Revised Version "dart-snake"; Septuagint echinos; compare Arabic qunfud, or qunfudh, "hedgehog" or "porcupine." qippodh, is referred to the root qaphadh, "to draw one\'s self together" or "to roll oneself up," while qipoz is referred to the root qaphaz, and the root qaphats, "to draw together in order to spring." The resemblance between all these words, including the Arabic is obvious, and it is to be noted that the Septuagint has echinos in all the places cited):<P>The Greek echinos is the hedgehog. The Arabic kunfudh is used in some localities for the hedgehog and in others for the porcupine, which is also called nis. The hedgehog is also called kibbabat-ush-shauk, or "ball of spines." These two animals are both found in Syria and Palestine, and, while both have spines, they are very different animals, though often confounded. The hedgehog, Erinaceus europeus, is one of the Insectivora. It eats not only insects but also snakes and other small animals, as well as fruits and roots. It is about 10 inches long, covered with short spines, and rolls itself into a ball when attacked. It inhabits the countries bordering the Mediterranean. The porcupine, Hystrix cristata, is a rodent, about 26 inches long, having long spines. It is herbivorous. It backs rapidly at its foes, thrusting its sharp spines into their flesh, not shooting its spines, as is often stated. It inhabits most of Europe and Asia. It is very different from the Canadian porcupine, Erethizon dorsatus, as well as from the tree porcupines of Mexico and Central and South America.<P>As to the rendering "bittern" for qippodh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',14,23);">Isa 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,15);">34:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zep\',2,14);">Ze 2:14</a>), while the etymology favors "hedgehog," the context favors a bird, especially in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,11);">Isa 34:11</a>, though it cannot be said that in any of the passages the context makes "hedgehog" an impossible rendering.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',34,15);">Isa 34:15</a>, for qippoz, most modern authorities (compare the Revised Version (British and American)) have some sort of serpent, referring to the Arabic root qafaz, "to spring." (See notes above on qaphaz and qaphats.) In this passage also the context is not unfavorable to a bird (compare the King James Version "great owl").`<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>`37';
isbe[7037]='Porphyry`por\'-fi-ri (in <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,6);">Es 1:6</a>, the Revised Version margin has "porphyry" (the King James Version margin "porphyre") for bahaT, English Versions of the Bible "red (marble)"; the Septuagint has smaragdtes, which was a green stone): Porphyry is an igneous rock containing distinct crystals of feldspar in a feldspathic matrix. It may be purple or of other colors, as green. "Porphyry" is from porphureos, "purple."``1';
isbe[7038]='Porpoise`por\'-pus (the Revised Version margin has "porpoise-skin" for \'or tachash, the Revised Version (British and American) "sealskin," the King James Version "badgers\' skins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,5);">Ex 25:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',26,14);">26:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',35,7,23);">35:7,23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',36,19);">36:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,34);">39:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,6,8,10,11,12,14,25);">Nu 4:6,8,10,11,12,14,25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,10);">Eze 16:10</a>)): The word denotes leather used in the furnishings of the tabernacle (for shoes in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',16,10);">Eze 16:10</a>), and was probably the skin of the dugong, Halichore dugong, Arabic tukhas, which is found in the Red Sea.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BADGER">BADGER</a>`1';
isbe[7039]='Port; Porter`port, por\'-ter: "Port" in the sense of "gate" (of a city or building) is obsolete in modern English, and even in the King James Version is found only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,13);">Ne 2:13</a>. "Porter," as "gate-keeper," however, is still in some use, but "porter" now (but never in the English Versions of the Bible) generally means a burden-carrier. In the Old Testament, except in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',18,26);">2Sa 18:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',7,10,11);">2Ki 7:10,11</a>, the porter (sho\'er) is a sacred officer of the temple or tabernacle, belonging to a particular family of the Levites, with a share in the sacred dues (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,5);">Ne 13:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,47);">12:47</a>). The "porters" are mentioned only in Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, and Chronicles has a special interest in them, relating that their duties were settled as far back as the time of David (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',26,\'1-19\');">1Ch 26:1-19</a>), and that the office extended further to the first settlement of Palestine and even to Moses\' day (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,\'17-26\');">1Ch 9:17-26</a>). The office was evidently one of some dignity, and the "chief-porters" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,26);">1Ch 9:26</a>) were important persons. For some inscrutable reason the Revised Version (British and American) renders sho\'er by "doorkeeper" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',15,1);">1Ch 15-26</a>, but not elsewhere.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DOORKEEPER">DOORKEEPER</a>`48';
isbe[7040]='Portion; Part`por\'-shun: As far as a distinction between these words is possible in English, it lies in the fact that a "portion" is a "part" about whose destiny something is implied (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',142,5);">Ps 142:5</a>, etc.). The Hebrew has no two synonyms similarly related, and in consequence the use of the words in English Versions of the Bible is settled either by rather arbitrary considerations (menah, is always "portion" in the Revised Version (British and American), but is "part" in the King James Version, <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,26);">Ex 29:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',7,33);">Le 7:33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',8,29);">8:29</a>) or by the context, irrespective of the Hebrew word used. So "part" and "portion" both represent dabhar, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',6,38);">1Ki 6:38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,47);">Ne 12:47</a>; peh, <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',13,8);">Zec 13:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,17);">De 21:17</a>; chebhel, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',17,5);">Jos 17:5</a> (Revised Version); <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',47,13);">Eze 47:13</a>; meros, <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,36);">Lu 11:36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',12,46);">12:46</a>. And in the vast majority of cases in the Old Testament both words represent simply some derivative of chalaq, normally the noun cheleq.``48';
isbe[7041]='Posidonius`pos-i-do\'-ni-us (Posidonios, al. Posidonios and Poseidon): One of the three envoys sent by the Syrian general Nicanor to treat with the Jews under Judas during his invasion of Judea, 161 BC (2Macc 14:19). In 1Macc 7:27ff, proposals are sent by Nicanor to Judas, but no envoys are named, and it is there asserted in contradiction to 2 Maccabees that Judas broke off the negotiation because of the treacherous designs of Nicanor.``1';
isbe[7042]='Possess; Possession`po-zes\', po-zesh\'-un: "Possess" in modern English means normally only "keep in one\'s possession." But in Elizabethan English it means also "take into possession," and, in fact, the word in the Old Testament always represents Hebrew verbs with the latter as their primary meaning (yarash, in nearly all cases, otherwise nachal, qanah, \'achaz; Aramaic chacan). Consequently, in almost every case "take possession of" could be substituted advantageously for "possess," but the Revised Version (British and American) has not thought the change worth carrying through. In the Apocrypha and New Testament, however, the distinction has been made, the King James Version\'s "possess" being retained for katecho, in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',7,30);">1Co 7:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,10);">2Co 6:10</a>, but the same translation for ktaomai, is changed into "take us for a possession (Judith 8:22), "get" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,12);">Lu 18:12</a>), "win" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,19);">Lu 21:19</a>), and "possess himself of" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,4);">1Th 4:4</a>, a very obscure passage). In the noun possession, on the other hand, no such ambiguity exists, and attention need be called only to the following passages. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',11,6);">De 11:6</a>, the King James Version has, "all the substance that was in their possession," Hebrew "all that subsisted at their feet," the Revised Version (British and American) "every living thing that followed them." the King James Version uses "possession" loosely in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,7);">Ac 28:7</a> for chorion, the Revised Version (British and American) "lands." peripoiesis, from peripoieo, "cause to remain over," "gain," rendered "God\'s own possession" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,14);">Eph 1:14</a> the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "possession") and <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,9);">1Pe 2:9</a> (the King James Version "peculiar," the King James Version margin "purchased"). "God\'s own" is a gloss but is implied in the context.``48';
isbe[7043]='Possession, Demoniacal`de-mo-ni\'-a-kal (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,24);">Mt 4:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,16);">8:16</a>, etc.).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DEMON,+DEMONIAC,+DEMONOLOGY">DEMON, DEMONIAC, DEMONOLOGY</a>`1';
isbe[7044]='Post`post (ruts, "to run," ratsim, "runners"): The "runners" formed the royal guard (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,17);">1Sa 22:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,27);">1Ki 14:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,4,13);">2Ki 11:4,13</a>; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GUARD">GUARD</a>). From them were chosen the couriers who carried royal letters and dispatches throughout the kingdom (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',30,6,10);">2Ch 30:6,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',3,13,15);">Es 3:13,15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,31);">Jer 51:31</a>). In the Persian service they were mounted on the swiftest horses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',8,10,14);">Es 8:10,14</a>; compare Xenophon, Cyrop. viii. 6, 17; Herodotus viii. 98). They had the right to command the service of either men or animals in order to expedite their progress (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,41);">Mt 5:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,21);">Mr 15:21</a>, "compel," "impress").<P>Used in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',9,25);">Job 9:25</a> and the King James Version The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 5:9</span> (aggelia, the Revised Version (British and American) "message") of the swift passage of time.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOUSE">HOUSE</a>`91';
isbe[7045]='Pot`pot: A term used as the translation of a number of Hebrew and Greek words whose fundamental meaning seems to describe them as intended for the most part to hold liquid or semi-liquid substances, but the pots of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,3);">Ex 27:3</a> are intended to hold ashes.<P>(1) cir, the most common word for "pot." It designates most frequently some household utensil, probably a pot or kettle for boiling. So <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',4,38);">2Ki 4:38</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',16,3);">Ex 16:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',1,13);">Jer 1:13</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',11,3,7,11);">Eze 11:3,7,11</a>, "caldron"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',24,3,6);">24:3,6</A> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',3,3);">Mic 3:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',14,21);">Zec 14:21</a>, etc. It is also used as the name of some vessel of the sanctuary. So <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,3);">Ex 27:3</a>, where the context shows it was intended to hold ashes; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',7,45);">1Ki 7:45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',4,16);">2Ch 4:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,14);">2Ki 25:14</a>. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',60,8);">Ps 60:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',108,9);">108:9</a>, it is a pot for washing.<P>(2) parur (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,8);">Nu 11:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,14);">1Sa 2:14</a>), a vessel for boiling; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,19);">Jud 6:19</a>, a vessel for holding broth.<P>(3) dudh, rendered "pot" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',81,6);">Ps 81:6</a> in the King James Version, "basket" in the Revised Version (British and American); "pot" both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,20);">Job 41:20</a>.<P>(4) tsintseneth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',16,33);">Ex 16:33</a>), the jar in which the manna was placed. This jar or pot is mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,4);">Heb 9:4</a> under the name stamnos.<P>(5) \'acon (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',4,2);">2Ki 4:2</a>), some kind of jar for holding oil.<P>(6) xestes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,4);">Mr 7:4</a>), some kind of household utensil.<P>Mention may also be made of the word rendered "pot" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,28);">Le 6:28</a> the King James Version, where the Revised Version (British and American) renders more correctly by the general term "vessel"; for the King James Version "pots" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',68,13);">Ps 68:13</a>) the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "sheepfolds." The root is uncertain. Those who render "sheepfolds" connect with the related root in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,14);">Ge 49:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,16);">Jud 5:16</a>. Others render "fireplaces" or "ash heaps." See also "range for pots," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',11,35);">Le 11:35</a>; "pots," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',35,5);">Jer 35:5</a> the King James Version, correctly "bowls" the Revised Version (British and American); "refining pots" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',17,3);">Pr 17:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',27,21);">27:21</a>.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FOOD">FOOD</a>`13';
isbe[7046]='Potentate`po\'-ten-tat (dunastes, "mighty one," from dunamai, "to be able"): A person who possesses great power and authority. Only in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,15);">1Ti 6:15</a>, "the blessed and only Potentate" (= God). The same Greek word is used of Zeus in Sophocles (Ant. 608), and of God in Apocrypha (e.g. Sirach 46:5; 2Macc 15:3,13). It is used of men in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,52);">Lu 1:52</a> (the King James Version "the mighty," the Revised Version (British and American) "princes") and <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',8,27);">Ac 8:27</a> ("of great authority").``1';
isbe[7047]='Poti-Phera`po-tif\'-e-ra (potiphera\'; Egyptian Padipara, "the (one) given of the sun-god"; compare Hebrew Nathaniel, "the gift of God," <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,45,50);">Ge 41:45,50</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',46,20);">46:20</a>): There is no certain evidence from Egypt that this name was in existence until the XXIInd Dynasty, about 950 BC. But names of the Hyksos period, and, indeed, any kind of Hyksos inscriptions, are so scarce on account of the destruction of Hyksos monuments by the Egyptians of later times that the absence of such names is really no evidence on the subject. The fact that this name has not been discovered earlier than 950 BC does not give any warrant for the claim that the narrative is of a late date.``93';
isbe[7048]='Potiphar`pot\'-i-far (potiphar; compare Egyptian Potiphera (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',39,1);">Ge 39:1</a>f)): A high Egyptian official who became the master of Joseph. It is particularly mentioned that he was an Egyptian, i.e. one of the native Egyptian officials at the Hyksos court.``1';
isbe[7049]='Potsherd`pot\'-shurd (cheres): A piece of earthenware (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',2,8);">Job 2:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,15);">Ps 22:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',45,9);">Isa 45:9</a>). the Revised Version (British and American) renders the word in <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',26,23);">Pr 26:23</a>, "an earthen vessel," and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,30);">Job 41:30</a> substitutes "sharp potsherds" for "sharp stones." Sirach 22:7 refers to the art of "gluing a potsherd (ostrakon) together."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HARSITH">HARSITH</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=OSTRACA">OSTRACA</a>`1';
isbe[7050]='Potsherd Gate`(<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,2);">Jer 19:2</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HARSITH">HARSITH</a>`1';
isbe[7051]='Pottage`pot\'-aj.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FOOD">FOOD</a>`1';
isbe[7052]='Potter\'s Field`pot\'-erz.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ACELDAMA">ACELDAMA</a>`1';
isbe[7053]='Potter; Pottery`pot\'-er, pot\'-er-i:<P>1. Historical Development<P>2. Forms<P>3. Methods of Production<P>4. Uses<P>5. Biblical Terms<P>6. Archaeological Significance<P>LITERATURE<hr /><P>1. Historical Development:<P>(1) Prehistoric.<P>The making of pottery ranks among the very oldest of the crafts. On the rocky plateaus of Upper Egypt, overlooking the Nile valley, are found the polished red earthenware pots of the prehistoric Egyptians. These are buried in shallow oval graves along with the cramped-up bodies of the dead and their chipped flint weapons and tools. These jars are the oldest examples of the potter\'s art. It is inconceivable that in the country of Babel, Egypt\'s great rival in civilization, the ceramic arts were less developed at the same period, but the difference in the nature of the country where the first Mesopotamian settlement probably existed makes it unlikely that relics of the prehistoric dwellers of that country will ever be recovered from under the debris of demolished cities and the underlying deposits of clay and silt.<P>(2) Babylonia.<P>The oldest examples of Babylonian ceramics date from the historical period, and consist of baked clay record tablets, bricks, drainage pipes, household shrines, as well as vessels for holding liquids, fruits and other stores. (See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Chaldea and Assyria, I, figures 159,160,II, figures 163, 168.) Examples of pottery of this early period are shown in the accompanying figures. By the 9th to the 7th century BC the shaping of vessels of clay had become well developed. Fragments of pottery bearing the name of Esarhaddon establish the above dates.<P>(3) Egypt.<P>With the close of the neolithic period in Egypt and the beginning of the historical or dynastic period (4500-4000 BC) there was a decline in the pottery art. The workmanship and forms both became bad, and not until the IVth Dynasty was there any improvement. In the meantime the process of glazing had been discovered and the art of making beautiful glazed faience became one of the most noted of the ancient Egyptian crafts. The potter\'s wheel too was probably an invention of this date.<P>(4) Palestine.<P>The making of pottery in the land which later became the home of the children of Israel began long before this people possessed the land and even before the Phoenicians of the coast cities had extended their trade inland and brought the earthenware vessels of the Tyrian or Sidonian potters. As in Egypt and Babylonia, the first examples were hand-made without the aid of the wheel.<P>It is probable that Jewish potters learned their art from the Phoenicians. They at least copied Phoenician and Mycenaean forms. During their wanderings the children of Israel were not likely to make much use of earthenware vessels, any more than the Arabs do today. Skins, gourds, wooden and metal vessels were less easily broken.<P>To illustrate this, a party, of which the writer was a member, took on a desert trip the earthenware water jars specially made for travel, preferring them to the skin bottles such as the Arab guides carried, for the bottles taint the water. At the end of six days only one out of eight earthenware jars was left. One accident or another had broken all the others.<P>When the Israelites became settled in their new surroundings they were probably not slow in adopting earthenware vessels, because of their advantages, and their pottery gradually developed distinctive though decadent types known as Jewish.<P>Toward the close of the Hebrew monarchy the pottery of the land again showed the effect of outside influences. The red and black figured ware of the Greeks was introduced, and still later the less artistic Roman types, and following these by several centuries came the crude glazed vessels of the Arabic or Saracenic period<6F>forms which still persist.<P>2. Forms:<P>It is not within the limits of this article to describe in detail the characteristics of the pottery of the various periods. The accompanying illustrations taken from photographs of pottery in the Archaeological Museum of the Syrian Protestant College, Beirut, give a general idea of the forms. Any attempt at classification of Palestinian pottery must be considered more or less provisional, due to the uncertainty of origin of many forms. The classification of pre-Roman pottery here used is that adopted by Bliss and Macalister and based upon Dr. Petrie\'s studies.<P>(1) Early Pre-Israelite, Called also "Amorite" (before 1500 BC).<P>Most of the vessels of this period are handmade and often irregular in shape. A coarse clay, turning red or black when burned, characterizes many specimens. Some are brick red. Specimens with a polished or burnished surface are also found.<P>(2) Late Pre-Israelite or Phoenician (1500-1000 BC).<P>From this period on, the pottery is all wheel-turned. The clay is of a finer quality and burned to a brown or red. The ware is thin and light. Water jars with pointed instead of fiat bases appear. Some are decorated with bands or lines of different colored meshes. Cypriote ware with its incised decorations was a like development of the period.<P>(3) Jewish (1000-300 BC).<P>Foreign influence is lost. The types which survive degenerate. New forms are introduced. Ordinary coarse clay burning red is used. Cooking pots are most characteristic. Many examples bear Hebrew stamps, the exact meaning of which is uncertain.<P>(4) Seleucidan.<P>Foreign influence again appears. Greek and other types are imported and copied. Ribbed surfaces are introduced. The old type of burnishing disappears.<P>(5) Roman and Saracenic.<P>Degenerate forms persisting till the present time.<P>(6) Present-day Pottery.<P>3. Methods of Production:<P>The clay as found in the ground is not suitable for use. It is dug out and brought to the vicinity of the pottery (the "potter\'s field," <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,7);">Mt 27:7</a>) and allowed to weather for weeks. The dry material is then dumped into a cement-lined tank or wooden trough and covered with water. When the lumps have softened they are stirred in the water until all have disintegrated and a thin slimy mud or "slip" has been formed. In coast cities-the potteries are all near the sea, as the sea-water is considered better for the "slipping" process. The slip is drawn off into settling tanks. All stones and lumps remain behind. When the clay has settled, the water is drawn off and the plastic material is worked by treading with the feet (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',41,25);">Isa 41:25</a>; <span class="noTag">The Wisdom of Solomon 15:7</span>). The clay used on the Syrian coast is usually a mixture of several earths, which the potters have learned by experience gives the right consistency. The prepared clay is finally packed away and allowed to stand another six months before using, during which time the quality, especially the plasticity, is believed to improve.<P>Before the invention of the potter\'s wheel the clay was shaped into vessels by hand. In all of the countries previously mentioned the specimens representing the oldest work are all hand-made. Chopped straw was usually added to the clay of these early specimens. This material is omitted in the wheel-shaped objects. In a Mt. Lebanon village which is noted for its pottery the jars are still made by hand. Throughout the country the clay stoves are shaped by hand out of clay mixed with straw.<P>The shaping of vessels is now done on wheels, the use of which dates back to earliest history. Probably the Egyptians were the first to use such a machine (IVth Dynasty). In their original form they were stone disks arranged to be turned by hand on a vertical axis. The wheel stood only a few inches above the ground, and the potter sat or squatted down on the ground before it as he shaped his object (see Wilkinson, Ancient Egypt, II, figure 397). The wheels used in Palestine and Syria today probably differ in no respect from those used in the potter\'s house visited by Jeremiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',18,\'1-6\');">Jer 18:1-6</a>). The wheel or, to be more exact, wheels (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',18,3);">Jer 18:3</a>) are fitted on a square wooden or iron shaft about 3 ft. long. The lower disk is about 20 inches in diameter, and the upper one 8 inches or 12 inches. The lower end of the shaft is pointed and fits into a stone socket or bearing in which it rotates. A second bearing just below the upper disk is so arranged that the shaft inclines slightly away from the potter. The potter leans against a slanting seat, bracing himself with one foot so that he will not slide off, and with the sole of his other foot he kicks the upper face of the lower wheel, thus making the whole machine rotate. The lower wheel is often of stone to give greater momentum. With a marvelous dexterity, which a novice tries in vain to imitate, he gives the pieces of clay any shape he desires.<P>After the vessel is shaped it is dried and finally fired in a furnace or kiln. The ancient Egyptian kiln was much smaller than the one used today (Wilkhinson, II, 192). Most of the kilns are of the crudest form of the "up-draught" variety, i.e. a large chamber with perforated bottom and a fireplace beneath. The fire passes up through the holes, around the jars packed in tiers in the chamber, and goes out at the top. An interesting survival of an early Greek form is still used in Rachiyet-el-Fakhar in Syria. In this same village the potters also use the lead dross, which comes from the parting of silver, for glazing their jars (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',26,23);">Pr 26:23</a>). In firing pottery there are always some jars which come out imperfect. In unpacking the kiln and storing the product others get broken. As a consequence the ground in the vicinity of a pottery is always strewn with <A href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POTSHERD">Potsherd</a>potsherds (see also separate article). The ancient potteries can frequently be located by these sherds. The potter\'s field mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,7,10);">Mt 27:7,10</a> was probably a field near a pottery strewn with potsherds, thus making it useless for cultivation although useful to the potter as a place in which to weather his clay or to dry his pots before firing.<P>4. Uses:<P>Pottery was used in ancient times for storing liquids, such as wine or oil, fruits, grains, etc. The blackened bottoms of pots of the Jewish period show that they were used for cooking. Earthenware dishes were also used for boiling clothes. Every one of these uses still continues. To one living in Bible lands today it seems inconceivable that the Hebrews did not readily adopt, as some writers disclaim, the porous earthen water jars which they found already in use in their new country. Such jars were used for carrying live coals to start a fire, and not only for drawing water, as they are today, but for cooling it (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>). The evaporation of the water which oozes through the porous material cools down the contents of a jar, whereas a metal or leathern vessel would leave it tepid or tainted. They were also used for holding shoemaker\'s glue or wax; for filling up the cracks of a wall before plastering; ground up they are used as sand in mortar.<P>5. Biblical Terms:<P>Only a few of the Hebrew words for vessels of different sorts, which in all probability were made of pottery, have been translated by terms which indicate that fact (For cheres, and yatsar, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EARTHEN+VESSELS">EARTHEN VESSELS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=OSTRACA">OSTRACA</a>.) kadh, is translated "pitcher" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',24,14);">Ge 24:14</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',7,16);">Jud 7:16</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',12,6);">Ec 12:6</a> (compare keramion, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,13);">Mr 14:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,10);">Lu 22:10</a>); "jar" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',17,12);">1Ki 17:12</a> (compare hudria, <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',4,28);">Joh 4:28</a>). The kadh corresponded in size and use to the Arabic jarrah (compare English derivative "jar"). The jarrah is used for drawing and storing water and less frequently for holding other liquids or solids. It is used as an proximate standard of measure. For example, a man estimates the capacity of a cistern in jirar (plural of jarrah). baqbuq, "a bottle," usually leathern, but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,1,10);">Jer 19:1,10</a> of pottery. This may have been like the Arabic ibriq, which causes a gurgling sound when liquid is turned from it. Baqbuq is rendered "cruse" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,3);">1Ki 14:3</a>.<P>keli "vessel," was of wood, metal or earthen-ware in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,28);">Le 6:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,9);">Ps 2:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',31,12);">31:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,11);">Jer 19:11</a>, etc.; compare ostrakinos, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',4,7);">2Co 4:7</a>, etc.<P>pakh, is translated "vial" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',10,1);">1Sa 10:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',9,1);">2Ki 9:1</a>; see so-called pilgrim bottles.<P>koc also qasah "cup" or "bowl," translated "cup" in many passages, like Arabic ka\'s, which was formerly used for drinking instead of modern cups.<P>gabhia, translated "bowl" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',35,5);">Jer 35:5</a>.<P>parur, translated "pots" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,8);">Nu 11:8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,19);">Jud 6:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,14);">1Sa 2:14</a>; compare chutra, which is similar to Arabic.<P>kidr, commonly used for cooking today.<p>\'etsebh, "pot," <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',22,28);">Jer 22:28</a> the American Revised Version margin.<P>6. Archaeological Significance:<P>The chemical changes wrought in clay by weathering and firing render it practically indestructible when exposed to the weather and to the action of moisture and the gaseous and solid compounds found in the soil. When the sun-baked brick walls of a Palestinian city crumbled, they buried, often intact, the earthenware vessels of the period. In the course of time, perhaps after decades or centuries, another city was built on the debris of the former. The brick walls required no digging for foundations, and so the substrata were left undisturbed. After long periods of time the destruction, by conquering armies or by neglect, of succeeding cities, produced mounds rising above the surrounding country, sometimes to a height of 60 or 100 ft. A typical example of such a mound is Tell el-Chesy (? Lachish). Dr. Flinders Petrie, as a result of the study of the various strata of this mound, has formed the basis of a classification of Palestinian pottery (see 2, above). With a knowledge of the forms of pottery of each period, the excavator has a guide, though not infallible, to the date of the ruins he finds.<P>Figurative: The shaping of clay into pottery typified the molding of the characters of individuals or nations by a master mind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',18,\'1-6\');">Jer 18:1-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,16);">Isa 29:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',45,9);">45:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',64,8);">64:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,20);">Ro 9:20</a>); commonplace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',4,2);">La 4:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',2,20);">2Ti 2:20</a>); frailness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,9);">Ps 2:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',30,14);">Isa 30:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,11);">Jer 19:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',2,41);">Da 2:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',4,7);">2Co 4:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,27);">Re 2:27</a>).<P>LITERATURE.<P>Publications of PEF, especially Bliss and Macalister, Excavations in Palestine; Excavations of Gezer; Bliss, A Mound of Many Cities; Flinders Petrie, Tell el-Ghesy; Bliss and Dickie, Excavations at Jerusalem; Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art (i) in Chaldea and Assyria, (ii) Sardinia and Judea, (iii) Cyprus and Phoenicia, (iv) Egypt; King and Hall, Egypt and Western Asia in Light of Modern Discoveries; S. Birch, History of Ancient Pottery; Wilkinson, The Ancient Egyptians; PEFQ; EB; HDB.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CRAFTS">CRAFTS</a>`133';
isbe[7054]='Pound`pound (maneh; mna, litra; Latin, libra): Pound does not correctly represent the Hebrew maneh, which was more than a pound (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MANEH">MANEH</a>). The litra of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,3);">Joh 12:3</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,39);">19:39</a> is the Roman pound (libra) of 4,950 grains, which is less than a pound troy, being about 10 1/3 oz. In a monetary sense (its use in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',19,\'13-25\');">Lu 19:13-25</a>) it is the mna, or maneh, which was either of silver or gold, the former, which is probably the one referred to by Luke, being equal to 6,17 British pounds, or about $33 (in 1915); the latter 102,10 British pounds or $510 (in 1915).<P>Figurative: "Pound," like "talent," is used in the New Testament for intellectual gifts and spiritual endowments, as in the passage given above.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WEIGHTS+AND+MEASURES">WEIGHTS AND MEASURES</a>`138';
isbe[7055]='Poverty`pov\'-er-ti:<P>1. Old Testament References:<P>This word, found but once in the Old Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',45,11);">Ge 45:11</a>) outside of the Book of Proverbs in which it occurs 11 times (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',6,11);">6:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',10,15);">10:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',11,24);">11:24</A> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',13,18);">13:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',20,13);">20:13</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,21);">23:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',24,34);">24:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,19,22);">28:19,22</A> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',30,8);">30:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,7);">31:7</a>), is a translation of yiwaresh, "to be poor," "to come to poverty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',45,11);">Ge 45:11</a>). Four different Hebrew words are used in the 11 references in Prov, all bearing the idea of being in need of the necessities of life, although a distinction is made between being in want and being in extreme want. <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',18,23);">Pr 18:23</a> well illustrates the general meaning of "poverty" as found in this book: "The poor (rush, "to be impoverished," "destitute") useth entreaties; but the rich answereth roughly."<P>2. New Testament References<P>"Poverty" occurs 3 times in the New Testament (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,2,9);">2Co 8:2,9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',2,9);">Re 2:9</a>) and is the translation of ptocheia, "to be reduced to a state of beggary or pauperism."<P>The teaching of the Bible on this subject would, however, be incomplete unless all the references to the "poor" were considered in this connection. Indeed the word for "poverty" has its root in the word for "poor" (ptochos; \'ani, or dal).<P>3. Two Degrees of Poverty:<P>At least two degrees of poverty are recognized. The Old Testament does not distinguish between them as clearly as does the New Testament. The New Testament, for example, by its use of two words for "poor" sets forth this distinction. In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,9);">2Co 9:9</a>, "he hath given to the poor," the word used is penes, which does not indicate extreme poverty, but simply a condition of living from hand to mouth, a bare and scant livelihood, such as that made by the widow who cast her two mites into the treasury (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',21,2);">Lu 21:2</a>); while in such passages as <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,10);">2Co 6:10</a>: "As poor, yet making many rich," and <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,20);">Lu 6:20</a>: "Blessed are ye poor" (ptochoi, a condition is indicated of abject beggary, pauperism, such as that in which we find Lazarus who was laid at the gate of the rich man\'s palace, begging even the crumbs which fell from the table of the rich man (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',16,20,21);">Lu 16:20,21</a>). It was into this latter condition that Christ voluntarily entered for our sakes: "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor (a mendicant, a beggar), that ye through his poverty might become rich" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,9);">2Co 8:9</a>). Between 30 and 40 times in the New Testament this latter word is used.<P>4. Causes of Poverty:<P>The causes of poverty are failure of harvest and poor crops (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',5,\'1-3\');">Ne 5:1-3</a>); devastation caused by enemies sweeping through the land; the oppression of the people by their own rulers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',5,8);">Isa 5:8</a>); excessive interest, usury (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',5,\'1-5\');">Ne 5:1-5</a>); persecution because of the faith (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',6,\'1-\');">2Co 6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,\'1-\');">8</a>). Widows and orphans by reason of their desolate condition were in a special sense subject to poverty. Gluttony brings poverty (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',23,21);">Pr 23:21</a>), as does indolence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,19);">Pr 28:19</a>).<P>God commanded His people to care for the poor. The exhortations to relieve poverty are numerous, especially in the Pentateuch. Those in poverty must be treated with kindness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,\'7-11\');">De 15:7-11</a>); must be allowed to glean in the vineyards (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',19,10);">Le 19:10</a>); to reap the harvest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',23,22);">Le 23:22</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rth\',2,\'14-16\');">Ru 2:14-16</a>); must not be neglected (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,27);">Pr 28:27</a>); nor dealt with harshly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',8,\'4-6\');">Am 8:4-6</a>); must be treated as equal before God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',22,2);">Pr 22:2</a>); are to share in our hospitality (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',14,13,21);">Lu 14:13,21</a>). Indeed, the truth or falsity of a man\'s religion is to be tested, in some sense at least, by his relation to those in need (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',1,27);">Jas 1:27</a>). The year of Jubilee was intended to be of great benefit to the poor by restoring to them any possessions which they, by reason of their poverty, had been compelled to deed over to their creditors (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',25,\'25-54\');">Le 25:25-54</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',15,\'12-15\');">De 15:12-15</a>). God required certain tithes from His people which were to be devoted to the helping of the poor and needy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',14,28);">De 14:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,12,13);">26:12,13</a>). So in the New Testament the apostles lay special emphasis upon remembering the poor in the matter of offerings. Paul, especially, inculcated this duty upon the churches which he had rounded (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',15,26);">Ro 15:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',2,10);">Ga 2:10</a>). The attitude of the early Christian church toward its poor is amply illustrated in that first attempt at communism in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'1-\');">Ac 2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,\'1-\');">4</a>. James, in his Epistle, stingingly reminds his readers of the fact that they had grossly neglected the important matter of caring for the poor (chapter <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>). Indeed, so strong is he in his plea for the care of the poor that he claims that the man who willfully neglects the needy thereby proves that the love of God has no place in his heart, and that he has consequently no real faith in God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',2,\'14-26\');">2:14-26</a>). Christians are exhorted to abound in the grace of hospitality, which, of course, is nothing less than kindness to those in need (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,13);">Ro 12:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',6,18);">1Ti 6:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,17);">1Joh 3:17</a>).<P>The happiest mother and the noblest and holiest son that ever lived were among the poor. Jesus was born of poor parents, and had not where to lay His head (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,20);">Mt 8:20</a>), no money with which to pay tribute (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,27);">Mt 17:27</a>), no home to call His own (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',7,53);">Joh 7:53</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',8,1);">Joh 8:1</a>), and was buried in a borrowed grave (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,\'57-61\');">Mt 27:57-61</a>).<P>Figurative: Of course there is also a spiritual poverty indicated by the use of this word<72>a poverty in spiritual things: "Blessed are the poor in spirit." By this is meant, Blessed are they who feel that they have no self-righteousness, no worth of their own to present to Christ as a ground of their salvation, who feel their utter bankruptcy of spirit, who say "Nothing in my hand I bring." It is to this state of spirit that Christ refers in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',3,17);">Re 3:17</a>: "Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POOR">POOR</a>`53';
isbe[7056]='Powders`pou\'-derz (\'abheqath rokhel): The "powders of the merchant" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',3,6);">So 3:6</a> were probably perfumes, as they are associated with myrrh and frankincense in the account of the festal procession of the litter of Solomon. They may have been some sweet-scented wood in powder, or else some form of incense.``1';
isbe[7057]='Power`pou\'-er: This word, indicative of might, strength, force, is used in the Old Testament to render very many Hebrew terms, the translation in numerous instances being varied in the Revised Version (British and American) to words like "valor," "rule," "strength," "might," "dominion." The principal words for "power" in the New Testament are dunamis, and exousia. In the latter case the Revised Version (British and American) frequently changes to "authority" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,15);">Mr 3:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,7);">6:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,21);">Eph 1:21</a>, etc.) or "right" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,21);">Ro 9:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,6);">1Co 9:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Th\',3,9);">2Th 3:9</a>, etc.). Power is attributed preeminently to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',29,11);">1Ch 29:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',26,14);">Job 26:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',66,7);">Ps 66:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',145,11);">145:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',7,12);">Re 7:12</a>, etc.). On this attribute of power of God, see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=OMNIPOTENCE">OMNIPOTENCE</a>. The supreme manifestation of the power, as of the wisdom and love of God, is in redemption (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',1,18,24);">1Co 1:18,24</a>). The preaching of the gospel is accompanied by the power of the Holy Spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,4);">1Co 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,5);">1Th 1:5</a>, etc.). Miracles, as "mighty works," are denoted by the term "powers" (so <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,21,23);">Mt 11:21,23</a> the Revised Version margin, etc.). The end of all time\'s developments is that God takes to Him His great power and reigns (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',11,17);">Re 11:17</a>).``132';
isbe[7058]='Power of Keys``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=KEYS,+POWER+OF+THE">KEYS, POWER OF THE</a>`1';
isbe[7059]='Praetorian Guard`pre-to\'-ri-an: "My bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other, places" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,13);">Php 1:13</a> the King James Version). This verse is translated in the Revised Version (British and American), "My bonds became manifest in Christ throughout the whole praetorian guard, and to all the rest," and is noteworthy.<P>1. Pretorium in Philippians<6E>Usual View:<P>It has been usual to connect the words, "the soldier that guarded him," <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',28,16);">Ac 28:16</a>, with this statement in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,13);">Php 1:13</a>, that the apostle\'s bonds were manifest in the whole praetorium, and to understand that the former was the cause of the latter; that the result of Paul\'s making the gospel known in his own hired house to those soldiers to one of whom he was chained by the wrist day and night, was that it became known in all the praetorian regiment that his bonds were endured for Christ\'s sake, that it was for conscience\' sake that he was suffering wrongfully, that he was no wrongdoer but a prisoner of Jesus Christ. In this way the gospel would spread through the whole of the praetorian guard in that regiment\'s headquarters which were situated in a permanent camp established by Tiberius in Rome, outside the Colline Gate, at the northeast of the city. This verse would also mean that the gospel had been proclaimed in the same way to those members of the praetorian guard who were on duty as the bodyguard of the emperor and who were lodged in one of the buildings which adjoined the emperor\'s palace on the Palatine Hill.<P>2. Lightfoot on Interpretations:<P>Thus, Lightfoot, discussing the meaning of the phrase "in the whole praetorium" (Commentary on Philippians, 99ff), reviews the different interpretations which have been given of the word, and shows<P>(1) that no instance is to be found of its signifying Nero\'s palace on the Palatine Hill;<P>(2) that there is no authority for the interpretation which would make it mean the praenterinn barracks on the Palatine;<P>(3) that neither is there any authority for making it mean the praetorian camp outside the walls of Rome. In Lightfoot\'s words (op. cit., 101), "All attempts to give a local sense to \'praetorium\' thus fail for want of evidence." Lightfoot accordingly defends the interpretation, "the praetorian guard," and the Revised Version (British and American), above cited, follows him in this.<P>3. View of Mommsen and Ramsay:<P>One of the meanings of "praetorium" is a council of war, the officers who met in the general\'s tent (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRAETORIUM">PRAETORIUM</a>). Lightfoot is very decided in interpreting "praetorium" to mean the praetorian regiment, the imperial guards, and he adds, "in this sense and in this alone can it be safely affirmed that the apostle would hear the word praetorium used daily," and that this sense is in all respects appropriate. But the other meaning, though not appropriate here, namely, a council of war composed of the officers and their general, is much nearer to that which is now accepted by such authorities as Mommsen and Sir W.M. Ramsay, who hold that in this passage "praetorium" means a council, not of war, however, but the council of judgment, the emperor\'s court of appeal in which he was assisted by his legal assessors (see Mommsen, Berlin Akad. Sitzungsber.,1895,501; Ramsay, Paul the Traveler and the Rein Citizen, 357; Workman, Persecution in the Early Church, 35). Over this court there presided the emperor or his delegate, the prefect of the praetorian guard, and associated with him were twenty assessors selected from the senators. Formerly their votes were taken by ballot, but Nero preferred to receive from each a written opinion and on the next day to deliver his judgment in person. Such, it is now believed, is the praetorium to which Paul refers.<P>The meaning, therefore, of the words, "My bonds in Christ are manifest in the whole praetorium," will be that when Paul wrote the Epistle to the Philippians his first Roman trial was already so far advanced that he had been able to impress upon his judges, the twenty assessors and their president, the fact that he was no evildoer, but that the sole cause of his imprisonment was his loyalty to Christ. It was manifest to all the members of the emperor\'s court of appeal that Paul was enduring his long imprisonment, suffering wrongfully, but only for the sake of Jesus Christ.<P>4. Bearing on Paul\'s Captivity and Trial:<P>The important bearing will be seen which this signification of "praetorium" in this passage has on the question of the order in which Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon<6F>the epistles of Paul\'s captivity in Rome<6D>were written. On subjective evidence Lightfoot concludes that Philippians is the earliest of them, basing his opinion largely on the resemblance which exists in many particulars between the thoughts and expressions in Philippians and in the Epistle to the Romans, making Philippians, as it were, a connecting link between Paul\'s earlier and his later epistles. See Lightfoot, Philipplans, 42f; he writes: "These resemblances suggest as early a date for the Epistle to the Philippians as circumstances will allow," earlier, that is, than Colossians and Ephesians. But Lightfoot\'s argument is set aside by the new light which has been thrown upon the real meaning of "praetorium." Sir W.M. Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveler, 357) writes: "The trial seems to have occurred toward the end of AD 61. Its earliest stages were over before Paul wrote to the Philipplans, for he says, \'The things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the progress of the Good News; so that my bonds became manifest in Christ in the whole Pretorium, and to all the rest; and that most of the Brethren in the Lord, being confident in my bonds, are more abundantly bold to speak the word of God without fear.\' This passage has been generally misconceived and connected with the period of imprisonment; and here again we are indebted to Mommsen for the proper interpretation. The Praetorum is the whole body of persons connected with the sitting in judgment, the supreme Imperial Court, doubtless in this case the Prefect or both Prefects of the Praetorian Guard, representing the emperor in his capacity as the fountain of justice, together with the assessors and high officers of the court. The expression of the chapter as a whole shows that the trial is partly finished, and the issue as yet is so favorable that the Brethren are emboldened by the success of Paul\'s courageous and freespoken defense and the strong impression which he evidently produced on the court; but he himself, being entirely occupied with the trial, is for the moment prevented from preaching as he had been doing when he wrote to the Colossians and the Asian churches generally."<P>5. Bearing on Date of Epistle:<P>Thus, the correct meaning of "praetorium" enables us to fix the date of the Epistle to the Philippians as having been written close to the end of Paul\'s first Roman imprisonment. That this inference is correct is confirmed by various other facts, such as his promise to visit that city, and the fact that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,20);">Php 2:20</a>f the King James Version he says regarding Timothy, "I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ\'s." We could not conceive of Paul writing like this if Mark, Tychicus, Aristarchus, and especially if Luke had been with him then, and yet we know (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',4,7,10,14);">Col 4:7,10,14</a>) that each and all of these companions of the apostle were with him in Rome when he wrote the Epistle to the Colossians. They had evidently, along with others, been sent on missions to Asia or other places, so that Paul now had only Timothy "likeminded" when he wrote to Philippi.<P>All these facts and considerations confirm us in accepting the signification of "praetorium" as the emperor\'s supreme court of appeal, before which Paul when he wrote the Epistle to the Philippians had so conducted his defense as to produce a most favorable impression, from which he inferred that he might soon be liberated from imprisonment. And his liberation, as the event proved, soon followed.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PAUL,+THE+APOSTLE">PAUL, THE APOSTLE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PHILIPPIANS,+THE+EPISTLE+TO+THE">PHILIPPIANS, THE EPISTLE TO THE</a>`155';
isbe[7060]='Praetorium`pre-to\'-ri-um praitorion, <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,27);">Mt 27:27</a> (the King James Version "common hall"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,16);">Mr 15:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,28,33);">Joh 18:28,33</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,9);">19:9</a> (in all margins "palace," and in the last three the King James Version "judgment hall"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,35);">Ac 23:35</a>, (Herod\'s) "palace," margin "Praetorium," the King James Version "judgment hall"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,13);">Php 1:13</a>, "praetorian guard" (margin "Greek \'in the whole Pretorium,\' " the King James Version "palace," margin "Caesar\'s court"):<P>1. Governor\'s Official Residence:<P>The Pretorium was originally the headquarters of a Roman camp, but in the provinces the name became attached to the governor\'s official residence. In order to provide residences for their provincial governors, the Romans were accustomed to seize and appropriate the palaces which were formerly the homes of the princes or kings in conquered countries. Such a residence might sometimes be in a royal palace, as was probably the case in Caesarea, where the procurator used Herod\'s palace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,35);">Ac 23:35</a>).<P>2. In Gospels Herod\'s Palace:<P>The Pretorium where Jesus was brought to trial has been traditionally located in the neighborhood of the present Turkish barracks where once stood the Antonia and where was stationed a large garrison (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',21,\'32-35\');">Ac 21:32-35</a>), but the statements of Josephus make it almost certain that the headquarters of the procurator were at Herod\'s palace. This was a building whose magnificence Josephus can hardly sufficiently appraise (Wars, I, xxi, 1; V, iv, 4). It was in this palace that "Florus, the procurator took up his quarters, and having placed his tribunal in front of it, held his sessions and the chief priests, influential persons and notables of the city appeared before the tribunal" (Wars II, xiv, 8). Later on, "Florus...brought such as were with him out of the king\'s palace, and would have compelled them to get as far as the citadel (Antonia); but his attempt failed" (II, xv, 5). The word translated "palace" here is aule, the same word as is translated "court" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,16);">Mr 15:16</a>, "the soldiers led him away within the court (aule), which is the Pretorium." There is no need to suppose that Herod Antipas was in the same palace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,4);">Lu 23:4</a>); it is more probable he went to the palace of the Hasmoneans which lay lower down on the eastern slope of this southwest hill, where at a later time Josephus expressly states that Herod Agrippa II and his sister Bernice were living (Wars, II, xvi, 3).<P>The palace of Herod occupied the highest part of the southwest hill near the northwest angle of the ancient city, now traditionally called Zion, and the actual site of the Pretorium cannot have been far removed from the Turkish barracks near the so-called "Tower of David." It is interesting to note that the two stations of the Turkish garrison of Jerusalem today occupy the same spots as did the Roman garrison of Christ\'s time. It is needless to point out how greatly this view of the situation of the Pretorium must modify the traditional claims of the "Via Dolorosa," the whole course of which depends on theory that the "Way of Sorrow" began at the Antonia, the Pretorium of late ecclesiastical tradition.<P>3. <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,13);">Philippians 1:13</a>:<P>With regard to the expression en holo to praitorio in <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,13);">Php 1:13</a>, there is now a general consensus of opinion that "Praetorium" here means, not a place, but the imperial praetorian guard, ten thousand in number, which was instituted by Augustus. Paul was allowed to reside in his private house in the custody of a praetorian soldier. As these were doubtless constantly changed, it must have become "manifest" to the whole guard that his bonds were for the sake of Christ.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRAETORIAN+GUARD">PRAETORIAN GUARD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GABBATHA">GABBATHA</a>`117';
isbe[7061]='Praise`praz (tehillah, "psalm," "praise," todhah, "confession" "thanksgiving," shabhach, "to praise" "glorify," zamar, yadhah, "to stretch out the hand," "confess"; aineo, epaineo, (epainos):<P>1. Its Meaning:<P>The word comes from the Latin pretium, "price," or "value," and may be defined generally as an ascription of value or worth. Praise may be bestowed upon unworthy objects or from improper motives, but true praise consists in a sincere acknowledgment of a real conviction of worth. Its type may be seen in the representation given in the Apocalypse of the adoration of God and of the Lamb, which is inspired by a sense of their worthiness to be adored (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,11);">Re 4:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,12);">5:12</a>).<P>2. With Man as Its Object:<P>Man may be the object of praise, and may receive it either from God or from his fellow-men. In the former case (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',2,29);">Ro 2:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',4,5);">1Co 4:5</a>) the praise is inevitably just, as resting on a divine estimate of worth; in the latter case its value depends upon the grounds and motives that lie behind it. There is a praise which is itself a condemnation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,26);">Lu 6:26</a>), an honor which seals the eyes in unbelief (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',5,44);">Joh 5:44</a>), a careless use of the epithet "good" which is dishonoring to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,19);">Lu 18:19</a>). This is the "praise of men" which Jesus warned His followers to shun as being incompatible with the "praise of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'1-4\');">Mt 6:1-4</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,43);">Joh 12:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',1,10);">Ga 1:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,6);">1Th 2:6</a>). On the other hand, there is a praise that is the instinctive homage of the soul to righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,47);">Lu 23:47</a>), the acknowledgment given to well-doing by just government (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',13,3);">Ro 13:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,14);">1Pe 2:14</a>), the tribute of the churches to distinguished Christian service (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',8,18);">2Co 8:18</a>). Such praise, so far from being incompatible with the praise of God, is a reflection of it in human consciousness; and so Paul associates praise with virtue as an aid and incentive to holy living on which the mind should dwell (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,8);">Php 4:8</a>).<P>3. With God as Its Object:<P>In the Bible it is God who is especially brought before us as the object of praise. His whole creation praises Him, from the angels of heaven (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,20);">Ps 103:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,11);">Re 5:11</a>) to those lower existences that are unconscious or even inanimate (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,\'1-4\');">Ps 19:1-4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',148,\'1-10\');">148:1-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,13);">Re 5:13</a>). But it is with the praises offered to God by man, and with the human duty of praising God, that the Scriptures are principally concerned. In regard to this subject the following points may be noticed:<P>(1) The Grounds of Praise.<P>Sometimes God is praised for His inherent qualities. His majesty (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',104,1);">Ps 104:1</a>) or holiness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',6,3);">Isa 6:3</a>) fills the mind, and He is "glorified as God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,21);">Ro 1:21</a>) in view of what He essentially is. More frequently He is praised for His works in creation, providence, and redemption. References may be dispensed with here, for the evidence meets us on almost every page of the sacred literature from Genesis to Revelation, and the Book of Psalms in particular, from beginning to end, is occupied with these themes. When God\'s operations under these aspects present themselves, not simply as general effects of His power and wisdom, but as expressions of His personal love to the individual, the nation, the church, His works become benefits, and praise passes into blessing and thanksgiving (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',34,\'1-\');">Pss 34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,\'1-\');">103</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,3);">Eph 1:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,3);">1Pe 1:3</a>).<P>(2) The Modes of Praise.<P>True praise of God, as distinguished from false praise (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',29,13);">Isa 29:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,8);">Mt 15:8</a>), is first of all an inward emotion<6F>a gladness and rejoicing of the heart (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',4,7);">Ps 4:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',33,21);">33:21</a>), a music of the soul and spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,1);">Ps 103:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,46);">Lu 1:46</a>f) which no language can adequately express (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',106,2);">Ps 106:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,15);">2Co 9:15</a>). But utterance is natural to strong emotion, and the mouth instinctively strives to express the praises of the heart (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,15);">Ps 51:15</a> and passim). Many of the most moving passages in Scripture come from the inspiration of the spirit of praise awakened by the contemplation of the divine majesty or power or wisdom or kindness, but above all by the revelation of redeeming love. Again, the spirit of praise is a social spirit calling for social utterance. The man who praises God desires to praise Him in the hearing of other men (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,10);">Ps 40:10</a>), and desires also that their praises should be joined with his own (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',34,3);">Ps 34:3</a>). Further, the spirit of praise is a spirit of song. It may find expression in other ways<79>in sacrifice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',7,13);">Le 7:13</a>), or testimony (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',66,16);">Ps 66:16</a>), or prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,3);">Col 1:3</a>); but it finds its most natural and its fullest utterance in lyrical and musical forms. When God fills the heart with praise He puts a new song into the mouth (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,3);">Ps 40:3</a>). The Book of Psalms is the proof of this for the Old Testament. And when we pass to the New Testament we find that, alike for angels and men, for the church on earth and the church in heaven, the higher moods of praise express themselves in bursts of song (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',2,14);">Lu 2:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,19);">Eph 5:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,16);">Col 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,9);">Re 5:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',14,3);">14:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',15,3);">15:3</a>). Finally, both in the Old Testament and New Testament, the spirit of song gives birth to ordered modes of public praise. In their earlier expressions the praises of Israel were joyful outbursts in which song was mingled with shouting and dancing to a rude accompaniment of timbrels and trumpets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',15,20);">Ex 15:20</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,5,14);">2Sa 6:5,14</a>). In later times Israel had its sacred Psalter, its guilds of trained singers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,41);">Ezr 2:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,44);">Ne 7:44</a>), its skilled musicians (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,\'1-\');">Pss 42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',49,\'1-\');">49</a>, etc.); and the praise that waited for God in Zion was full of the solemn beauty of holiness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',29,2);">Ps 29:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',96,9);">96:9</a>). In the New Testament the Psalter is still a manual of social praise. The "hymn" which Jesus sang with His disciples after the Last Supper (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,30);">Mt 26:30</a>) would be a Hebrew psalm, probably from the Hallel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',113,1);">Pss 113-118</a>) which was used at the Passover service, and various references in the Epistles point to the continued employment of the ancient psalms in Christian worship (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,26);">1Co 14:26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,19);">Eph 5:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,16);">Col 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jam\',5,13);">Jas 5:13</a>). But the Psalter of the Jewish church could not suffice to express the distinctive moods of Christian feeling. Original utterance of the spirit of Christian song was one of the manifestations of the gift of tongues (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,\'15-17\');">1Co 14:15-17</a>). Paul distinguishes hymns and spiritual songs from psalms (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',5,19);">Eph 5:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',3,16);">Col 3:16</a>); and it was hymns that he and Silas sang at midnight in the prison of Philippi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,25);">Ac 16:25</a> the Revised Version (British and American)). But from hymns and songs that were the spontaneous utterance of individual feeling the development was natural, in New Testament as in Old Testament times, to hymns that were sung in unison by a whole congregation; and in rhythmic passages like <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',3,16);">1Ti 3:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',15,3);">Re 15:3</a>f; we seem to have fragments of a primitive Christian hymnology, such as Pliny bears witness to for the early years of the 2nd century, when he informs Trajan that the Christians of Bithynia at their morning meetings sang a hymn in alternate strains to Christ as God (Ep. x.97).<P>(3) The Duty of Praise.<P>Praise is everywhere represented in the Bible as a duty no less than a natural impulse and a delight. To fail in this duty is to withhold from God\'s glory that belongs to Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',50,23);">Ps 50:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,20);">Ro 1:20</a>f); it is to shut one\'s eyes to the signs of His presence (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',40,26);">Isa 40:26</a>), to be forgetful of His mercies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',6,12);">De 6:12</a>), and unthankful for His kindness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,35);">Lu 6:35</a>). If we are not to fall into these sins, but are to give to God the honor and glory and gratitude we owe Him, we must earnestly cultivate the spirit and habit of praise. From holy men of old we learn that this may be done by arousing the soul from its slothfulness and sluggishness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',57,8);">Ps 57:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,1);">103:1</a>), by fixing the heart upon God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',57,7);">Ps 57:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',108,1);">108:1</a>), by meditation on His works and ways (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',77,11);">Ps 77:11</a>), by recounting His benefits (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,2);">Ps 103:2</a>), above all, for those to whom He has spoken in His Son, by dwelling upon His unspeakable gift (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',9,15);">2Co 9:15</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,31);">Ro 8:31</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,1);">1Joh 3:1</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PERSECUTION">PERSECUTION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WORSHIP">WORSHIP</a>`94';
isbe[7062]='Prayer`prar (deesis, proseuche, (enteuxis; for an excellent discussion of the meaning of these see Thayer\'s Lexicon, p. 126, under the word deesis; the chief verbs are euchomai, proseuchomai, and deomai, especially in Luke and Acts; aiteo, "to ask a favor" distinguished from erotao, "to ask a question," is found occasionally): In the Bible "prayer" is used in a simpler and a more complex a narrower and a wider signification. In the former case it is supplication for benefits either for one\'s self (petition) or for others (intercession). In the latter it is an act of worship which covers all soul in its approach to God. Supplication is at the heart of it, for prayer always springs out of a sense of need and a belief that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,6);">Heb 11:6</a>). But adoration and confession and thanksgiving also find a It place, so that the suppliant becomes a worshipper. It is unnecessary to distinguish all the various terms for prayer that are employed in the Old Testament and the New Testament. But the fact should be noticed that in the Hebrew and Greek aloe there are on the one hand words for prayer that denote a direct petition or short, sharp cry of the heart in its distress (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',30,2);">Ps 30:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,8);">2Co 12:8</a>), and on the other "prayers" like that of Hannah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'1-10\');">1Sa 2:1-10</a>), which is in reality a song of thanksgiving, or that of Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ, in which intercession is mingled with doxology (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,\'14-21\');">Eph 3:14-21</a>).<P>1. In the Old Testament:<P>The history of prayer as it meets us here reflects various stages of experience and revelation. In the patriarchal period, when \'men began to call upon the name of the Lord\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',4,26);">Ge 4:26</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',12,8);">Ge 12:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',21,33);">21:33</a>), prayer is naive, familiar and direct (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',15,2);">Ge 15:2</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',17,18);">17:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',18,23);">18:23</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',24,12);">24:12</a>). It is evidently associated with sacrifice (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',12,8);">Ge 12:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',13,4);">13:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,25);">26:25</a>), the underlying idea probably being that the gift or offering would help to elicit the desired response. Analogous to this is Jacob\'s vow, itself a species of prayer, in which the granting of desired benefits becomes the condition of promised service and fidelity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',28,20);">Ge 28:20</a>). In the pre-exilic history of Israel prayer still retains many of the primitive features of the patriarchal type (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',3,4);">Ex 3:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',11,\'11-15\');">Nu 11:11-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,13);">Jud 6:13</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',11,30);">11:30</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',1,11);">1Sa 1:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,8);">2Sa 15:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',66,13);">Ps 66:13</a>f). The Law has remarkably little to say on the subject, differing here from the later Judaism (see Schurer, HJP, II, i, v290, vindex-vol, p. 93; and compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,5);">Mt 6:5</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',23,14);">23:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,1);">Ac 3:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,13);">16:13</a>); while it confirms the association of prayer with sacrifices, which now appear, however, not as gifts in anticipation of benefits to follow, but as expiations of guilt (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-9\');">De 21:1-9</a>) or thank offerings for past mercies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,\'1-11\');">De 26:1-11</a>). Moreover, the free, frank access of the private individual to God is more and more giving place to the mediation of the priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,5);">De 21:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,3);">26:3</a>), the intercession of the prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',32,\'11-13\');">Ex 32:11-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,\'5-13\');">1Sa 7:5-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',12,23);">12:23</a>), the ordered approach of tabernacle and temple services (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',40,\'1-\');">Ex 40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,\'1-\');">1Ki 8</a>). The prophet, it is true, approaches God immediately and freely<6C>Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',34,34);">Ex 34:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',34,10);">De 34:10</a>) and David (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',7,27);">2Sa 7:27</a>) are to be numbered among the prophets<74>but he does so in virtue of his office, and on the ground especially of his possession of the Spirit and his intercessory function (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',2,2);">Eze 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',14,15);">Jer 14:15</a>).<P>A new epoch in the history of prayer in Israel was brought about by the experiences of the Exile. Chastisement drove the nation to seek God more earnestly than before, and as the way of approach through the external forms of the temple and its sacrifices was now closed, the spiritual path of prayer was frequented with a new assiduity. The devotional habits of Ezra (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',7,27);">Ezr 7:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,23);">8:23</a>), Nehemlab (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',2,4);">Ne 2:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',4,4,9);">4:4,9</a>, etc.) and Daniel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,10);">Da 6:10</a>) prove how large a place prayer came to hold in the individual life; while the utterances recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',9,\'6-15\');">Ezr 9:6-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',1,\'5-11\');">Ne 1:5-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,\'5-38\');">9:5-38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,\'4-19\');">Da 9:4-19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',63,\'7-\');">Isa 63:7</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',64,\'1-12\');">64:12</a> serve as illustrations of the language and spirit of the prayers of the Exile, and show especially the prominence now given to confession of sin. In any survey of the Old Testament teaching the Psalms occupy a place by themselves, both on account of the large period they cover in the history and because we are ignorant in most cases as to the particular circumstances of their origin. But speaking generally it may be said that here we see the loftiest flights attained by the spirit of prayer under the old dispensation<6F>the intensest craving for pardon, purity and other spiritual blessings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',51,\'1-\');">Ps 51</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',130,\'1-\');">130</a>), the most heartfelt longing for a living communion with God Himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',42,2);">Ps 42:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',63,1);">63:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',84,2);">84:2</a>).<P>2. In the New Testament:<P>Here it will be convenient to deal separately with the material furnished by the Gospel narratives of the life and teaching of Christ and that found in the remaining books. The distinctively Christian view of prayer comes to us from the Christ of the Gospels. We have to notice His own habits in the matter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,21);">Lu 3:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,12);">6:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,16,29);">9:16,29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,32,\'39-46\');">22:32,39-46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,\'34-46\');">23:34-46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,46);">Mt 27:46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'1-\');">Joh 17</a>), which for all who accept Him as the revealer of the Father and the final authority in religion immediately dissipate all theoretical objections to the value and efficacy of prayer. Next we have His general teaching on the subject in parables (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'5-9\');">Lu 11:5-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'1-14\');">18:1-14</a>) and incidental sayings (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',5,44);">Mt 5:44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'5-8\');">6:5-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,\'7-11\');">7:7-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,38);">9:38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,21);">17:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,19);">18:19</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,22);">21:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',24,20);">24:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,41);">26:41</a> and the parallels), which presents prayer, not as a mere energizing of the religious soul that is followed by beneficial spiritual reactions, but as the request of a child to a father (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,8);">Mt 6:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,11);">7:11</a>), subject, indeed, to the father\'s will (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,11);">Mt 7:11</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,10);">Mt 6:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,39,42);">26:39,42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,14);">1Joh 5:14</a>), but secure always of loving attention and response (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',7,\'7-11\');">Mt 7:7-11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,22);">21:22</a>). In thus teaching us to approach God as our Father, Jesus raised prayer to its highest plane, making it not less reverent than it was at its best in Old Testament times, while far more intimate and trustful. In the <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD\'S+PRAYER">LORD\'S PRAYER</a> (which see). He summed up His ordinary teaching on the subject in a concrete example which serves as a model and breviary of prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'9-13\');">Mt 6:9-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'2-4\');">Lu 11:2-4</a>). But according to the Fourth Gospel, this was not His final word upon the subject. On the night of the betrayal, and in full view of His death and resurrection and ascension to God\'s right hand, He told His disciples that prayer was henceforth to be addressed to the Father in the name of the Son, and that prayer thus offered was sure to be granted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,23,24,26);">Joh 16:23,24,26</a>). The differentia of Christian prayer thus consists in its being offered in the name of Christ; while the secret of its success lies on the one hand in the new access to the Father which Christ has secured for His people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,19);">Joh 17:19</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'14-16\');">Heb 4:14-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,\'19-22\');">10:19-22</a>), and on the other in the fact that prayer offered in the name of Christ will be prayer in harmony with the Father\'s will (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,7);">Joh 15:7</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',3,22);">1Joh 3:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Jo\',5,13);">5:13</a>).<P>In the Acts and Epistles we see the apostolic church giving effect to Christ\'s teaching on prayer. It was in a praying atmosphere that the church was born (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',1,14);">Ac 1:14</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,1);">Ac 2:1</a>); and throughout its early history prayer continued to be its vital breath and native air (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,42);">Ac 2:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,1);">3:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',6,4,6);">6:4,6</a> and passim). The Epistles abound in references to prayer. Those of Paul in particular contain frequent allusions to his own personal practice in the matter (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',1,9);">Ro 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,16);">Eph 1:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,9);">Php 1:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',1,2);">1Th 1:2</a>, etc.), and many exhortations to his readers to cultivate the praying habit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,12);">Ro 12:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,18);">Eph 6:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',4,6);">Php 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',5,17);">1Th 5:17</a>, etc.). But the new and characteristic thing about Christian prayer as it meets us now is its connection with the Spirit. It has become a spiritual gift (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',14,\'14-16\');">1Co 14:14-16</a>); and even those who have not this gift in the exceptional charismatic sense may "pray in the Spirit" whenever they come to the throne of grace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,18);">Eph 6:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jud\',1,20);">Jude 1:20</a>). The gift of the Spirit, promised by Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,16);">Joh 14:16</a>ff, etc.), has raised prayer to its highest power by securing for it a divine cooperation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,15,26);">Ro 8:15,26</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gal\',4,6);">Ga 4:6</a>). Thus Christian prayer in its full New Testament meaning is prayer addressed to God as Father, in the name of Christ as Mediator, and through the enabling grace of the indwelling Spirit.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRAYERS+OF+CHRIST">PRAYERS OF CHRIST</a>`94';
isbe[7063]='Prayer of Habakkuk``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HABAKKUK">HABAKKUK</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BETH-+horon,+the+battle+of">BETH-HORON, THE BATTLE OF</a>`1';
isbe[7064]='Prayer of Joseph``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JOSEPH,+PRAYER+OF">JOSEPH, PRAYER OF</a>`1';
isbe[7065]='Prayer of Manasses``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MANASSES,+THE+PRAYER+OF">MANASSES, THE PRAYER OF</a>`1';
isbe[7066]='Prayer, Hours of``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=HOURS+OF+PRAYER">HOURS OF PRAYER</a>`1';
isbe[7067]='Prayer, Lord\'s``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD\'s+prayer,+the">LORD\'S PRAYER, THE</a>`1';
isbe[7068]='Prayers of Christ`prarz:<P>1. The Lord\'s Prayer<P>2. Christ\'s Doctrine of Prayer: Sacredness, Importunity, Conditions<P>3. Prayers Offered by Christ<P class="in15">(1) The High-priestly Prayer<P class="in15">(2) The Prayer in Gethsemane<P class="in15">(3) The Prayers on the Cross<P class="in15">(4) Prayer after the Resurrection<P class="in15">(5) General Conclusions<hr /><P>In the history and doctrine of prayer, nothing is more important than the light shed upon the subject by the prayers of Jesus. These are to be studied in connection with His teaching concerning prayer found in the model of the Lord\'s Prayer, and general statements and hints to His disciples.<P>1. The Lord\'s Prayer:<P>This model of prayer is given in two forms (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,\'9-13\');">Mt 6:9-13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'2-4\');">Lu 11:2-4</a>). The differences of form show that exactness of similarity in words is not essential. The prayer includes adoration, supplication for the Kingdom, for personal needs, for forgiveness, for deliverance from temptation and the ascription of glory. It is at once individual and universal; it sets the recognition of divine things first, and yet clearly asserts the ethical and social relations of life.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LORD\'S+PRAYER,+THE">LORD\'S PRAYER, THE</a>.<P>2. Christ\'s Doctrine of Prayer: Sacredness, Importunity, Conditions:<P>That men should pray is taken for granted (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,5);">Mt 6:5</a>). Its sacredness is involved in the command for privacy (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,6);">Mt 6:6</a>); its importunity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',11,\'5-9\');">Lu 11:5-9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'1-8\');">18:1-8</a>); its necessary conditions of humility, absence of self righteousness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',18,\'9-14\');">Lu 18:9-14</a>), of display and repetition (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',6,7);">Mt 6:7</a>); necessity of faith and a forgiving spirit (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',11,\'24-26\');">Mr 11:24-26</a>); of agreement in social prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',18,19);">Mt 18:19</a>); submission to the will of Christ, "in my name" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,13);">Joh 14:13</a>).<P>3. Prayers Offered by Christ:<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,25,26);">Mt 11:25,26</a> the King James Version, Christ thanks God: "Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight." This language shows the essence of prayer to be not the mere expression of need and request for what is required, but resort to God. The prayer gives us insight into the deeper experience of the Son with the Father, and His perfect submission to the Father\'s will, with thanksgiving even for what might seem inexplicable. It thus illustrates the truth that the highest form of prayer is found in the serenity of the soul.<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,23);">Mt 14:23</a> narrates the retirement of the Lord to a "mountain apart to pray." No word of what the prayer was is given, but the record is suggestive. Following a day of severe toil and probably excitement, Jesus betakes Himself to prayer. The reality, the true humanity of the Christ, are here revealed. The former prayer may almost be regarded as that of the Son of God addressed to the Father in the sublime communion of the Godhead. This passage emphatically is a prayer-scene of the Son of Man. The association of this incident of prayer in Christ\'s life with the miracle of walking on the sea (an example of miracle in the person of the Lord Himself, and not performed on another) opens up an interesting question of the relation of the supernatural and the natural. Here perhaps lies an explanation of the true significance of the miraculous. The communion of the Lord with a supreme Father had filled the physical nature of Jesus with spiritual forces which extended the power of the spirit over the material world beyond the limits by which man is bound in his normal and sinful condition (see Lange, Commentary on Mat; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,36);">Mt 15:36</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',14,19);">14:19</A>). Christ\'s recognition of God as the Giver of food, in thanks at the meal, or "asking a blessing," should be noted as an example which in modern times is largely ignored or followed as a mere formality. But it is significant; it expresses that intense and all-compelling sense of the divine which ever dwelt in Him; of which prayer is an expression, and which is evoked so naturally and becomingly at a social meal. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,21);">Mt 17:21</a>, our Lord\'s reference to prayer as a necessary condition of miraculous power, in the light of <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,34);">Mr 7:34</a>, where "looking up to heaven, he sighed, and saith unto him (the deaf man), Ephphatha," may imply His own prayer in connection with the exercise of miraculous energy. This is apparently indicated in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,41,42);">Joh 11:41,42</a>, although, as above, it is the expression of the intimate relation between Christ and the Father, which is the essence of prayer, and in which relation He ever exercised the fullest power of God Himself. <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,13);">Mt 19:13</a> records that little children were brought to Him that He should put His hands on them and pray. That He prayed is not related, but <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,15);">19:15</a> relates that He laid His hands on them and, presumably, with the imposition, prayed. The scene is most suggestive, in the light of our Lord\'s words. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',19,14);">Mt 19:14</a> and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,26);">26:26</a> Our Lord blesses the bread or gives thanks at the institution of the Supper, and has set the mode of celebration universally adopted, even giving the term Eucharist ("giving of thanks") to the service.<P>(1) The High-priestly Prayer.<P>This prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'1-\');">Joh 17</a>) is the special prayer of the Lord, and may be regarded as the sole example furnished by the evangelists of our Lord\'s method of prayer. The thanksgiving in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,25);">Mt 11:25</a> is the only other instance of any extent in the report of the prayers of Jesus, but even that is brief compared to what is here furnished. The fullness of this prayer clearly shows that it was uttered in the hearing of the disciples. Their relation to it is remarkable. Auditors, they yet could not share in it. At the same time, it was a profound revelation to them both of the relation of the Master to God, and the character of the work which He had come to perform, and the part which they were to take in it. John gives us no hint as to the place in which it was spoken; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,31);">14:31</a> indicates a departure from the upper room. But apparently the prayer was offered where the discourses of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,\'1-\');">John 15</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'1-\');">16</a> were delivered. It has been suggested by Westcott that some spot in the temple courts was the scene of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',15,\'1-\');">John 15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,\'1-\');">16</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'1-\');">17</a>. It has been generally supposed that the ornament of the Golden Vine would naturally suggest the figure of the Vine and Branches which our Lord employs. <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'1-\');">Joh 18:1</a> shows that the prayer was offered before the Lord and His disciples had passed over the brook Kidron. The determination of the exact spot is certainly impossible, except the probability that the words were spoken in the vicinity of the temple.<P>The first part of the prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'1-5\');">Joh 17:1-5</a>) is an expression of profound communion between the Son and the Father, and the prayer that the Father should glorify the Son, but with the supreme end of the Father\'s own glory. The absolutely unique character of Christ\'s relation to God is the calm assertion of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,4);">Joh 17:4</a>. Its consciousness of completeness in the work which He had received from God, impossible for the children of men, marks the supreme nature of the Son of God.<P>In the second part of the prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,\'6-19\');">Joh 17:6-19</a>), our Lord prays for His disciples, to whom He has revealed Himself and His relation to God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,7,8);">Joh 17:7,8</a>). He prays that they may be kept by the Father, and for their unity. Their separation from the world is declared (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,14);">Joh 17:14</a>), and our Lord prays that they may be kept from the evil that is in the world, which is alien from them as it is from Him.<P>In the third portion of the prayer Christ\'s relation to His ultimate followers is referred to. Their unity is sought, not an external unity, but the deep, spiritual unity found by the indwelling of Christ in them and God in Christ. The prayer closes by the declaration that Christ\'s knowledge of the Father is revealed to His people, and the end and crown of all is to be the indwelling of God\'s love in man by the dwelling of Christ in him.<P>This prayer is unique, not merely among the prayers of our Lord, but also among the prayers of humanity. While it is distinctly a petition, it is at the same time a communion. In one or two places our Lord expresses His will, thus setting Himself upon a level with God. The fact of this prayer of triumph in which every petition is virtually a declaration of the absolute certainty of its realization, immediately preceding the prayer of Gethsemane, is both difficult and suggestive. The anomaly is a powerful argument for the historic reality. The explanation of these contrasted moods is to be found in the depth of our Lord\'s nature, and especially in the complete consistency of His dual nature with the spheres to which each nature belongs. He is most divine; He is most human. In the fullness of the reach of the prayer and its calm confidence, the believer may find a ceaseless and inexhaustible source of comfort and encouragement. Attention might be called to the remarkable forecast of the history and experience of the church which the prayer furnishes.<P>(2) The Prayer in Gethsemane.<P>This is recorded by the three Synoptics (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,\'36-44\');">Mt 26:36-44</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,\'22-40\');">Mr 14:22-40</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'39-46\');">Lu 22:39-46</a>), and is probably referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,7);">Heb 5:7</a>. Brief though the prayer is, it exhibits most clearly recognition of God\'s infinite power, a clear object sought by the prayer, and perfect submission to God\'s will. All the elements of prayer, as it can be offered by man, are here except the prayer for forgiveness. It is to be noted that the prayer was three times repeated. This is not to be regarded as inconsistent with our Lord\'s prohibition of repetition. It was vain repetition which was forbidden. The intensity of the prayer is expressed by its threefold utterance (compare Paul\'s prayer in regard to the thorn in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',12,8);">2Co 12:8</a>).<P>(3) The Prayers on the Cross.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,46);">Mt 27:46</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,34);">Mr 15:34</a>, Christ uses the prayer of <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',22,1);">Ps 22:1</a>. In the moment of complete desolation, the Sufferer claimed His unbroken relationship with God. This is the victory of the atoning sacrifice. <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,34);">Lu 23:34</a> records the prayer of intercession for those who crucified Him; in 23:46 is the calm committal of His spirit to the Father. Prayer here again assumes its highest form in the expression of recognition and trust. Thus the three prayers on the cross not only reveal the intimate relation of our Lord to the Father, but they also illustrate prayer such as man may offer. They represent supplication, intercession, communion. Prayer thus expresses our relation to God, to others, to ourselves; our trust, our love, our need. In all things He was made like unto His brethren, except without sin (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=UPPERCASE">POINTS</a>). His prayers on the cross illustrate His high-priestly office. It rises at that intense crisis to its supreme manifestation and activity.<P>(4) Prayer after the Resurrection.<P>It is to be observed that after His resurrection there is no record of any prayer, offered by Christ. In the supper at Emmaus He "blessed" the bread (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,30);">Lu 24:30</a>); and the ascension took place in the midst of blessing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,51);">Lu 24:51</a>), suggestive of the course of the church as ever beneath the benediction of the Lord, to be ended only at the final consummation. The act of eating the fish and honeycomb (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',24,43);">Lu 24:43</a>) seems to have been unaccompanied by any act of specifically religious form. Mark, with characteristic regard to details, records Christ\'s "looking up to heaven" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',6,41);">Mr 6:41</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',7,34);">7:34</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,41);">Joh 11:41</a> refers to a similar act, and adds the Lord\'s words of thanksgiving that God had heard Him (see also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',17,1);">Joh 17:1</a>). The gesture was usual in association with Christ\'s prayers; it is appropriate and suggestive. Luke narrates that Christ prayed at His baptism (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,21);">Lu 3:21</a>); that He spent a night in prayer before choosing the Twelve (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',6,12,13);">Lu 6:12,13</a>); that the transfiguration was preceded by prayer (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,29);">Lu 9:29</a>); and records the prayer in the garden (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,\'41-45\');">Lu 22:41-45</a>). The third evangelist thus in addition to the notes of our Lord\'s prayers in retirement, which the other evangelists record, adds these instances of the special relation of prayer to events of critical importance.<P>(5) General Conclusions.<P>The following conclusions as to prayer may be drawn from the records of Christ\' prayers:<P>(1) Prayer is the highest exercise of man\'s spiritual nature.<P>(2) It is natural to the soul even in perfect accord with God.<P>(3) It is not only the expression of need, the supply of which is sought of God, but by the example of Christ it is the highest expression of trust, submission and union with God.<P>(4) It is to be used both in solitude and in society; it is personal and intercessory.<P>(5) It may be accompanied by the plea of Christ\'s name, and for Christ\'s sake.<P>These are the laws which should direct it; that is to say, it should be based upon the merit and the intercession of Christ, and should be addressed to God under the limitations of the Kingdom of the Lord and His purposes for good, both for the interest of the suppliant and others, under the conditions of the interest of the whole Kingdom.``14';
isbe[7069]='Preacher; Preaching`prech\'-er, prech\'-ing (qoheleth, "preacher" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',1,1);">Ec 1:1</a>), basar, "to bring or tell good tidings" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,9);">Ps 40:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>), qara\', "to call," "proclaim" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',6,7);">Ne 6:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',3,2);">Jon 3:2</a>), qeri\'ah, "cry," "preaching" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',3,2);">Jon 3:2</a>); kerux, "crier," "herald" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',2,7);">1Ti 2:7</a>), kerusso, "to cry or proclaim as a herald" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,1);">Mt 3:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',10,14);">Ro 10:14</a>), euaggellizo, "to announce good news" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,5);">Mt 11:5</a>)):<P>1. Definition<P>2. The Preacher\'s Limitations<P>3. A Man with a Message<P>4. Preaching a Necessary Agency<P>5. Biblical Terms and Their Meanings<P>6. The Hebrew Prophets<P>7. Christ as a Preacher<P>8. The Apostles as Preachers<P>9. Fundamental Postulates<P class="in15">(1) Preach the Word<P class="in15">(2) "We Are Ambassadors"<hr /><P>1. Definition:<P>In the New Testament sense a preacher is a man who has the inner call from the Holy Spirit and the external call from the church the witnessing body of Christ on earth, and has been duly set apart as an accredited and qualified teacher of the Christian religion. His vocation is that of addressing the popular mind and heart on religious truth, as that truth is set forth in the sacred Scripture, for the spiritual profit of the hearer as its end. The preacher, recognized as such by the church, speaks as a personal witness of God\'s saving truth, explaining it and applying it as the circumstances of the people and the time may require. The gravity and importance of this vocation, as set forth in the sacred Scriptures and amply illustrated in the history of the church, surpass those of any other calling among men. Luther said, "The Devil does not mind the written word but he is put to flight whenever it is preached aloud."<P>2. The Preacher\'s Limitations:<P>The preacher, in the sense indicated above, is with all other Christians a sharer in the freedom that is in Christ. But as a recognized teacher and leader of the church, he is not an unattached and entire unrestricted teacher. He is not to speak as his own, but as the mouthpiece of the church whose apprehension of the gospel he has voluntarily confessed. The faith of the church is, by his own assent, his faith, and her doctrine is his doctrine. He is not expected to give his own, as distinct from or opposed to the faith of the church in whose name he has been set apart to proclaim the gospel. Both the personal and the representative or official are united in him and his preaching.<P>3. A Man with a Message:<P>His work is always to be related to the Old Testament and New Testament. His sermon is under the creed of his church as the creed is under the word. The preacher is a man with a message, and the preacher who has no message of the particular kind indicated above is in no true sense a preacher. It has been well expressed in one of the valuable Yale series of lectures on the subject, "Every living preacher must receive his communication direct from God, and the constant purpose of his life must be to receive it uncorrupted and to deliver it without addition or subtraction." When he presents the message of his divinely-appointed ambassadorship in its integrity, he speaks with that peculiar kind of "authority" which has been pronounced "the first and indispensable requisite" in giving a message from God. He manifests thereby a "high celestial dogmatism," and "human weakness becomes immortal strength." The true preacher preaches from a divine impulsion. He says with Paul, "Necessity is laid upon me; for woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',9,16);">1Co 9:16</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',20,9);">Jer 20:9</a>). He says with Peter, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to hearken unto you rather than unto God, judge ye: for we cannot but speak the things which we saw and heard" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,19,20);">Ac 4:19,20</a>). The message of the preacher is greater than the man, because it is from God. It largely makes the man who preaches it in its fullness and power. Whatever be his own gifts or whatever the alleged gift conferred in the laying on of hands, without the sense of the message he is not chosen of God to proclaim His word. Destitute of that, he does not have the sustaining impulse of his vocation to enlist his entire personality in his work and give him mastery over the minds and hearts of men.<P>4. Preaching a Necessary Agency:<P>No agency of religion is older than preaching. It is as old as the Bible itself (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,5);">2Pe 2:5</a>). It is a necessary adjunct of a religion that is communicated to man by means of an objective and authoritative revelation, such as we have in the sacred Scriptures. It is an entirely natural agency of the forms of religion revealed in the Old Testament and New Testament. It is strictly in harmony with those ideas that obtain in both testaments regarding the method of propagating the faith, set forth through the agency of holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. That faith is disseminated by means of teaching through argument, explanation, motive and exhortation. The agency for the spread of a religion of persuasion must be preaching.<P>5. Biblical Terms and Their Meanings:<P>In the Biblical usage of the terms which have reference to the subject, preaching means the proclamation of religious truth. It is that continuous and public testimony which the church is always giving, through discourses by men set apart for such work, to her own living faith as that faith is rooted in and sustained by the written word of God. In this sense "to call," "proclaim," "cry aloud" are used frequently of the prophetic message under the various aspects of denunciation, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jon\',1,2);">Jon 1:2</a>; of the relation of the divine, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',11,6);">Jer 11:6</a>, and of Messianic promise, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>. The term for "preaching" is also used to designate a political propagandism set forth by the prophet (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',6,7);">Ne 6:7</a>). In two passages (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',68,11);">Ps 68:11</a>, "publish"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',61,1);">Isa 61:1</a>) another word for preaching means "to declare good news." In the case of Jonah\'s preaching at Nineveh, the word used to designate what it was means strictly "proclamation" and corresponds to the New Testament word used to define our Lord\'s "proclamation" as a herald of the advent of the Kingdom of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,17);">Mt 4:17</a>), which in its initial stages particularly was closely associated with the preaching of John the Baptist (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',3,1,2);">Mt 3:1,2</a>).<P>6. The Hebrew Prophets:<P>Thus, while preaching belongs especially to Christianity, it has well-defined antecedents in the Old Testament. Under both the old and the new dispensations the subject takes the church for granted and utters the testimony, not simply of a solitary believer, but of a divinely-founded society, whether it be of Jews or Christians. The older books in the Canon have in them the beginnings and some of the features of the preacher\'s office and of the high function of preaching. In them we find a special class of men set apart and separated unto that particular work, as we find in the Christian church, from its beginnings, the same divinely instituted office. The Hebrew prophet had a message direct from God, which frequently came with supernatural knowledge in the power of prediction. The mission of the prophet, however, was simply or chiefly to forecast the future, but to declare a present message from the Lord to the people. The prophet of the Old Testament was the forerunner in office and the prototype of the ambassador of Christ. With the development of the synagogue as the center of Hebrew worship, application as well as interpretation of the Law became essential.<P>Moses, the most commanding figure in Hebrew history, was a prophet, and no messages in the Old Testament are more imbued with power, sublimity and pathos than those uttered by the great lawgiver. He became the guide Israel, not so much by his rod as by the word he delivered to the people. There are numerous indications that after Moses there was a continuous class of religious teachers whose work it was to instruct men and inspire the people, as is indicated in the cases of Joshua, in the history of Deborah and Barak, and in the days of solemn assembly which are inconceivable without men who spoke and other men who listened. In the time of Samuel there was a distinct advance made in the work of the prophets, and the prophetic office had become a fixed institution. There were schools of the prophets at Bethel, Jericho and Gilgal, the very seats of heathen idolatry. Under the Old Testament dispensation the whole course of progress was toward presenting divine truth in its simplicity and power, by bringing it to bear upon the popular mind and heart. One of the marks of the new era beginning with John the Baptist was a revival of prophetic preaching (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',11,9);">Mt 11:9</a>), which again resumed its old character and meaning.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROPHECY,+PROPHETS">PROPHECY, PROPHETS</a>.<P>7. Christ as a Preacher:<P>The words meaning "to proclaim as a herald" and "preaching," are frequent in the New Testament. The mission of our Lord was essentially one of proclaiming good tidings concerning the Kingdom of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,17);">Mt 4:17</a>). He at once, on His entrance upon His ministry, gave to preaching a spiritual depth and practical range which it never had before. At that time preaching had manifestly become a fixed part of the synagogue worship, and was made one of the chief instruments in the spread of the gospel. our Lord constantly taught in the synagogue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',4,23);">Mt 4:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,21);">Mr 1:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',6,59);">Joh 6:59</a>). He thus read and interpreted and applied the Law and the Prophets (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',1,39);">Mr 1:39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,16);">Lu 4:16</a>). Christ\'s testimony about Himself was that He came "to bear witness to the truth." The spoken word became His great power in His life and ministry. Throughout His life Jesus was above all things a preacher of the truths of His kingdom. Telling men what He was in Himself, what in His relation to man and his salvation and what to God the Father, formed a large part of His public work.<P>8. The Apostles as Preachers:<P>The preaching of the apostles was essentially prophetic in character, and bore testimony concerning the resurrection of Jesus and His early return to judgment (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,24,32,36);">Ac 2:24,32,36</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',15,15);">1Co 15:15</a>). The sermons of the apostles which are reported with much fullness are those of Peter on the Day of Pentecost (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,\'1-\');">Ac 2</a>), his address in the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',10,\'1-\');">Ac 10</a>), and the counsels of James to the brethren at Jerusalem, as to what ordinances should be imposed on Gentile Christians. In the early church preachers were first of all witnesses to what Jesus had said and done, and to the significance to be attached to the great facts of the redemptive history. With the spread of the gospel and the passing of time, this office was taken up by others, especially such as were endued with "the word of wisdom" and "of knowledge" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',12,8);">1Co 12:8</a>).<P>9. Fundamental Postulates:<P>Upon the basis of what is taught in the word of God there are two fundamentally important postulates concerning preaching and the preacher.<P>(1) Preach the Word.<P>The first note of preaching is that it be the word of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',4,2);">2Ti 4:2</a>). Out of the Bible must the life of every generation of Christians be fed. To Holy Scripture, therefore, ought the pulpit to abide faithful, for out of its treasures the preacher fulfils his double office of edifying believers and subjugating the world to Christ. There must always be an organic connection between the word in the text and the sermon.<P>(2) "We Are Ambassadors."<P>The work of preaching is the fulfillment of a divinely instituted ambassadorship (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',5,20);">2Co 5:20</a>). The gospel is put into the hands of men for a distinct purpose, and is to be administered in accordance with the plan of its author. The preacher is in a very distinct sense a trustee. "But even as we have been approved of God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God who proveth our hearts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',2,4);">1Th 2:4</a>). Those who have accepted the responsibility imposed upon them by this divine commission are enjoined to exercise their office so as to warrant the approbation of Him who has appointed them to a specific work. The homiletic practice of taking theme of every sermon from a passage of Holy Writ has been an almost invariable rule in the history of the church. It is the business of the preacher to present the truth embodied in the text in its integrity. In the exercise of his divinely-appointed ambassadorship he is to administer God\'s word revealed to Christian faith, not human opinions or speculations.``9';
isbe[7070]='Precept`pre\'-sept: A commandment, an authoritative rule for action; in the Scriptures generally a divine injunction in which man\'s obligation is set forth (Latin praeceptum, from praecipere, "to instruct").<P>Four words are so rendered in the King James Version:<P>(1) mitswah, very frequently (168 times) translated "commandment," but 4 times "precept" (in the Revised Version (British and American) only <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',35,18);">Jer 35:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,5);">Da 9:5</a>);<P>(2) from the same root is tsaw, or tsaw (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,10,13);">Isa 28:10,13</a>);<P>(3) piqqudhim, only in the Psalms (21 times in <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,1);">Ps 119</a>, e.g. verses <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,4,15,27);">4,15,27</a>; also the Revised Version (British and American) <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,8);">Ps 19:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',103,18);">103:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',111,7);">111:7</a>);<P>(4) in the New Testament, entole, generally in the King James Version translated "commandment" (68 times), but twice "precept" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',10,5);">Mr 10:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,19);">Heb 9:19</a>; in both cases the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "commandment").`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COMMANDMENT">COMMANDMENT</a>`49';
isbe[7071]='Precious`presh\'-us (stands for 17 different words, chief of which are yaqar; timios):<P>(1) Generally in the literal sense, "of great price," "costly," "expensive," of material things (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',1,13);">Pr 1:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',20,5);">Jer 20:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,3);">Mr 14:3</a> the King James Version), especially of precious stones (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',12,30);">2Sa 12:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',3,6);">2Ch 3:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',3,12);">1Co 3:12</a> the King James Version, etc.).<P>(2) Sometimes "of great moral (non-material) value." "Precious in the sight of Yahweh is the death of his saints" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',116,15);">Ps 116:15</a>); "his precious and exceeding great promises" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',1,4);">2Pe 1:4</a>); compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',139,17);">Ps 139:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',1,1);">2Pe 1:1</a>.<P>The literal and the moral senses are both involved in the expression, "knowing that ye were redeemed, not with corruptible things,...but with precious blood" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',1,18,19);">1Pe 1:18,19</a>). "Preciousness" (time) occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,7);">1Pe 2:7</a> the American Standard Revised Version, the English Revised Version, for the King James Version "precious."``49';
isbe[7072]='Precious Stones``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=STONES,+PRECIOUS">STONES, PRECIOUS</a>`1';
isbe[7073]='Precipitation`pre-sip-i-ta\'-shun.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PUNISHMENTS">PUNISHMENTS</a>`1';
isbe[7074]='Predestination`pre-des-ti-na\'-shun (prothesis, prognosis proorismos):<P>1. Predestination as a Biblical Question<P>2. Its Fundamental Importance<P>3. The Nature of Predestination<P>4. The Doctrine in Scripture<P>5. Historic Rise and Development of the Doctrine<P>6. The Doctrine in the Middle Ages<P>7. Predestination in the Reformed Theology<P>8. Predestination in Lutheranism<P>9. The Arminian View<P>10. Wesleyanism on Predestination<P>11. Present Needs and Values of the Doctrine<P>LITERATURE<hr /><P>1. Predestination as a Biblical Question:<P>Predestination can be, and has sometimes been, regarded as a philosophical question rather than a Biblical one. It is with predestination as a Biblical question, however, that we are here mainly concerned. It is possible to urge, and it has been urged, that the philosophical question<6F>whether all that occurs is foreordained<65>is not discussed and decided by Scripture. Theology, starting from God in its interpretation of all things, has arrived at universal foreordination by a species of deductive reasoning. But we must not argue the matter from any abstract principles, but deal with the actual facts as set forth in Scripture and as found, inductively, in the experience of man.<P>2. Its Fundamental Importance:<P>It must first be asserted, however, in view of much loose modern thinking, that predestination is a category of religious thought of fundamental importance. No category of religious thought could go deeper, for it reaches down to the Infinite Will in relation to the universe of finite wills, and lays stress on will as the core of reality. The philosophy of our time may be said to have received, from the time of Schopenhauer, an impact toward will-emphasis, alike in respect of will in the universe and in man. But the relation of the Absolute Will to the universe, and to mankind, is precisely that with which we are concerned in predestination.<P>3. Nature of Predestination:<P>Predestination is that aspect of foreordination Whereby the salvation of the believer is taken to he effected in accordance with the will of God, who has called and elected him, in Christ, unto life eternal. The divine plan of salvation must certainly be conceived under this aspect of individual reference. To understand and set forth the nature, and ethically justifiable character, of such a foreordaining to life eternal, is our purpose. For doctrine has need to be purged of the historic inconsistencies, and fatal illogicalities, with which, in its older forms of presentation, it was often infected. This, especially, in order that the doctrine may appear as grounded in reason and righteousness, not in arbitrariness and almighty caprice.<P>4. The Doctrine in Scripture:<P>To begin with, it must be said that there seems to be no evading the doctrine of an election by grace, as found both in the letter and the spirit of Scripture. The idea of predestination is set forth, with great power and clearness, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,29,30);">Ro 8:29,30</a>, and with its elements or parts articulated in natural and striking form. The idea recurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,\'1-\');">Eph 1</a>, where it is finely said (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,4,5);">1:4,5</a>) that God hath chosen us in Christ "before the foundation of the world," having predestinated or "foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ"; and where it is said, further, that our salvation imports "the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',1,9);">1:9</a>), which He purposed in Christ. This "eternal purpose" to save men through Christ is again referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',3,11);">Eph 3:11</a>. This helpful mode of viewing predestination as in Christ, and never outside Him, had a place in religious thought at the Reformation time, as the famous "Formula of Concord," to be referred to below, shows. The predestined certainty of God\'s gracious work in Christ was not meant to perplex men, but to encourage and reassure all who trust in His grace. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',9,\'14-25\');">Ro 9:14-25</a>, the absolute sovereignty of God is put in a form whereby election is made to originate in the divine will apart from all human merit, whether actual or foreseen. But from this assertion of God\'s free supremacy we can derive no concrete theodicy, or do more than infer that God is just and wise in His exercise of free grace, even when His doings are most perplexing to us.<P>5. Historic Rise and Development of the Doctrine:<P>The needful thing is to understand, so far as may be, the nature of the cooperation that takes place between the divine and the human factors or elements, which latter factors include natural capacity, disposition and development, working under grace. It must be carefully observed that nothing in Scripture points to any personal and inexorable predestination to reprobation, in any sense corresponding to the personal election to salvation just spoken of. A non-election there may be, of course, but not in any sense that annuls full personal responsibility for coming short of life everlasting. The appeal of Scripture from first to last is to men as free. Calvin\'s strange way of putting the matter was, "Man therefore falls, God\'s Providence so ordaining, but he falls by his own fault." This idea of reprobation was first introduced by Gottschalk, a monk of the 9th century, long after the predestination doctrine had received its first full and positive exposition by Augustine. Augustine, following upon the indecision shown by the fathers in the first three centuries of the church, made the doctrine of a special predestination his foundation for special grace, in opposition to Pelagius. Augustine gave new prominence in his theory to the absolute will of God: he made divine grace the only ground of man\'s salvation; it was to him the irresistible power working faith within the heart, and bringing freedom as its result. It was to him God\'s absolute predestination that determined who were believers. But Augustine held predestination as an inference from his conception of the Fall and of grace, rather than as a metaphysical principle.<P>6. The Doctrine in the Middle Ages:<P>In the Middle Ages, Anselm, Peter Lombard, and Aquinas, followed the Augustinian views only to a certain extent. Aquinas admits that predestination implies a relation to grace, but holds that grace is not of the essence of predestination. Predestination is, to Aquinas, a part of Providence, and it presupposes election in the order of reason. Though divine goodness in general be without election, Aquinas thinks the communication of a particular good cannot be without election. Predestination has, for him, its foundation in the goodness of God, which is its reason. Aquinas thinks predestination most surely takes effect, but not as from necessity; the effect takes place under the working of contingency. From such views we are recalled to the idea of a rigorous predestination, by Thomas Bradwardine and John Wycliff, in pre-Reformation times. We are thus brought up to the decretal system<65>so called from Calvin\'s making predestination consist of the eternal decree of God<6F>which became, in its metaphysical principle, the fundamental position of the whole Reformed theology after the Reformation.<P>7. Predestination in the Reformed Theology:<P>The theology of the Reformed church adopted the Calvinistic doctrine of the decree of predestination and election. Calvin, however, simply carried the Augustinian theory to its logical and necessary conclusion, and he was the first to adopt the doctrine as the cardinal point or primordial principle of a theological system. Zwingli, it must be remembered, was, even before Calvin, of consistent deterministic leanings, as part of his large speculative views, which were not without a tendency to universalism. Salvation was, to Calvin, the execution of a divine decree, which was supposed to fix the extent and conditions of such salvation.<P>(1) Calvin\'s Definition.<P>Reprobation was, for Calvin, involved in election, and divine foreknowledge and foreordination were taken to be identical. Calvin\'s mode of defining predestination was as the eternal decree of God, by which He has decided with Himself what is to become of each and every individual. For all, he maintains, are not created in like condition; but eternal life ordained for some, eternal condemnation for others. Calvin confesses that this is a "horrible decree," and it is not surprising to find competent theologians in our time denying such a form of predestinarianism any place in the teachings of Paul, who never speaks of reprobation.<P>(2) Theology Advanced by Calvin.<P>It is generally overlooked, however, that theological advance registered by Calvin is to be seen by study of the views of the Middle Ages, and on to the Reformation, not by viewing Calvinism in our post-Reformation lights. It was love<76>"the fatherly love of God," as he terms it<69>the efficiency of saving love<76>which Calvin insisted upon, above all, in his teaching about God. But Calvin also heightened men\'s ideas as to the certitude of personal salvation. It is but fair to Calvin to remember<65>for superficial acquaintance with his teachings is far from rare<72>that he, in the strongest manner, maintained divine sovereignty to be that of divine wisdom, righteousness, and love, and expressly rejected the notion of absolute power as, in this connection, a heathenish idea. The Calvinistic doctrine was not absolute, but mediated in Christ, and conditioned upon faith.<P>8. Predestination in Lutheranism:<P>Luther and the Lutheran church at first shared the doctrine of predestination and election, Luther in his treatment of free will reproducing the Augustinian form of the doctrine in a strict manner. The predestination of Luther and Melanchthon proceeded, not from their conception of God, but rather from the doctrine of sin and grace. Melanchthon was less disposed than Luther to press the doctrine of absolute predestination, and, in his "synergistic" tendencies, laid increasing stress on human freedom, until he at length rejected the doctrine of absolute predestination. He was blamed by strict Lutheranism for yielding too much to Pelagianism. But the Lutheran "Formula of Concord," prepared in 1577, was not a very logical and consistent presentation of the case, for, opposed at points to Augustinianism, it fell back, in the end, on election in the Augustinian spirit. Or, to put the matter in another form, the "Formula of Concord" may be said to have held with Augustinianism, but to have differed by maintaining a Universal call along witha particular election, and it rejected the decree of reprobation. Later Lutheranism adopted a moderate form of doctrine, wherein predestination was often identified with prescience. But Lutheranism ought not, in strictness, to be identified, as is sometimes done, with the Arminian theory. The Lutheran doctrine of predestination was further developed by Schleiermacher, who emphasized the efficiency of grace, while adopting its universality in the Lutheran sense.<P>9. The Arminian View:<P>Arminianism, in its earliest assertion, maintained simply universal grace and conditional election. But in the five articles it formulated its opposition to Calvinism, although Arminius does not appear to have been more than moderately Calvinistic, as we would account it. Arminius gave grace supreme place, and made it, when welcome, pass into saving grace. He made election depend on faith, which latter is the condition of universal grace. Arminianism rejects the so-called common grace of the predestination theory, and its effectual grace for the elect, for, in the Arminian view, saving grace can in no case be missed save by resistance or neglect. Arminianism holds the awakened human will to cooperate with divine grace, in such wise that it rests with the human will whether the divine grace is really accepted or rejected. It is the claim of Arminianism to do more justice than Calvinism to faith and repentance, as conditions of personal salvation, and precedent thereto. The Arminian standpoint admits the foreknowledge of God, but denies foreordination, though it must seem difficult to reduce the foreknowledge of God to such a bare knowledge of the future. But it is, of course, freely to be granted that foreknowledge in God, simply as knowledge, does not carry any causal energy or efficiency with it. But it may still be doubted whether the prescience of God can be nothing more fruitful and creative than such a position implies, and whether its relation to predestination may not be a more necessary one. The theory seems to fail of giving satisfactory account of the divine activity in its relation to human activity, in the sphere of grace. The shortcoming of Arminianism lies in its failing also to do justice to the spirit of Scripture with its emphatic assertion of the doctrine of God as the one absolute will, which, in its expression, is the sole originative power of the universe.<P>See also <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PROVIDENCE">PROVIDENCE</a>.<P>10. Wesleyanism on Predestination:<P>Wesleyanism, or Methodist Arminianism, maintains, like Calvinism, the will of God to be supreme. But it distinguishes between the desires and the determinations of God. It takes divine foreknowledge to precede the divine volitions. It makes God\'s prescience purely intuitional, and regards that which He knows as nowise necessitated by such knowledge, a conception of God which differentiates the Wesleyan type of thought from Calvinism. God is held to have left events in the moral sphere contingent, in an important sense, upon the human will. Hence, human probation is based upon this position, as to man\'s free choice. Influence of God upon man\'s will is postulated, for its right guidance and direction, but not in any coercive sense, as Augustinianism seems to Wesleyanism to imply. Thus, it is hoped to preserve just balance, and maintain proper responsibility, between the divine and the human factors in this spiritual cooperation.<P>When we come to the present needs and values of the predestination doctrine, we have to remark the primal need of a thoroughly ethicized conception of God. The past few decades have witnessed a lessened interest in this doctrine, largely because of the increasingly ethical conceptions of Deity.<P>11. Present Needs and Values of the Doctrine:<P>That is to say, the doctrine of the sovereignty of God\'s will has ceased to be taken, as often in the older presentations, as mere almightiness, or arbitrary and resistless will. Calvin expressly taught that no cause or ground but God\'s unconditioned will was to be sought; but he feebly tried to save divine will from sheer omnipotence by saying that God is law to Himself; and the notion of sovereignty continued to be presented in ways quite absolute and irresponsible. But God we now regard as the absolute and eternal reason, no less than the supreme will, and as both of these in the one indivisible and absolute personality. We have passed from an abstract predestinationism to maintain God in living and ethical relations to the world and to man. Such an ethical sovereignty we hold to be necessary, over against that lax humanitarian spirit, which, in its recoil from the older Calvinism, invests the Deity with no greater powers of moral determination than may be implied in His love, when viewed as a mere golden haze of good will.<P>LITERATURE.<P>The relative works of Augustine, Aquinas, Zwingli, Calvin, Luther, Melanchthon, Arminius, Wesley, Rothe, Dorner, Luthardt; W. Cunningham, The Reformers, and the Theology of the Reformation, 1862; James Orr, article "Calvinism," in Hastings, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics; and the various Histories of Christian Doctrine.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ELECTION">ELECTION</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FOREORDAIN">FOREORDAIN</a>`96';
isbe[7075]='Preeminence`pre-em\'-i-nens: Superiority, especially in noble or excellent qualities. The word stands for: (1) mothar, "what is over and above," "excellence"; "Man hath no preeminence above the beasts" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ecc\',3,19);">Ec 3:19</a>); (2) proteuo, "to be first"; "That in all things he (= Christ) might have the preeminence" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Col\',1,18);">Col 1:18</a>); (3) ho philoproteuon, is translated "who loveth to have the preeminence," literally "who loveth to be first" (of Diotrephes, <a onClick="return mV(\'3Jo\',1,9);">3Joh 1:9</a>).``1';
isbe[7076]='Prefer`pre-fur\':Does not always have the general meaning "to choose before another." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',137,6);">Ps 137:6</a>, it does have this sense and the two versions agree; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',2,9);">Es 2:9</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) has "removed" where the King James Version has "preferred"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,3);">Da 6:3</a>, "distinguished" takes its place; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,15,30);">Joh 1:15,30</a>, "become" is substituted for "preferred"; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,27);">1:27</a>, "preferred" drops out entirely; in <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,10);">Ro 12:10</a>, the versions agree.``1';
isbe[7077]='Preparation`prep-a-ra\'-shun: The concordances indicate that the word "preparation" occurs only twice in the Old Testament, once in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',22,5);">1Ch 22:5</a>, where it is used in the ordinary sense "to make preparation," and once in <a onClick="return mV(\'Nah\',2,3);">Na 2:3</a>, "in the day of his preparation," both of them translating the same Hebrew root and requiring no special elucidation. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',6,15);">Eph 6:15</a> the apostle speaks of the equipment of the Christian as including the "feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace," which means, according to Thayer, "with the promptitude and alacrity which the gospel produces."<P>The word occurs with technical significance ("the Preparation") in the gospel narratives of the crucifixion, translating the Greek paraskeue (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,62);">Mt 27:62</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,42);">Mr 15:42</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,54);">Lu 23:54</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14,31,42);">Joh 19:14,31,42</a>). It is used as a technical term indicating the day of the preparation for the Sabbath, that is, the evening of Friday. This is its use in Josephus, Ant, XVI, vi, 2, and presumably in the Synoptics. Later its use seems to have been extended to denote regularly the 6th day (Friday) of each week. So in the Didache, viii and the Martyrdom of Polycarp, vii.<P>The addition of the phrase tou pascha, "of the passover," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14);">Joh 19:14</a>, and of the phrase "for the day of that sabbath was a high day," in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,31);">19:31</a>, seems to indicate that the author of the Fourth Gospel regarded the Passover as occurring on the Sabbath in the year of the crucifixion. This is clearly the natural interpretation of the words of John\'s Gospel, and if it were not for the seeming contradiction to the narrative of the Synoptics it is very doubtful whether any other interpretation would ever have been put upon them. This question is discussed in the articles on the date of the crucifixion and the Lord\'s Supper, and it will be necessary only to allude to it here.<P>It is possible that the phrase the "Preparation of the passover" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14);">Joh 19:14</a> may mean it was the preparation day (Friday) of the Passover week (see Andrews, Life of our Lord, 451ff; and most recently Zahn, Das Evangelium des Johannes, 1908, 637ff). This method of harmonizing seems to the present writer to be forced, and it therefore seems wiser to give to the words of <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,14);">Joh 19:14</a> their natural interpretation, and to maintain that, according to the author of the Fourth Gospel, the Passover had not been celebrated at the time of the crucifixion. There seems to be reason to believe that the ordinary view that the Lord\'s Supper was instituted in connection with the Passover, based upon the narrative in Mark (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,12);">14:12</a>ff), does not have the unanimous support of the Synoptic Gospels.<P>LITERATURE.<P>In addition to references in the body of the article, the commentaries, especially Plummer, Cambridge Bible, "St. John," Appendix A; Allen, ICC, "St. Matthew," 270-74; Godet, Commentary on the New Testament; Gospel of John, English translation, New York, 1886, II, 378, 379; and the significant articles on the interpretation of <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,15,16);">Lu 22:15,16</a> by Burkitt and Brooke, Journal of Theological Studies, IX, 569ff, and by Box, ib, X, 106.``13';
isbe[7078]='Presbyter; Presbytery`prez\'-bi-ter, pres\'-bi-ter, prez\'-bi-ter-i, pres\'-bi-ter-i (presbuteros, presbuterion):<P>1. Words Used in the New Testament:<P>This latter word occurs in the New Testament once (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,14);">1Ti 4:14</a>), so rendered in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American). But the original Greek occurs also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,66);">Lu 22:66</a>, in the Revised Version (British and American) translated "the assembly of the elders," in the King James Version simply "the elders"; and in <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',22,5);">Ac 22:5</a>, translated in English Versions of the Bible "the estate of the elders"; in both of which occurrences the word might more accurately be translated "the presbytery," just as it is in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,14);">1Ti 4:14</a>. Besides these three occurrences of the neuter singular presbuterion, the masculine plural presbuteroi, always translated "elders," is often used to indicate the same organization or court as the former, being applied earlier in New Testament history to the Jewish Sanhedrin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,1);">Mt 27:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',28,12);">28:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',9,22);">Lu 9:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,5,8);">Ac 4:5,8</a>), and later in the development of the church to its governing body, either in general (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,2,4,6,22);">Ac 15:2,4,6,22</a>f), or locally (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,23);">Ac 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',16,4);">16:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,17);">20:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,17);">1Ti 5:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,5);">Tit 1:5</a>, etc.). It is sometimes used of the body, or succession, of religious teachers and leaders of the nation\'s past (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',15,2);">Mt 15:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',11,2);">Heb 11:2</a>). The word "presbyter" has been contracted by later ecclesiastical usage into the title "priest," although in the New Testament they are by no means identical, but on the contrary are often explicitly distinguished (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,43);">Mr 14:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,14);">Ac 23:14</a>).<P>2. Based on the Synagogue Plan:<P>The local synagogue of the Jewish church was under the care and control of a body of representative men called "the elders" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',7,3);">Lu 7:3</a>). Naturally the Christian church, beginning at Jerusalem and formed on the lines of the synagogue, took over the eldership into its own organization (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',11,30);">Ac 11:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,2);">15:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',5,1);">1Pe 5:1</a>, etc.); so also in all the cities in which the missionary activities of the apostles made church organization necessary, the local synagogues readily suggested and supplied a feasible plan for such organization (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,23);">Ac 14:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,5);">Tit 1:5</a>). The mother-church at Jerusalem, formed after the pattern of the synagogue, might well have offered to the churches formed elsewhere under apostolic preaching the only conceivable plan. We do not know from the New Testament passages how these elders were selected; we must infer that they were elected by the membership of the churches, as under the synagogue plan; they were then installed into their office by apostles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,23);">Ac 14:23</a>), or by apostolic helpers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Tts\',1,5);">Tit 1:5</a>), or by "the presbytery" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,14);">1Ti 4:14</a>), or by both together (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ti\',1,6);">2Ti 1:6</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,14);">1Ti 4:14</a>). So early as the Pauline letters the office of presbyter seems already to have borne the distinction of two functions: teaching and ruling (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',5,17);">1Ti 5:17</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',20,17,28);">Ac 20:17,28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',5,12,13);">1Th 5:12,13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',5,2);">1Pe 5:2</a>).<P>3. Principle Found in the New Testament:<P>In the New Testament history and epistles it does not appear that the various churches of a district were already organized into an ecclesiastical body known as "the presbytery," having some basis of representation from the constituent churches. But the absence of such mention is far from being final proof that such district organizations did not exist; little dependence can be placed on mere negative arguments. Moreover, the council of apostles and elders in Jerusalem, to which Paul and Barnabas appealed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',15,\'1-\');">Ac 15</a>), is positive evidence of the principle of representation and central authority. The various district organizations would quickly follow as administrative and judicial needs demanded; such development came early in the growth of the church, so early that it is unmistakably present in the post-apostolic age.<P>In Revelation the 24 elders occupy a conspicuous place in the ideal church (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,4,10);">Re 4:4,10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',5,6);">5:6</a>, etc.), sitting for those they represent, as an exalted presbytery, close to the throne of the Eternal One. "The four and twenty elders occupying thrones (not seats) around the throne are to be regarded as representatives of the glorified church; and the number, twice twelve, seems to be obtained by combining the number of the patriarchs of the Old Testament with that of the apostles of the New Testament" (Milligan on <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',4,4);">Re 4:4</a> in the Expositor\'s Bible).<P>4. In the Presbyterian Church:<P>Presbytery is the court, or representative body, in the Presbyterian Church next above the Session of the local church. The Session is composed of the ruling elders, elected by the membership of a particular church, with the minister as moderator or presiding officer. The Presbytery is composed of all the ordained ministers, or teaching elders, and one ruling elder from the Session of each church in a given district or community. To it now, as in New Testament times (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ti\',4,14);">1Ti 4:14</a>), is committed the power of ordination; as also of installation and removal of ministers. It has supervision of the affairs which are general to the churches in its jurisdiction, and the power of review in all matters concerning the local churches (see Form of Government, Presbyterian Church in U.S.A., chapter x). The Presbytery elects the representatives composing the General Assembly, which is the highest court of the Presbyterian Church.<P>5. In Architecture:<P>In ecclesiastical architecture the presbytery is that part of the church structure which is set apart for the clergy, usually the space between altar and apse; sometimes used of the whole choir space, but ordinarily the word is more restricted in its meaning.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BISHOP">BISHOP</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHURCH">CHURCH</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ELDER">ELDER</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOVERNMENT">GOVERNMENT</a>`109';
isbe[7079]='Presence`prez\'-ens: In the Old Testament nearly always the rendition of panim, "face" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',3,8);">Ge 3:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',33,14);">Ex 33:14</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',95,2);">Ps 95:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',63,9);">Isa 63:9</a>, etc.); occasionally of \'ayin, "eye" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',23,11);">Ge 23:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',25,9);">De 25:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',28,1,11);">Jer 28:1,11</a>, etc.); and in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,22);">1Ki 8:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,7);">Pr 14:7</a>, "the presence of" represents the preposition neghedh, "before"; compare also Aramaic qodham, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',2,27);">Da 2:27</a> the King James Version (the Revised Version (British and American) "before"). In Greek, "presence" has an exact equivalent in parousia, but this word is rendered "presence" only in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Cr\',10,10);">2Co 10:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,12);">Php 2:12</a>; the Revised Version (British and American); <a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',1,26);">Php 1:26</a> (the King James Version "coming"). Elsewhere parousia is rendered "coming," but always with "presence" in the margin. Otherwise in the New Testament "presence" represents no particular word but is introduced where it seems to suit the context (compare e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,13);">Ac 3:13</a> the King James Version and <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,19);">Ac 3:19</a>).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PAROUSIA">PAROUSIA</a>`48';
isbe[7080]='Present`prez\'-ent.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GIFT">GIFT</a>`1';
isbe[7081]='Presently`prez\'-ent-li: The strict meaning is of course "at the present moment," "instantly," and the modern force "after a short interval" is due simply to the procrastinating habits of mankind; hence, the Revised Version (British and American) modifications of the King James Version use of the word into "immediately" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',21,19);">Mt 21:19</a>), "even now" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,53);">Mt 26:53</a>), and "forthwith" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Phl\',2,23);">Php 2:23</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',12,16);">Pr 12:16</a>, the uncertainty of the meaning (margin "openly," Hebrew "in the day") has led to the retention of the King James Version word.``1';
isbe[7082]='President`prez\'-i-dent (carakh): Used only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',6,\'2-7\');">Da 6:2-7</a>. Probably a Persian derivative from sar, "head," and the Aramaic equivalent for Hebrew shoter. The meaning is self-evident and refers to the appointment of Daniel by Darius to be one of the three princes who had rule over the satraps of the empire.``1';
isbe[7083]='Press`pres: As a verb is used in the Revised Version (British and American) as a translation of no less than 13 Greek and Hebrew words (rather more in the King James Version). All the Revised Version (British and American) uses are modern. In the King James Version may be noted <span class="noTag">The Wisdom of Solomon 17:11</a>, "pressed with conscience" (the Revised Version (British and American) "pressed hard by"); 2Macc 14:9, "pressed on every side" (the Revised Version (British and American) "surrounded by foes"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',18,5);">Ac 18:5</a>, "pressed in the spirit" (the Revised Version (British and American) "constrained by"). As a noun, the King James Version uses "press" in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,4);">Mr 2:4</a> for ochlos, "crowd" (so the Revised Version (British and American)).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=VINE">VINE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WINE">WINE</a>`1';
isbe[7084]='Pressfat`pres\'-fat (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,16);">Hag 2:16</a> in the King James Version, the English Revised Version "winefat," the American Standard Revised Version "winevat").`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=WINE">WINE</a>`1';
isbe[7085]='Presume; Presumptuous; Presumptuously`pre-zum\', pre-zump\'-tu-us, pre-zump\'-tu-us-li: "To presume" ("to take or go beforehand") is to speak or act without warrant or proudly. In the Old Testament the words are for the most part the translation of zudh, and zidh, "to boil up" (as water), and derivatives; hence, to act proudly, to speak unauthorizedly, etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',18,20,22);">De 18:20,22</a>, of the prophet; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',21,14);">Ex 21:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,43);">De 1:43</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,12,13);">17:12,13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',19,13);">Ps 19:13</a>, "presumptuous sins" (zedh, "proud"); compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',86,14);">Ps 86:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,21);">119:21</a>, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',21,24);">Pr 21:24</a>, etc.). Other words are male\', "to fill," "to be full" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',7,5);">Es 7:5</a>, "presume"); \'aphal, "to lift oneself up" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',14,44);">Nu 14:44</a>); beyadh ramah, "with a high hand" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',15,30);">Nu 15:30</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "with a high hand"); in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Pe\',2,10);">2Pe 2:10</a> tolmetes, "bold," "daring," is translated "presumptuous," the Revised Version (British and American) "daring"; in 2Macc 3:24; 5:15 we have katatolmao; thrasus, is rendered "presumption" in 2Macc 5:18, the Revised Version (British and American) "daring deed."``185';
isbe[7086]='Prevent`pre-vent\' (qadham; prophthano, phthano): "Prevent" occurs in the King James Version in the literal but obsolete sense of "to come or go before," "to anticipate," not in the sense of "to hinder." It is the translation of qadham, "to be sharp," "to be in front," "to be beforehand" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',22,6,19);">2Sa 22:6,19</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "came upon" <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',3,12);">Job 3:12</a>, the Revised Version (British and American) "receive"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',30,27);">30:27</a>, "are come upon"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',41,11);">41:11</a>, "first given"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',18,5,18);">Ps 18:5,18</a>, "came upon"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',21,3);">21:3</a>, the American Standard Revised Version "meetest"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',59,10);">59:10</a>, the American Standard Revised Version "meet"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',79,8);">79:8</a>, the American Standard Revised Version "meet"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',88,13);">88:13</a>, "come before"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',119,147,148);">119:147,148</a>, the American Standard Revised Version "anticipated"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',21,14);">Isa 21:14</a>, "did meet"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',9,10);">Am 9:10</a>, the American Standard Revised Version "meet"). In the New Testament prophthano, with same meaning, is translated "prevent" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',17,25);">Mt 17:25</a>, "Jesus prevented him," the Revised Version (British and American) "spake first to him"); phthano (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Th\',4,15);">1Th 4:15</a>, "shall not prevent," the Revised Version (British and American) "shall in no wise precede"). "Prevent" in the above sense occurs in The <span class="noTag">Wisdom of Solomon 6:13</span>, the Revised Version (British and American) "forestalleth" (phthano); <span class="noTag">16:28</span>, "we must prevent the sun to give thee thanks," the Revised Version (British and American) "rise before."``185';
isbe[7087]='Prey`pra (baz, Tereph, shalal): "Prey" is frequent in the Old Testament, chiefly as the translation of baz, "spoil," "plunder" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',14,3,11);">Nu 14:3,11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',1,39);">De 1:39</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',10,6);">Isa 10:6</a>, etc.); of Tereph, "prey of wild beasts," "torn thing" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,9);">Ge 49:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',23,24);">Nu 23:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',4,11);">Job 4:11</a>, etc.); of malqoah, "a taking" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,11);">Nu 31:11</a>, etc.; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,24,25);">Isa 49:24,25</a>); of shalal, "spoil" or "booty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,30);">Jud 5:30</a> twice; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,24,25);">Jud 8:24,25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',10,2);">Isa 10:2</a>, etc.). Maher-shalal-chash-baz (the Revised Version margin "The spoil speedeth, the prey hasteth") was the symbolical name given to a son of Isaiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',8,1,3);">Isa 8:1,3</a>). "Prey" does not occur in the New Testament, but is found in the Apoc: 1Esdras 8:77, "for our sins...were given up...for a prey" (pronome); Judith 9:4; 16:5; 1Macc 7:47; Ecclesiasticus 27:10 (thera); Judith 5:24 (katabroma).<P>In the Revised Version (British and American) shalal is generally translated "spoil" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,30);">Jud 5:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,24,25);">8:24,25</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',10,2);">Isa 10:2</a>, etc.), while, conversely, "prey" (noun and verb) is occasionally substituted for "spoil," "booty" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,32);">Nu 31:32</a>, ere).`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BOOTY">BOOTY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SPOIL">SPOIL</a>`185';
isbe[7088]='Price`pris: Represents various words in the Old Testament; time, is the usual Greek word for "price" in the New Testament. "Of great price" is polutimos, in <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',13,46);">Mt 13:46</a>, and poluteles, in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',3,4);">1Pe 3:4</a>. The verb occurs in <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',11,13);">Zec 11:13</a> the King James Version and the English Revised Version as "prised." The spelling "prized" in the American Standard Revised Version and some editions of the King James Version is due to a confusion with "prize."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DOG">DOG</a>`1';
isbe[7089]='Prick`prik: As a noun (= any slender pointed thing, a thorn, a sting) it translates two words:<P>(1) sekh, a "thorn" or "prickle." Only in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',33,55);">Nu 33:55</a>, "those that ye let remain of them be as pricks in your eyes," i.e. "shall be a source of painful trouble to you."<P>(2) kentron "an iron goad" for urging on oxen and other beasts of burden: "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" (the King James Version of <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,5);">Ac 9:5</a>, where the Revised Version (British and American) omits the whole phrase, following the best manuscripts, including Codices Sinaiticus, A, B, C, E; the King James Version of <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',26,14);">Ac 26:14</a>, where the Revised Version (British and American) has "goad," margin "Greek: \'goads\' "), i.e. to offer vain and perilous resistance. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOAD">GOAD</a>. As a verb (= "to pierce with something sharply pointed," "to sting"), it occurs once in its literal sense: "a pricking brier" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',28,24);">Eze 28:24</a>); and twice in a figurative sense: "I was pricked in my heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',73,21);">Ps 73:21</a>); "They were pricked in their heart" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',2,37);">Ac 2:37</a>, katanusso, Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) compungo; compare English word "compunction").``49';
isbe[7090]='Priest`prest (kohen, "priest," "prince," "minister"; hiereus archiereus; for hiereus megas, of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,21);">Heb 10:21</a>, see Thayer\'s Lexicon, under the word hiereus:<P><b>I. NATURE OF THE PRIESTLY OFFICE</b><P class="in15">1. Implies Divine Choice<P class="in15">2. Implies Representation<P class="in15">3. Implies Offering Sacrifice<P class="in15">4. Implies Intercession<P><b>II. THE TWO GREAT PRIESTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, MELCHIZEDEK AND AARON</b><P><b>III. PRIESTLY FUNCTIONS AND CHARACTER</b><P class="in15">1. A Strictly Religious Order<P class="in15">2. Priestism Denied<P class="in15">3. The High Priest\'s Qualifications<P class="in15">4. Symbolism of Aaron\'s Rod<P><b>IV. CONSECRATION OF AARON AND HIS SONS (<span class="noTag">EXODUS 29; LEVITICUS 8</span>)</b><P class="in15">1. Symbolism of Consecration<P class="in15">2. Type and Archetype<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>A priest is one who is duly authorized to minister in sacred things, particularly to offer sacrifices at the altar, and who acts as mediator between men and God. In the New Testament the term is applied to priests of the Gentiles (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,13);">Ac 14:13</a>), to those of the Jews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',8,4);">Mt 8:4</a>), to Christ (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,5,6);">Heb 5:5,6</a>), and to Christians (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,9);">1Pe 2:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,6);">Re 1:6</a>). The office of priest in Israel was of supreme importance and of high rank. The high priest stood next the monarch in influence and dignity. Aaron, the head of the priestly order, was closely associated with the great lawgiver, Moses, and shared with him in the government and guidance of the nation. It was in virtue of the priestly functions that the chosen people were brought into near relations with God and kept therein. Through the ministrations of the priesthood the people of Israel were instructed in the doctrine of sin and its expiation, in forgiveness and worship. In short, the priest was the indispensable source of religious knowledge for the people, and the channel through which spiritual life was communicated.<P>I. Nature of the Priestly Office.<P>1. Implies Divine Choice:<P>The Scriptures furnish information touching this point. To them we at once turn. Priesthood implies choice. Not only was the office of divine institution, but the priest himself was divinely-appointed thereto. "For every high priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men in things pertaining to God....And no man taketh the honor unto himself, but when he is called of God, even as was Aaron" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,1,4);">Heb 5:1,4</a>). The priest was not elected by the people, much less was he self-appointed. Divine selection severed him from those for whom he was to act. Even our Great High Priest, Jesus Christ, came not into the world unsent. He received His commission and His authority from the fountain of all sovereignty. At the opening of His earthly ministry He said, "He anointed me....He hath sent me" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',4,18);">Lu 4:18</a>). He came bearing heavenly credentials.<P>2. Implies Representation:<P>It implies the principle of representation. The institution of the office was God\'s gracious provision for a people at a distance from Him, who needed one to appear in the divine presence in their behalf. The high priest was to act for men in things pertaining to God, "to make propitiation for the sins of the people" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,17);">Heb 2:17</a>). He was the mediator who ministered for the guilty. "The high priest represented the whole people. All Israelites were reckoned as being in him. The prerogative held by him belonged to the whole of them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,6);">Ex 19:6</a>), but on this account it was transferred to him because it was impossible that all Israelites should keep themselves holy as became the priests of Yahweh" (Vitringa). That the high priest did represent the whole congregation appears, first, from his bearing the tribal names on his shoulders in the onyx stones, and, second, in the tribal names engraved in the twelve gems of the breastplate. The divine explanation of this double representation of Israel in the dress of the high priest is, he "shall bear their names before Yahweh upon his two shoulders for a memorial" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,12,19);">Ex 28:12,19</a>). Moreover, his committing heinous sin involved the people in his guilt: "If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3);">Le 4:3</a>). The Septuagint reads, "If the anointed priest shall sin so as to make the people sin." The anointed priest, of course, is the high priest. When he sinned the people sinned. His official action was reckoned as their action. The whole nation shared in the trespass of their representative. The converse appears to be just as true. What he did in his official capacity, as prescribed by the Lord, was reckoned as done by the whole congregation: "Every high priest...is appointed for men" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,1);">Heb 5:1</a>).<P>3. Implies Offering Sacrifice:<P>It implies the offering of sacrifice. Nothing is clearer in Scripture than this priestly function. It was the chief duty of a priest to reconcile men to God by making atonement for their sins; and this he effected by means of sacrifice, blood-shedding (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,1);">Heb 5:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,3);">8:3</a>). He would be no priest who should have nothing to offer. It was the high priest who carried the blood of the sin offering into the Most Holy Place and who sprinkled it seven times on and before the mercy-seat, thus symbolically covering the sins of the people from the eyes of the Lord who dwelt between the cherubim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',80,1);">Ps 80:1</a>). It was he also who marked the same blood on the horns of the altar of burnt offering in the Court of the Tabernacle, and on those of the golden altar, that the red sign of propitiation might thus be lifted up in the sight of Yahweh, the righteous Judge and Redeemer.<P>4. Implies Intercession:<P>It implies intercession. In the priestly ministry of Aaron and his sons this function is not so expressly set forth as are some of their other duties, but it is certainly included. For intercession is grounded in atonement. There can be no effective advocacy on behalf of the guilty until their guilt is righteously expiated. The sprinkling of the blood on the mercy-seat served to cover the guilt from the face of God, and at the same time it was an appeal to Him to pardon and accept His people. So we read that after Aaron had sprinkled the blood he came forth from the sanctuary and blessed Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',9,\'22-24\');">Le 9:22-24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,\'22-27\');">Nu 6:22-27</a>).<P>II. The Two Great Priests of the Old Testament, Melchizedek and Aaron:<P>These were Melchizedek and Aaron. No others that ever bore the name or discharged the office rank with these, save, of course, the Lord Jesus Christ, of whom they were distinguished types. Of the two, Melchizedek was the greater. There are two reasons why they are to be considered chiefs: first, because they are first in their respective orders. Melchizedek was not only the head of his order, but he had no successor. The office began and terminated with him (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,3);">Heb 7:3</a>). The ordinary priests and the Levites depended for their official existence on Aaron. Apart from him they would not be priests. Second, the priesthood of Christ was typified by both. The office is summed up and completed in Him. They were called and consecrated that they might be prophecies of Him who was to come and in whom all priesthood and offering and intercession would find its ample fulfillment. In the Epistle to the Hebrews the priesthood of both these men is combined and consummated in Christ. But let it be noted that while He is of the order of Melchizedek He exercises the office after the pattern of Aaron. He perfects all that Aaron did typically, because He is the true and the real Priest, while Aaron is but a figure.<P>III. Priestly Functions and Character.<P>1. A Strictly Religious Order:<P>These are minutely prescribed in the Law. In the institution of the office the Lord\'s words to Moses were, "Take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest\'s office" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,1);">Ex 28:1</a> the King James Version). Their duties were strictly religious. They had no political power conferred upon them. Their services, their dependent position, and the way in which they were sustained, i.e. by the free gifts of the people, precluded them from exercising any undue influence in the affairs of the nation. It is true that in process of time the high office degenerated, and became a thing of barter and sale in the hands of unscrupulous and corrupt men, but as originally appointed the priesthood in Israel was not a caste, nor a hierarchy, nor a political factor, but a divinely-appointed medium of communication between God and the people.<P>2. Priestism Denied:<P>The Hebrew priests in no wise interfered with the conscience of men. The Hebrew worshipper of his own free will laid his hand on the head of his sacrifice, and confessed his sins to God alone. His conscience was quite free and untrammeled.<P>3. The High Priest\'s Qualifications:<P>There were certain duties which were peculiar to the high priest. He alone could wear the "garments for glory and for beauty." To him alone it pertained to enter the Most Holy Place and to sprinkle the blood of the sin offering on the mercy-seat. To him alone it pertained to represent the congregation before the Lord as mediator, and to receive the divine communications. He was to be ceremonially pure and holy. He must be physically perfect. Any defect or deformity disqualified a member of the priestly family from performing the duties of the office (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,\'17-21\');">Le 21:17-21</a>). The Law spoke with the utmost precision as to the domestic relations of the high priest. He could marry neither a widow, nor a divorced woman, nor one polluted, nor a harlot; only a virgin of his own people, a Hebrew of pure extraction, could become his wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,14,15);">Le 21:14,15</a>). Nor was he to come in contact with death. He must not rend his clothes, nor defile himself, even for his father or his mother (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,10,11);">Le 21:10,11</a>). His sons might defile themselves for their kin, but the high priest must not. For he was the representative of life. Death did not exist for him, in so far as he was a priest. God is the Ever-Living, the Life-Giving; and His priest, who had "the crown of the anointing oil of his God upon him," had to do with life alone.<P>4. Symbolism of Aaron\'s Rod:<P>Adolph Saphir believes there is deep significance in the miracle of Aaron\'s rod that budded and bare almonds (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',17,\'1-\');">Nu 17</a>). It was a visible sign of the legitimacy of Aaron\'s priesthood and a confirmation of it, and a symbol of its vitality and fruitfulness. The twelve rods of the tribes were dead sticks of wood, and remained dead; Aaron\'s alone had life and produced blossoms and fruit. It was the emblem of his office which correlated itself with life, and had nothing to do with death.<P>IV. Consecration of Aaron and His Sons (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,\'1-\');">Exodus 29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',8,\'1-\');">Leviticus 8</a>).<P>The process of the consecration is minutely described and is worthy of a more detailed and careful study than can here be given it. Only the more prominent features are noticed.<P>(1) Both the high priest and his sons were together washed with water (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,4);">Ex 29:4</a>). But when this was done, the high priest parted company with his sons.<P>(2) Next, Aaron was arrayed in the holy and beautiful garments, with the breastplate over his heart, and the holy crown on his head, the mitre, or turban, with its golden plate bearing the significant inscription, "Holy to Yahweh." This was Aaron\'s investiture of the high office.<P>(3) He was then anointed with the precious oil. It is noteworthy that Moses poured the oil on his head. When he anointed the tabernacle and its furniture he sprinkled the oil, but in Aaron\'s case there was a profusion, an abundance in the anointing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',133,2);">Ps 133:2</a>).<P>(4) After the anointing of the high priest the appointed sacrifices were offered (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,10);">Ex 29:10</a>). Up to this point in the ceremony Aaron was the principal figure, the sons having no part save in the bathing. But after the offerings had been made the sons became prominent participants in the ceremonies, sharing equally with the high priest therein.<P>(5) The blood of the offering was applied to the person of father and sons alike (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,20,21);">Ex 29:20,21</a>). On the tip of the right ear, on the thumb of the right hand, and on the great toe of the right foot was the consecrating blood-mark set.<P>1. Symbolism of Consecration:<P>The significance of this action should not escape the reader. The whole person and career of the priest were thus brought under power of the blood. He had a blood-stained ear that he might hear and obey the divine injunctions, that he might understand the word of Yahweh and interpret it to the people. His will was brought into subjection to the will of His Lord that he might be a faithful minister in things pertaining to God. He had a blood-stained hand that he might execute, rightly and efficiently, the services of the sanctuary and the duties of his great office. He had likewise a blood-stained foot that he might walk in the statutes and commandments of the Lord blameless, and tread the courts of the Lord\'s house as the obedient servant of the Most High. Sacrificial blood, the blood of atonement, is here, as everywhere else, the foundation for saints and sinners, for priests and ministers alike, in all their relations with God.<P>2. Type and Archetype:<P>The priests of Israel were but dim shadows, obscure sketches and drafts of the one Great Priest of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. Without drawing out at length the parallelism between the type and the archetype, we may sum up in a few brief sentences the perfection found in the priestly character of Christ:<P class="in15">(1) Christ as Priest is appointed of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,5);">Heb 5:5</a>).<P class="in15">(2) He is consecrated with an oath (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'20-22\');">Heb 7:20-22</a>).<P class="in15">(3) He is sinless (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,26);">Heb 7:26</a>).<P class="in15">(4) His priesthood is unchangeable (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,23,24);">Heb 7:23,24</a>).<P class="in15">(5) His offering is perfect and final (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'25-28\');">Heb 9:25-28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,12);">10:12</a>).<P class="in15">(6) His intercession is all-prevailing (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,25);">Heb 7:25</a>).<P class="in15">(7) As God and man in one Person He is a perfect Mediator (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,\'1-\');">Heb 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'1-\');">2</a>).<P>LITERATURE.<P>Smith, DB; HDB; P. Fairbairn, Typology of Scripture, II; Soltau, Exposition of the Tabernacle; the Priestly Garments and the Priesthood; Martin, Atonement; A.B. Davidson, Hebrews; Moorehead, Mosaic Institutions.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHRIST,+OFFICES+OF">CHRIST, OFFICES OF</a>`123';
isbe[7091]='Priest, Christ As``<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHRIST,+OFFICES+OF">CHRIST, OFFICES OF</a>`1';
isbe[7092]='Priest, High`(ha-kohen, ho hiereus; ha-kohen ha-mashiach, ho hiereus ho christos; ha-kohen ha-gadhol, ho hiereus ho megas; kohen ha-ro\'sh, ho hiereus hegoumenos; New Testament archiereus):<P><b>I. INSTITUTION OF THE HIGH-PRIESTHOOD</b><P class="in15">1. The Family<P class="in15">2. The Consecration<P class="in15">3. The Dress<P class="in15">4. The Duties of High-Priesthood<P class="in15">5. Special Regulations<P class="in15">6. The Emoluments<P class="in15">7. Importance of the Office<P><b>II. HISTORY OF THE HIGH-PRIESTHOOD IN ISRAEL</b><P class="in15">1. In the Old Testament<P class="in15">2. In the New Testament<P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>I. Institution of the High-Priesthood.<P>Temples with an elaborate ritual, a priesthood and a high priest were familiar to Moses. For a millennium or two before his time these had flourished in Egypt. Each temple had its priest or priests, the larger temples and centers having a high priest. For centuries the high priest of Amon at Thebes stood next to the king in power and influence. Many other high-priesthoods of less importance existed. Moses\' father-in-law was priest of Midian, doubtless the chief or high priest. In founding a nation and establishing an ecclesiastical system, nothing would be more natural and proper for him than to institute a priestly system with a high priest at the head. The records give a fairly full account of the institution of the high-priesthood.<P>1. The Family:<P>Aaron, the brother of Moses, was chosen first to fill the office. He was called "the priest" (ha-kohen) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',31,10);">Ex 31:10</a>). As the office was to be hereditary and to be preserved in perpetuity in the family of Aaron (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,9,29);">Ex 29:9,29</a>), he is succeeded by his son Eleazar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',20,28);">Nu 20:28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,6);">De 10:6</a>), and he in turn by his son Phinehas (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,11);">Nu 25:11</a>). In his time the succession was fixed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,12,13);">Nu 25:12,13</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3,5,16);">Le 4:3,5,16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,22);">6:22</a> he is called "the anointed priest." Three times in the Pentateuch he is spoken of as "great priest" or "high priest" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,10);">Le 21:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,25,28);">Nu 35:25,28</a>). The first of these passages identifies him with the anointed priest.<P>2. The Consecration:<P>The ceremonies by which he was installed in his office are recorded in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',29,29);">Ex 29:29</a>ff. Seven days of special solemnities were spent. The first consecration was by Moses; it is not said who performed the others. There was special washing and anointing with oil (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',133,2);">Ps 133:2</a>). Each new high priest must wear the holy garments, as well as be specially anointed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,10);">Le 21:10</a>). Every day a bullock for a sin offering must be offered for atonement; the altar also must be cleansed, atoned for, and anointed, the high priest offering a sacrifice or minchah for himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,24);">Le 6:24</a>).<P>3. The Dress:<P>Besides the regularly prescribed dress of the priests, the high priest must wear the robe of the ephod, the ephod, the breastplate and the mitre or head-dress (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',8,\'7-9\');">Le 8:7-9</a>). The robe of the ephod seems to have been a sleeveless tunic, made of blue, fringed with alternate bells and pomegranates (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'31-35\');">Ex 28:31-35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,\'22-26\');">39:22-26</a>). The ephod seemed to be a variegated dress of the four colors of the sanctuary, blue, purple, scarlet and fine linen interwoven with gold (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'6-8\');">Ex 28:6-8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,\'2-5\');">39:2-5</a>). This distinguishing ephod of the high priest was fastened at the shoulders by two clasps of shoham stone, upon each of which was engraved the names of six tribes of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'9-14\');">Ex 28:9-14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,6,7);">39:6,7</a>). Over the ephod and upon his breast he wore the breastplate, a four-cornered choshen suspended by little chains. Set in this in four rows were twelve precious stones, having engraved upon them the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. This breastplate must have contained a pocket of some kind inside, for in it were deposited the Urim and Thummim, which seemed to be tangible objects of some kind (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'15-30\');">Ex 28:15-30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,\'8-21\');">39:8-21</a>). The mitre or head-dress was of fine linen, the plate of the crown of pure gold, and inscribed upon it the words, "Holy to Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'36-38\');">Ex 28:36-38</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',39,30,31);">39:30,31</a>). When entering the Holy of Holies he must be dressed wholly in linen, but in his ordinary duties in the dress of the priests; only when acting as high priest he must wear his special robes.<P>4. The Duties of the High-Priesthood:<P>In addition to his regular duties as a priest, the high priest was to enter the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,3,15,33,34);">Le 16:3,15,33,34</a>). He must also officiate at the ceremony of the two goats, when one is sent into the wilderness to Azazel, and the other slain to make atonement for the sanctuary (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,10);">Ex 30:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,\'8-10\');">Le 16:8-10</a>). He alone could make atonement for the sins of the people, the priests and his own house (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3);">Le 4:3</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',9,8);">9:8</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',16,6);">16:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',15,25);">Nu 15:25</a>). He must offer the regular meal offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,14,15);">Le 6:14,15</a>). He must share with the priests in the caring for the lamp that burned continually (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,21);">Ex 27:21</a>), He must assist in arranging the shewbread (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',25,30);">Ex 25:30</a>). When he carried the breastplate with the names of the tribes inscribed thereon he acted as mediator between Israel and God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,29);">Ex 28:29</a>). He alone could consult the Urim and Thummim before Yahweh, and according to his decision Israel must obey (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',27,21);">Nu 27:21</a>).<P>5. Special Regulations:<P>An office so important required certain special regulations. He must be free from every bodily defect (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,\'16-23\');">Le 21:16-23</a>). He must marry only a virgin of Israel, not a widow, nor a divorced woman, nor a profane one (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,14);">Le 21:14</a>). He must not observe the external signs of mourning for any person, and not leave the sanctuary when news came of the death of even a father or mother (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,\'10-12\');">Le 21:10-12</a>). He must not defile himself by contact with any dead body, even father or mother (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,11);">Le 21:11</a>); and is forbidden to let his hair grow long or rend his clothes as a sign of mourning (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,10);">Le 21:10</a>). If he should bring guilt upon the people, he must present a special offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3);">Le 4:3</a>). Sins affecting the priesthood in general must be expiated by the other priests as well as himself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,1);">Nu 18:1</a>). He must eat nothing that died of itself or was torn by beasts (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',22,8);">Le 22:8</a>). He must wash his feet and hands when he went to the tabernacle of the congregation and when he came near to the altar to minister (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',30,\'19-21\');">Ex 30:19-21</a>). At first Aaron was to burn incense on the golden altar every morning when he dressed the lamps and every evening when he lighted them (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',27,21);">Ex 27:21</a>), but in later times the common priests performed this duty. He must abstain from holy things during his uncleanness (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',22,\'1-3\');">Le 22:1-3</a>), or if he should become leprous (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',22,4,7);">Le 22:4,7</a>). He was to eat the people\'s meat offering with the inferior priests in the holy place (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,16);">Le 6:16</a>). He must assist in judging the leprosy in the human body and garments (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',13,\'2-59\');">Le 13:2-59</a>), and in adjudicating legal questions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',17,12);">De 17:12</a>). When there was no divinely-inspired leader, the high priest was the chief ruler till the time of David and again after the captivity.<P>6. The Emoluments:<P>The emoluments were not much greater than those of the priests in general. He received no more inheritance among the tribes than any other Levite, but he and his family were maintained upon certain fees, dues and perquisites which they enjoyed from the common fund. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,28);">Nu 18:28</a> the priests were to receive a tithe of the tithe paid in to the Levites. Josephus says this was a common fund (Ant., IV, iv, 4), but the high priest was probably charged with the duty of distributing it. In general the family of the high priest was well-to-do, and in the later period became very wealthy. The high priest and his family were among the richest people of the land in the time of Christ, making enormous profits out of the sacrifices and temple business.<P>7. Importance of the Office:<P>The importance of the high priest\'s office was manifest from the first. The high priest Eleazar is named in the first rank with Joshua, the prince of the tribes and successor of Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',34,17);">Nu 34:17</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',14,1);">Jos 14:1</a>). He with others officiated in the distribution of the spoils of the Midianites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,21,26);">Nu 31:21,26</a>). His sins were regarded as belonging to the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,3,12);">Le 4:3,12</a>). He acted with Moses in important matters (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',26,1);">Nu 26:1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',31,29);">31:29</a>). The whole congregation must go or come according to his word (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',27,20);">Nu 27:20</a>). His death was a national event, for then the manslayer was free to leave the City of Refuge (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',35,25,28);">Nu 35:25,28</a>). He had no secular authority, but was regarded generally as the leading religious authority. Later, he became also the leading secular as well as religious authority.<P>II. History of the High-Priesthood in Israel.<P>1. In the Old Testament:<P>In general the present writer accepts the historical records of the Old Testament as true and rejects the critical views of a fictitious or falsified history. Such views have only subjective reasons to support them and are based upon a naturalistic evolutionary view of the development of Israel\'s religion. As Moses was the founder of the high-priesthood in Israel he anticipated a perpetuation of the office throughout the history (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',26,3);">De 26:3</a>). The high priest appears frequently. Eleazar officiated with Joshua in the division of the land among the twelve tribes (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',14,1);">Jos 14:1</a>). The law of the manslayer shows that he was an important personage in the life of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',20,6);">Jos 20:6</a>). He seemed to have the power to distribute the offices of the priests to those whom he would, and poor priests would appeal to him for positions (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,36);">1Sa 2:36</a>). The office seems to have remained in the family of Eleazar until the days of Eli, when, because of the wickedness of his sons, the family was destroyed and the position passed into the family of Ithamar (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'31-36\');">1Sa 2:31-36</a>). A descendant of that family officiated at Nob in the times of Saul, whose name was Ahimelech (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',21,2);">1Sa 21:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,11);">22:11</a>). His son, Abiathar, escaped from the slaughter, and later seems to have succeeded his father and to have been chief priest throughout David\'s reign (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',22,\'20-23\');">1Sa 22:20-23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',23,9);">23:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',30,7);">30:7</a>). Zadok seems to have had almost equal privilege (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',8,17);">2Sa 8:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',18,16);">1Ch 18:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,6);">24:6</a> almost certainly by copyist\'s error, transpose Abiathar and Ahimelech; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',2,26);">Mr 2:26</a> may be based on this reading. See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ABIATHAR">ABIATHAR</a>, etc.). Because he joined the party of Adonijah rather than that of Solomon, Abiathar was deposed and banished to Anathoth, where he spent the rest of his days (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,26,27);">1Ki 2:26,27</a>). Zadok was put in his place (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,35);">1Ki 2:35</a>). He seems to have been a descendant of Eleazar. Under Jehoshaphat, Amariah was high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',19,11);">2Ch 19:11</a>) and was the leading authority in all religious matters. In the time of Athaliah, during the minority of Joash and almost his entire reign Jehoiada was high priest and chief adviser. He seems to have been the most influential man in the kingdom for more than half a century (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,4);">2Ki 11:4</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,\'2-16\');">11:2-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',24,\'1-\');">2Ch 24</a> passim). Azariah officiated in the days of Uzziah and Hezekiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',26,20);">2Ch 26:20</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,10);">31:10</a>); Urijah in the reign of Ahaz (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,\'10-16\');">2Ki 16:10-16</a>), and the latter priest seems to have been a friend of Isaiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',8,2);">Isa 8:2</a>). Hilkiah held the office in the days of Josiah when the Book of the Law was discovered (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',22,4);">2Ki 22:4</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,4);">23:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',34,9);">2Ch 34:9</a>); Zephaniah in the time of Jeremiah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',29,25);">Jer 29:25</a>f); Seraiah in the days of Zedekiah, who was put to death at Riblah by Nebuchadnezzar (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,18);">2Ki 25:18</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,24);">Jer 52:24</a>). At the time, mention is made of a priest of the second rank (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,4);">2Ki 23:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,18);">25:18</a>) and Zephaniah fills that office (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,24);">Jer 52:24</a>). It is doubtful whether this is the same Zephaniah mentioned in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',29,25);">Jer 29:25</a>. This "second priest" was doubtless a deputy, appointed to take the high priest\'s place in case anything should prevent his performing the duties of the office. Lists of high priests are given in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,\'1-15\');">1Ch 6:1-15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,\'50-53\');">6:50-53</a>. The first of these gives the line from Levi to Jehozadak who was carried away in the captivity under Nebuchadnezzar. The second traces the line from Aaron to Ahimaaz, and is identical so far with the first list.<P>There could have been no place for the functions of the high priest during the captivity, but the family line was preserved and Joshua the son of Jehozadak was among those who first returned (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',3,2);">Ezr 3:2</a>). From this time the high priest becomes more prominent. The monarchy is gone, the civil authority is in the hands of the Persians, the Jews are no longer independent, and hence, the chief power tends to center in the high-priesthood. Joshua appears to stand equal with Zerubbabel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',1,1,12,14);">Hag 1:1,12,14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,2,4);">2:2,4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,1,8);">Zec 3:1,8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,14);">4:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,\'11-13\');">6:11-13</a>).<P>He is distinctly known as high priest (ha-kohen ha-gadhol). He takes a leading part in establishing the ecclesiastico-civil system, particularly the building of the temple. In the vision of Zechariah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,\'1-5\');">Zec 3:1-5</a>) Satan accuses the high priest who is here the representative proper of the nation. The consummation of the Messianic age cannot be completed without the cooperation of the high priest who is crowned with Zerubbabel, and sits with him on the throne (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',6,13);">Zec 6:13</a>). The prophet also describes Joshua and his friends as "men of the sign," alluding to the coming Messiah under whom the sin of the land was to be taken away in one day (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,9);">Zec 3:9</a>f). The promise is made to Joshua that if he will walk in Yahweh\'s ways and keep His house, he shall judge Yahweh\'s house, i.e. Israel, keep His court and have a place to walk among those who stand before Yahweh (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',3,7);">Zec 3:7</a>). He is anointed equally with the prince of the royal line, for the two sons of oil (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',4,14);">Zec 4:14</a>) almost certainly refer to the royal Zerubbabel and priestly Joshua who are to be joint inspirers of Israel in rebuilding the temple.<P>This exaltation of the high priest is very different from the state of things pictured by Ezekiel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,\'1-\');">Eze 40</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',41,\'1-\');">41</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',42,\'1-\');">42</a>). In that picture no place is left for a high priest; the prince seemed to be the chief personage in the ecclesiastical system. Ezekiel\'s vision was ideal, the actual restoration was very different, and the institutions and conditions of the past were carried out rather than the visions of the prophet. In the time of Nehemiah, Eliashib was high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',3,1,20);">Ne 3:1,20</a>). For abusing his office by using a temple chamber in the interests of his family he was reprimanded (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,\'4-9\');">Ne 13:4-9</a>). The list of high priests from Jeshua to Jaddua is given in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,10);">Ne 12:10</a>. According to Josephus (Ant., XI, viii, 5) Jaddua was priest at the time of Alexander the Great (332 BC), but it is practically certain that it was Jaddua\'s grandson, Simon, who was then priest (see W.J. Beecher, Reasonable Biblical Criticism, chapter xviii). Thus is preserved the unbroken line from Aaron to Jaddua, the office still being hereditary. No essential change can be found since the days of Ezra. The Book of Chronicles, compiled some time during this period, uses the three names, ha-kohen, ha-kohen ha-ro\'sh, ha-kohen ha-gadhol. The word naghidh ("prince") is also used, and he is called "the ruler of the house of God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,11);">1Ch 9:11</a>). This seems to imply considerable power invested in him. Usually the Chronicler in both Books of Chronicles and Nehemiah uses the term "the priest."<P>The line of Eleazar doubtless continued until the time of the Maccabees, when a decided change took place. The Syrian Antiochus deposed Onias III and put his brother Jason in his place (174 BC), who was soon displaced by Menelaus. About 153 BC Jonathan the Hasmonean was appointed by King Alexander, and thus the high-priesthood passed to the priestly family of Joiarib (1Macc 10:18-21). Whether the family of Joiarib was a branch of the Zadokites or not cannot be determined. After the appointment of Jonathan, the office became hereditary in the Hasmonean line, and continued thus until the time of Herod the Great. The latter set up and deposed high priests at his pleasure. The Romans did the same, and changed so frequently that the position became almost an annual appointment. Though many changes were thus made, the high priest was always chosen from certain priestly families. From this group of deposed priests arose a class known as "chief priests." The anointing prescribed in the law of Moses was not always carried out in later times, and in fact was generally omitted. The Mishna speaks of high priests who were installed in office simply by clothing them with their special robes (Schurer, II, i, p. 217, note 24).<P>2. In the New Testament:<P>In New Testament times the high priest was the chief civil and ecclesiastical dignitary among the Jews. He was chairman of the Sanhedrin, and head of the political relations with the Roman government. It is not clear just how far he participated in the ceremonies of the temple. No doubt he alone entered the Holy of Holies once a year on the Day of Atonement, and also offered the daily offerings during that week. What other part he took in the work was according to his pleasure. Josephus says that he officiated at the Sabbath, the New Moon and yearly festivals. The daily minchah (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',6,12);">Le 6:12</a>) which he was required to offer was not always offered by the high priest in person, but he was required to defray the expense of it. This was a duty which, according to Ezekiel\'s vision, was to be performed by the prince. The Jews had many contentions with the Romans as to who should keep the garments of the high priest. When Jerusalem fell into the hands of the Romans, the robe of state also fell into their hands.<P>In the time of Christ, Annas and Caiaphas were high priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',3,2);">Lu 3:2</a>), though, as appears later in the Gospel, Caiaphas alone acted as such. Annas had probably been deposed, yet retained much of his influence among the priestly families. For particulars see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ANNAS">ANNAS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CAIAPHAS">CAIAPHAS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JESUS+CHRIST">JESUS CHRIST</a>. These two were also the chief conspirators against Jesus. As president of the council Caiaphas deliberately advised them to put Jesus to death to save the nation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',11,51);">Joh 11:51</a>). He was also chairman of the council which tried and condemned Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',26,57,58,63,65);">Mt 26:57,58,63,65</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',14,53,60,61,63);">Mr 14:53,60,61,63</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',22,54);">Lu 22:54</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',18,\'12-14\',19,24,28);">Joh 18:12-14,19,24,28</a>). They were also leaders in the persecution of the apostles and disciples after Pentecost (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',4,6);">Ac 4:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,17,21);">5:17,21</a>); Saul sought letters from the high priest to Damascus to give him authority to bring any Christians he might find there bound to Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',9,2);">Ac 9:2</a>). He presided at the council which tried Paul (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',22,5);">Ac 22:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',23,4);">23:4</a>).<P>In the Epistle to the Hebrews the doctrine of the priesthood of Jesus is fully and carefully elaborated. Jesus is here called the great High Priest, as well as priest. The opening words of the Epistle contain the essential thought: "when he had made purification of sins" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,3);">1:3</a>). The title of high priest is first introduced in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,17);">2:17</a>, "a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God"; also in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,1);">3:1</a>, "the Apostle and High Priest of our confession." Having thus fairly introduced his great theme, the writer strikes the keynote of his great argument: "Having then a great high priest," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,14,15);">4:14,15</a>). From <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'14-\');">4:14</a> to <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,28);">7:28</a> the argument deals with the high-priestly work of Jesus. His qualifications are not only those which distinguish all priesthood, but they are also unique. He is named after the order of Melchizedek. The general qualifications are:<P class="in15">(1) He is appointed by God to His office (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,1);">5:1</a>).<P class="in15">(2) He is well fitted for the office by His experiences and participation in human temptations (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'2-6\');">5:2-6</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,18);">2:18</A>).<P class="in15">(3) He undergoes a divine preparation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,8,9);">5:8,9</a>).<P>The special qualifications of His priesthood are: It is after the order of Melchiezedek (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,10);">5:10</a>). This is an eternal one (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,20);">6:20</A>); royal or kingly (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,1,2,3);">7:1-3</a>); independent of birth or family (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,3);">7:3</A>); it is timeless (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,8);">7:8</a>); superior to that of Levi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'4-10\');">7:4-10</A>); new and different from that of Aaron (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,11,12);">7:11,12</A>). It is also indissoluble (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,6);">7:16</A>); immutable (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,21);">7:21</A>); inviolable (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,24);">7:24</a>). Thus, with all these general and special qualifications, He is completely fitted for His work (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,26);">7:26</A>). That work consists in offering up Himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">7:27</A>); entering within the veil as a forerunner (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',6,20);">6:20</A>); presenting the sacrificial blood in heaven itself (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,3);">8:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,7,24);">9:7,24</a>); thus obtaining eternal redemption (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,12);">9:12</a>); ratifying the new covenant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'15-22\');">9:15-22</a>). The result of this high-priestly work is a cleansing from all sin (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,6);">9:23</a>); a possibility of full consecration to God and His service (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,10);">10:10</a>); an ultimate perfection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,14);">10:14</a>); and full access to the throne of grace (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,21,22);">10:21,22</a>).<P>LITERATURE.<P>Articles on the priesthood in general, with references to the high priest in HDB, HCG, EB, Jewish Encyclopedia, Kitto, Smith, Fallows, Schaff-Herzog, etc.; no article on "High Priest" only. For the history, Breasted, History of Egypt; Schurer, History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, II, i, 207-99; Josephus, Ant, XV, XVIII, XX. For works on the priesthood from the radical viewpoint, see Graf, S.I. Curtiss, Jost, Graetz, Kautzsch, Budde, Baentsch, Benzinger, Buchler, Meyer, Wellhausen. For a more moderate position see Baudissin, Die Geschichte des alttestamentlichen Priesterthums untersucht. For a more conservative position see A. Van Hoonacker, Le sacerdoce levitique dans la loi et dans l\'histoire des Hebreux. On the high-priesthood subsequent to the return from Babylon, see B. Pick, Lutheran Church Review,1898,I, 127-41; II, 370-74; III, 555-56; IV, 655-64; and the commentaries on the passages cited.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHRIST,+OFFICES+OF">CHRIST, OFFICES OF</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRIEST">PRIEST</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRIESTHOOD+IN+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT">PRIESTHOOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PAUL,+THE+APOSTLE">PAUL, THE APOSTLE</a>`1';
isbe[7093]='Priesthood`prest\'-hood:<P>1. Priesthood Is an Office<P>2. In the Old Testament<P>3. Hereditary Priesthood<P>4. In the New Testament<P>5. Conclusions<P>LITERATURE<hr /><P>All worship is based on priesthood, for the priestly office is an essential part of salvation. Christianity itself has its glorious Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ, and it is through His one supreme offering that we are brought into saved relations with God and enjoy fellowship with Him. The priesthood of Christ and its mighty effects in sacrifice and intercession on behalf of the people of God are the chief and fundamental theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews.<P>1. Priesthood an Office:<P>Priesthood is a real office, definite and specific. It is needful to insist on this fact, for the noble word "priest" has been misappropriated and misapplied, so that its intrinsic import has been impaired. There is a certain literary slang indulged in by some who talk of the "priests of science," "priests of art," and similar absurdities. The idea of priesthood, if priesthood is to have any definite meaning, can have no place in literature or science or art or in anything of the kind. For it belongs to the realm of grace, presupposing as it does sin and the divine purpose to remove it. Hugh Martin writes that he "would as soon think of transferring the language of geometry and of algebra to botany and talk of the hypothenuse of a flower and the square root of a tree, or the differential coefficient of a convolvulus, as to speak of the priesthood of nature or letters." Priesthood is an office, embracing very specific duties and functions.<P>2. In the Old Testament:<P>Priesthood in some form appears to have existed from the earliest times, even from the beginning of the history of our race. In patriarchal times the office was held and its duties were discharged by those who occupied some sort of headship, and particularly by the father or the chief of the family and of the tribe. Thus, Noah in his capacity of priest and in behalf of his household "builded an altar unto Yahweh, and took of every clean beast, and of every clean bird, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',8,20);">Ge 8:20</a>). Abraham offered the ram "for a burnt-offering in the stead of his son" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,13);">Ge 22:13</a>). In like manner Job offered burnt offerings for his children, and likewise by divine direction for the three "comforters" when the great trial had passed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',1,5);">Job 1:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',42,8);">42:8</a>). In these and the like instances there was priestly action no less certainly than in that of Aaron or of any regularly appointed priest in Israel. Melchizedek was "priest of God Most High" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',14,18);">Ge 14:18</a>). Isaac "builded an altar there and called upon the name of Yahweh" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',26,25);">Ge 26:25</a>), as did Jacob (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',33,20);">Ge 33:20</a>). In these cases priestly acts were performed by the patriarchs in their capacity as fathers of the family or heads of clans. From the beginning, priesthood with its acts of expiation and of worship was thus recognized as a divinely-instituted office. But in pre-Mosaic times there was no special class of priests recognized.<P>3. Hereditary Priesthood:<P>Regular priestly succession in a single family was established by Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'1-3\');">Ex 28:1-3</a>). From this point of time onward the priesthood in Israel was confined to the family of Aaron. No hereditary priesthood seems to have prevailed in patriarchal times. According to the Epistle to the Hebrews, Melchizedek, a priest of the highest rank, had neither predecessor nor successor in his great office. By divine direction Moses designated the Aaronic family as the priestly family in Israel, and he prescribed the garments they should wear, the sacrifices they should offer both for themselves and for the congregation, their maintenance, their domestic relations, and their conduct toward their fellow Hebrews.<P>In the appointment of the priesthood there is no trace of Egyptian influence. Yet we know that Joseph married the daughter of the priest of On (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',41,50);">Ge 41:50</a>). But this fact had no bearing on the selection of Israel\'s priestly family. The Aaronic priesthood had nothing in common with that of Egypt; it claimed to be of divine origin, and its duties, functions and powers in no way contradict the claim. The witness of an Egyptian archaeologist (Dr. M.G. Kyle) may be here introduced touching one essential element in the duties of the priestly office, namely, sacrifice: "The entire absence from the offerings of old Egyptian religion of any of the great Pentateuchal ideas of sacrifice, substitution, atonement, dedication, fellowship, and indeed of almost every essential idea of real sacrifice, as clearly established by recent very exhaustive examination of the offering scenes, makes for the element of revelation in the Mosaic system by delimiting the field of rationalistic speculation on the Egyptian side. Egypt gave nothing to that system, for it had nothing to give." As much may be said respecting the priesthood; Israel took little or nothing of its powers and functions from Egyptian sources.<P>Although the office was limited to the Aaronic family, nevertheless in certain exigencies and emergencies others beside the regular priest offered sacrifices to the Lord and were accepted by Him. Thus did Gideon in a time of great straits in Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',6,24,26);">Jud 6:24,26</a>); thus the men of Beth-shemesh (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14,15);">1Sa 6:14,15</a>); the prophet Samuel (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,9);">1Sa 7:9</a>); David (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,13,17);">2Sa 6:13,17</a>); Elijah (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',18,23,\'32-38\');">1Ki 18:23,32-38</a>), etc. The chosen people appear to have felt free to offer sacrifices and to engage in priestly functions when occasion required, until the central sanctuary was established on Mt. Moriah. When the Temple was built and dedicated, priestly action was confined to Jerusalem and to the regular priestly household. When Pharisaism, with its rigid legalism, with its intolerable burdens, became dominant, all liberty of worship and spontaneous service largely disappeared. The religious life of Israel stiffened into a dreadful monotony.<P>4. In the New Testament:<P>All priesthood reaches its climax in that of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is because of the perfection of His priesthood that the office as represented by Melchizedek and Aaron was effective, and fulfilled the end for which it was appointed. The one answers to the other as type and antitype, as prediction and fulfillment. Christ\'s priesthood is opened to us in the Epistle to the Hebrews (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,\'14-18\');">2:14-18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,\'14-16\');">4:14-16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,\'1-10\');">5:1-10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,9,10,18);">7:9,10,18</a>). Two fundamental truths touching His priesthood are made very prominent in the Epistle to the Hebrews. These are its order and its duties. By the order is meant the rank or grade of the Priest, and by the duties the various functions of His ministry. Christ\'s order as Priest is that of Melchizedek, not at all that of Aaron; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'1-\');">Heb 7</a> makes this fact perfectly clear. Like Melchizedek, and infinitely above Melchizedek, He is Priest, having no predecessor in the great office, and no successor; herein He stands absolutely alone, peerless and perfect forever. He executes the duties or functions of it after the pattern of Aaron, as <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,\'1-\');">Heb 9</a> clearly exhibits. These two priesthoods, Melchizedek\'s and Aaron\'s, are gloriously accomplished in the person and Work of Jesus Christ.<P>The point is raised and discussed with some keenness in our day; Did Christ execute the office of priest during His sojourn on earth, or does He exercise the office only in heaven? A full discussion of this interesting subject would be inappropriate. However, let it be noted (1) that the Lord Jesus was appointed a Priest no less certainly than was Aaron (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,4,5);">Heb 5:4,5</a>). In the words, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee," there appears to be a reference both to His incarnation (<a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,32);">Lu 1:32</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,5);">Heb 1:5</a>) and also to His resurrection (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',13,33);">Ac 13:33</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,17);">Heb 2:17</a> we are told that it "behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." The assumption of human nature was needful that He might be such a priest. John the Baptist saw this truth, and said, "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',1,29);">Joh 1:29</a>).<P>There was certainly priestly action in His death. Twice we are told that He "offered up himself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">Heb 7:27</a>), "For this he did once for all, when he offered up himself." This strong term, "offered," is sacrificial and points to His death as an offering made for the sins of the people. His own action in it must not be overlooked; it was He Himself who presented the offering; He was not, therefore, a struggling victim, a martyr, who could not escape the doom that came upon Him<69>nay, He voluntarily offered Himself.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">Heb 9:14</a> we find these significant words: "How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" It was as Priest that He made this stupendous offering, and this He did when still on earth. He was at once both sacrifice and priest. Never was He more active than when He offered Himself to God.<P>It is worthwhile to remind ourselves that the words employed in Scripture to express the act of His dying are never used to denote the death of a creature, a man. Matthew has, He "yielded up (dismissed), his spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',27,50);">Mt 27:50</a>). John has, He "gave up his spirit" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',19,30);">Joh 19:30</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',15,37);">Mr 15:37</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',23,46);">Lu 23:46</a> both have the same words: He "gave up the ghost." He died, not because He was mortal as we are, nor because He could not deliver Himself, but because He gave Himself for our sins that we might be forgiven and saved (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',10,17,18);">Joh 10:17,18</a>). The voluntariness of His offering is the very essence of His priestly atonement.<P>5. Conclusions:<P>Priesthood springs out of the deepest need of the human soul. Men universally feel that somehow they have offended the Power to whom they are responsible, to whom they must give account of their deeds. They long to appease their offended Lord, and they believe that one who is authorized and qualified to act in their behalf may secure for them the abrogation of penalty and the pardon they seek. Hence, priesthood connects itself most closely with sin, with guilt and its removal. The heart craves the intervention and intercession on their behalf of one who has liberty of access to God, and whose ministry is acceptable. In short, the priest is the representative of the sinner in things pertaining to God. He is the mediator whose office it is to meet and satisfy the claims of God upon those for whom he acts, and who secures the pardon and the favor which the offender must have, if he is to enjoy fellowship with God. And this, and more than this, we have in our Great High Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ.<P>LITERATURE.<P>P. Fairbairn, Typology of Scripture, II; Soltau, Exposition of the Tabernacle, the Priestly Garments and the Priesthood; Martin, Atonement; Moorehead, Mosaic Institutions, article "Priest."`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHRIST,+OFFICES+OF">CHRIST, OFFICES OF</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRIESTHOOD+IN+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT">PRIESTHOOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT</a>`123';
isbe[7094]='Priesthood in the New Testament`1. The Jewish Priesthood<P>2. The Priesthood and High-Priesthood of Jesus Christ<P>3. The Priesthood of Believers<hr /><P>1. The Jewish Priesthood:<P>In the New Testament hierateuma (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,5,9);">1Pe 2:5,9</a>), "priesthood," is not found with reference to the Jewish priesthood, but hiereus, and archiereus, "high priest," frequently occur. As until the fall of Jerusalem the activities of the priests were carried on in careful accordance with the prescriptions of the Old Testament, there naturally is nothing new or striking in the numerous New Testament references to their work. Perhaps the information of the greatest interest is found in <a onClick="return mV(\'Luk\',1,\'5-9\');">Lu 1:5-9</a> to the effect that Zacharias was of the course of Abijah, the 8th of the 24 courses into which the priests were divided (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,\'7-18\');">1Ch 24:7-18</a>), and that in these courses the priests divided their work by lot. In the Gospels the archiereis are mentioned oftener than are the hiereis, the power of the priesthood seeming to have been absorbed by a sort of priestly aristocracy. As under the political pressure of that time the office of high priest could seldom be retained until the death of the holder, there might even be several living at the same time who had for a longer or shorter time held this office which made a man the head of the nation, not only ritually, but also politically, since the high priest was ex officio presiding officer of the Sanhedrin. Not only would these ex-high priests naturally retain the title belonging to their former dignity, but probably the name had come to include as well other members of the same families or of families of equal position, so that it seems that "chief priests" is a more exact translation of archiereis than high priests. In the singular, however, the reference of archiereus is usually, if not invariably, to the individual who at the time given was holding the unique office of high priest. The word hiereus is of course employed in its ordinary signification on the rare occasions when reference is made in the New Testament to corresponding ministers of other religions, as to the priest of Zeus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',14,13);">Ac 14:13</a>) and also to Melchizedek (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,1);">Heb 7:1</a>).<P>2. The Priesthood and High-Priesthood of Jesus Christ:<P>Only in Hebrews is the activity of Jesus set forth as priestly and high-priestly, but in this Epistle great emphasis is laid on these aspects of His work. Interpreters seldom distinguish between these two aspects of His work, and it is plain that sometimes at least the author himself made no effort sharply to distinguish them. But certain considerations make it probable that they were not really confused or combined in the mind of the author himself. For example, it is to be noted that the priesthood of Jesus is declared to be after the order of Melchizedek, and consequently radically unlike that of the Levitical priests. On the other hand, the Aaronic high-priesthood is regarded as having been analogous to that of Jesus, so that in spite of its inferiority, comparison is frequently made with it. It is readily seen that the work of the high priest, both because of his entry into the Most Holy Place and because he bore the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgment for a memorial before Yahweh continually, far more suitably than that of the ordinary priests typified the atoning and intercessory work of Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,12,15);">Ex 28:12,15</a>).<P>Attempting then to treat separately the priestly and high-priestly functions of Jesus, we note that most of what is said of the priestly functions is involved in the declaration that He is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and this thought is handled in <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'1-\');">Heb 7</a> in such a way as to make plain the superiority of a priesthood after the order of Melchizedek, and thus to confirm the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, the great theme of the book. Historically, the blessing bestowed upon Abraham and the reception of tithes from him prove the superiority of Melchizedek to Levi, and still more to the priestly descendants of Levi (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'4-10\');">7:4-10</a>). Further, Jesus became priest not on the ground of a "carnal commandment," i.e. in an order based on descent and inheritance, but by "the power of an endless life" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,16);">7:16</A>), of which fact Melchizedek reminds us, since Scripture is silent alike as to his birth and his death. Again, unlike the Levitical priests, Christ is inducted into His office by the oath of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,20,21);">7:20,21</A>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',110,4);">Ps 110:4</a>). Finally, while the priests of the Levitical line were hindered from permanence in office by their death, Jesus holds His priesthood untransmitted and untransmissible (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,23,24);">7:23,24</a>). This discussion of the priesthood of Christ "after the order of Melchizedek" occupies almost all of <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,\'1-\');">Heb 7</a>, but at <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,26);">7:26</A> His high-priesthood is suddenly introduced, and after that point, while His work is more than once contrasted with that of the temple priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',8,4,5);">8:4,5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,6);">9:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,11);">10:11</A>f), no further reference is in any way made to Melchizedek.<P>After having twice merely given the title of high priest to Jesus (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',2,17);">Heb 2:17</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',3,1);">3:1</a>), the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews at <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,14);">4:14</A> begins a statement of the resemblance between Jesus and the Jewish high priest, such "as was Aaron," finding the resemblance to reside<P>(1) in His divine appointment to His work (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,4,5);">5:4,5</a>), (2) in His experience of suffering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,7,8);">5:7,8</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',4,15);">4:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,2);">5:2</A>), and (3) in His saving work suggested by the sacrificial activity of the ordinary high priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',5,9);">5:9</a>), which, however, it far transcends in value and effect. But<P>(4) later the work of the high priest and that of Jesus are contrasted as to place where done, the high priest going into the second tabernacle, i.e. the Holy of Holies (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,7);">9:7</a>), while Christ passes through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, "heaven itself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,11,24);">9:11,24</A>). A similar contrast is<P>(5) drawn between the sacrifices respectively offered, the ancient sacrifices being the blood of goats and calves (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,12);">9:12</A>), Christ\'s being "himself" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">9:14</a>), "his own blood" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,12);">9:12</A>), "the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,14);">9:14</A>). The author also accepts and urges without argument or even explanation<P>(6) the truly sacrificial character of this self-immolation of Jesus. Nor is this fact nullified by the emphasis which once is laid on doing God\'s will in an antithesis copied from the Ps (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',10,\'5-9\');">10:5-9</A>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',40,6);">Ps 40:6</a>ff), for here the contrast drawn is not between sacrifice on one side and obedience on the other, but rather between the sacrifice of animals dying involuntarily and wholly unconscious of the sacrificial significance of their death, and the offering of Himself on the part of Jesus in intelligent purpose to carry out the will of God, by which will the body of Jesus Christ is the only acceptable offering (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',10,10);">Heb 10:10</a>). Further the author urges<P>(7) the actual effectiveness of Christ\'s work, his argument being that it would already have been repeatedly performed if this single offering had not been sufficient for all time, "once for all" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',7,27);">Heb 7:27</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',9,26);">9:26</a>). Finally is asserted<P>(8) the intercessory work of Christ, which, though not explained, seems to be a figurative presentation of his idea that men are blessed because Christ died, i.e. that this was an indispensable condition of God\'s manifestation of His merciful love, and that the grace consequent on the death of Christ does not merely grow out of a fact, but that the divine love and providence for believers are exercised, neither automatically or impersonally, but in virtue of a constant personal sympathy for varying temptations and needs, a sympathy intensified by the earthly experience, temptation, suffering of Him who had been and is, not only the Divine Son, but also the Son of Man. Thus, the salvation of the believer is certain and complete, and the priestly and high-priestly work of Jesus reaches its consummation.<P>3. The Priesthood of Believers:<P>The priesthood of believers is an idea which finds formal expression less frequently in the New Testament than has been the case in Protestant theology. But it does not follow that there has been a corresponding divergence from the thought of the apostles. It only shows that a thought which according to apostolic conception was one of the invariable privileges of every Christian, and which found, if not constant, yet sufficiently clear expression in this figurative fashion, has come, in consequence of errors which have developed, to receive in the controversies of later centuries stronger emphasis than it did at first. It may well be noted first that this conception of the priesthood of believers, standing by itself, is in no way related to the various priestly activities which are also figuratively attributed to them. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who does not speak of the priesthood of believers, knowing no Christian priesthood but that of Jesus Himself, yet calls "praise," "to do good and to communicate," sacrifices (<a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',13,15,16);">13:15,16</A>). So Paul bids the Romans present their bodies "a living sacrifice" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',12,1);">Ro 12:1</a>), and Peter calls Christians "a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Pe\',2,5);">1Pe 2:5</a>). But this figurative usage is entirely distinct from the subject of the present paragraph. Also the conception of the Christian priesthood never in the New Testament attaches itself merely to the ministry of the Christian church, whatever may be held as to its orders or tasks. In no sense has the church or any church an official priesthood. Nor is it any part of the New Testament conception of the priesthood of believers that any individual should act in any respect for any other. Though the intercessory supplication of believers in behalf of other persons has of late often been represented as a priestly act, as being, indeed, that activity which is essential to any real priesthood of believers, the New Testament thought is quite different, and is to be thus conceived: In ancient times it was held that men in general could not have direct access to God, that any approach to Him must be mediated by some member of the class of priests, who alone could approach God, and who must accordingly be employed by other men to represent them before Him. This whole conception vanishes in the light of Christianity. By virtue of their relation to Christ all believers have direct approach to God, and consequently, as this right of approach was formerly a priestly privilege, priesthood may now be predicated of every Christian. That none needs another to intervene between his soul and God; that none can thus intervene for another; that every soul may and must stand for itself in personal relation with God<6F>such are the simple elements of the New Testament doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. (Consult treatises on New Testament theology, and commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews.)``51';
isbe[7095]='Priests and Levites`(kohen, "priest"; nothing is definitely known as to the origin of the word; Lewi, "<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LEVITES">Levite</a>," on which see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=UPPERCASE">LEVI</a>):<P><b>I. DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE HISTORY</b><P class="in15">1. The Old View<P class="in15">2. The Graf-Wellhausen View<P class="in15">3. Mediating Views<P class="in15">4. An Alternative View<P><b>II. THE DATA OF THE PRIESTLY CODE (P) IN THE PENTATEUCH</b><P class="in15">1. The Levites<P class="in15">2. Aaron and His Sons<P><b>III. THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE PENTATEUCH</b><P><b>IV. FROM MOSES TO MALACHI</b><P class="in15">1. The Sources Other than Ezekiel<P class="in30">(1) The Custody of the Ark<P class="in30">(2) On Its Return from the Philistines<P class="in30">(3) In Abinadab\'s House<P class="in15">2. Ezekiel<P><b>V. EZRA, NEHEMIAH, CHRONICLES</b><P class="in15">1. Estimates of the Chronicler<P class="in15">2. His Data<P><b>VI. LEGAL PROVISIONS</b><P><b>LITERATURE</b><hr /><P>In some Minaean inscriptions found at El-\'Ola, dating back about 1200-800 BC (Hommel in Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands, 719), certain "priests and priestesses of the god Wadd are designated by the term lawi, feminine lawi\'at" (op. cit., 749). It is not known whether this is due to Israelite influence.<P>I. Different Views of the History.<P>1. The Old View:<P>There are great divergences of opinion among modern writers as to the true course of history and the dating of the different documents. It will therefore be best to sketch these views in rough outline, and then give the evidence of the various authorities, together with the reasons that in each case arise naturally from the consideration of that evidence.<P>The old belief was that the whole of the Pentateuchal laws were the work of Moses, that the account of the subsequent history given in the Books of Chronicles was correct, that Ezekiel\'s vision, if taken literally, could not be reconciled with the other known facts and was inexplicable, and that in the case of all other discrepancies harmonistic explanations should be adopted.<P>2. The Graf-Wellhausen View:<P>The modern critical school have traversed every one of these doctrines. The Chronicler is declared to be in constant and irreconcilable conflict with the older authorities, harmonistic explanations are uniformly rejected, the Pentateuch is denied to Moses and split up into a variety of sources of different ages, and Ezekiel gains a place of honor as representing a stage in a continuous and normal development. The subject is thus inextricably linked with the Pentateuchal problem, and reference must be made to the article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PENTATEUCH">PENTATEUCH</a> for an explanation of the supposed documents and a consideration of the analysis with its nomenclature. On the other hand the present article and the article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SANCTUARY">SANCTUARY</a> (which see) explain and discuss the most widely held theory of the historical development into which the history of the supposed Pentateuchal sources has been fitted.<P>The dominant theory is that of Wellhausen. According to this, "Levite" was originally a term denoting professional skill, and the early Levites were not members of the tribe of Levi, but professional priests. Anybody could sacrifice. "For a simple altar no priest was required, but only for a house which contained a sacred image; this demanded watching and attendance" (Wellhausen, Prolegomena, 130). The whole Levitical Law was unknown and the distinction between priests and Levites unheard of. There were a few great sanctuaries and one influential priesthood, that of Shiloh (afterward at Nob). With the monarchy the priesthood became more important. The royal priests at Jerusalem grew in consequence and influence until they overshadowed all the others. Deuteronomy recognized the equal priestly right of all Levites, and Josiah\'s reformation placed the sons of Zadok, who were the priests of Jerusalem and not descendants of Aaron, in a position of decisive superiority. Then Ezekiel drew a new and previously unknown distinction between "the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok" who are "keepers of the charge of the altar," and the other Levites who were made "keepers of the charge of the house" as a punishment for having ministered in the high places. The Priestly Code takes up this distinction and represents it as being of Mosaic origin, making of the sons of Zadok "sons of Aaron." "In this way arose as an illegal consequence of Josiah\'s reformation, the distinction between priests and Levites. With Ezekiel this distinction is still an innovation requiring justification and sanction; with the Priestly Code it is a \'statute forever,\' although even yet not absolutely undisputed, as appears from the priestly version of the story of Korah\'s company. For all Judaism subsequent to Ezra, and so for Christian tradition, the Priestly Code in this matter also has been authoritative. Instead of the Deuteronomic formula \'the priests the Levites,\' we henceforward have \'the priests and the Levites,\' particularly in Chronicles" (op. cit., 147). From that time onward the priests and Levites are two sharply distinguished classes. It is an essential part of this theory that the Chronicler meant his work to be taken as literal history, correctly representing the true meaning of the completed law.<P>See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CRITICISM">CRITICISM</a>.<P>3. Mediating Views:<P>There have been various attempts to construct less thoroughgoing theories on the same data. As a rule, these views accept in some form the documentary theory of the Pentateuch and seek to modify the Wellhausen theory in two directions, either by attributing earlier dates to one or more of the Pentateuchal documents<74>especially to the Priestly Code<64>or else by assigning more weight to some of the statements of Chronicles (interpreted literally). Sometimes both these tendencies are combined. None of these views has met with any great measure of success in the attempt to make headway against the dominant Wellhausen theory, and it will be seen later that all alike make shipwreck on certain portions of the evidence.<P>4. An Alternative View:<P>The independent investigations on which the present article is based have led the writer to a view that diverges in important particulars from any of these, and it is necessary to state it briefly before proceeding to the evidence. In one respect it differs from all the rival schemes, not merely in result, but also in method, for it takes account of versional evidence as to the state of the texts. Subject to this it accepts the Mosaic authenticity of all the Pentateuchal legislation and the clear and consentient testimony of the Law and the Prophets (i.e. of the two earlier and more authoritative portions of the Hebrew Canon), while regarding Chronicles as representing a later interpretation, not merely of the history, but also of the legal provisions. In outline the story of the priesthood is then as follows: Moses consecrated Aaron and his sons as the priests of the desert tabernacle. He purified the rest of the tribe of Levi as a body of sacred porters for the period of wanderings, but in the legislation of Numbers he made no provision whatever for their performing any duties after the sanctuary obtained a permanent location. At the same time he gave a body of priestly teaching requiring for its administration in settled conditions a numerous and scattered body of priests, such as the house of Aaron alone could not have provided immediately after the entry into Canaan. To meet this, Deuteronomy<6D>the last legislative work of Moses<65>contains provisions enlarging the rights and duties of the Levites and conferring on them a priestly position. The earlier distinction was thus largely obliterated, though the high-priestly dignity remained in the house of Aaron till the time of Solomon, when it was transferred from the house of Eli to that of Zadok, who, according to Ezekiel\'s testimony, was a Levite (but see below, IV, 1). So matters remained till the exile, when Ezekiel put forward a scheme which together with many ideal elements proposed reforms to insure the better application of the Mosaic principle of the distinction between holy and profane to greatly altered circumstances. Taking his inspiration from the wilderness legislation, he instituted a fresh division in the tribe of Levi, giving to the sons of Zadok a position similar to that once held by the sons of Aaron, and degrading all other Levites from the priesthood conferred on them by Deuteronomy to a lower rank. The duties now assigned to this class of "keepers of the charge of the house" were never even contemplated by Moses, but Ezekiel applies to them the old phrases of the Pentateuch which he invests with a new significance. As a result of his influence, the distinction between priests and Levites makes its appearance in post-exilic times, though it had been unknown to all the writers of the second division of the Hebrew Canon. At the same time a meaning was read into the provisions of the Law which their original author could not have contemplated, and it was this interpretation which is presented (at any rate to some extent) in Chronicles, and has given us the current tradition. Many of the Chronicler\'s statements are, however, not meant to be taken literally, and could not have been so taken by his original public.<P>II. The Data of the Priestly Code (P) in the Pentateuch.<P>1. The Levites:<P>To arrive at an objective conclusion it is necessary, in the first instance, to examine the facts without such bias as any view put forward by any other author, ancient or modern, sacred or profane, might impart. Every legislator is entitled to be judged on his own language, and where he has, so to speak, made his own dictionary, we are compelled to read his meaning into the terms used. The very first of the material references to the Levites drives this truth home. "But appoint thou the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all the furniture thereof" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',1,50);">Nu 1:50</a>). It is necessary to consider whether such expressions are to be read in a wide or a narrow sense. We learn from <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,3);">Nu 18:3</a> that death would be the result of a Levite\'s touching any of these vessels, and it therefore appears that these words are meant to be construed narrowly. "They shall bear the tabernacle, and all the furniture thereof; and they shall minister unto it," are the next words (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',1,50);">1:50</A>); but yet we read later of the Kohathites who were to bear it that "they shall not touch the sanctuary, lest they die" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,15);">4:15</A>). This shows that the service in question is strictly limited to a service of porterage after the articles have been wrapped up by Aaron and his sons. By no possibility could it include such a task as cleaning the vessels. It is then further directed that the Levites are to take down and set up the dwelling and camp round about it. All these are desert services and desert services only. Then we read that "the Levites shall keep the charge of the tabernacle (dwelling) of the testimony. This concludes the first material passage (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',1,\'50-53\');">Nu 1:50-53</a>). The other passages of Numbers only amplify these directions; they never change them. But some phrases are used which must be more particularly considered.<P>(1) Technical Phrases.<P>We hear that the Levites are "to serve the service of the tent of meeting," and this looks as if it might refer to some general duties, but the context and the kindred passages always forbid this interpretation. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',7,5);">Nu 7:5</a>ff is an admirable instance. Six wagons are there assigned to the Levites for this service, two to the Gershonites and four to the Merarites. "But unto the sons of Kohath he gave none, because the service of the sanctuary belonged unto them; they bare it upon their shoulders." Here service is transport and nothing else. Again we read of the charge of the Levites in the tent of meeting, e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,25);">4:25</A>f. If we look to see what this was, we find that it consisted of transporting portions of the tent that had been packed up. The "in" of English Versions of the Bible does not represent the meaning of the Hebrew fairly; for the context makes it clear that the legislator means "in respect to." "But they shall not go in to see the sanctuary even for a moment, lest they die" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',7,5);">4:20</a>). In English idiom we cannot speak of the transport of portions of a dismantled tent as service in that tent. One other expression requires notice, the phrase "keep the charge" which is distinguished in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',8,26);">8:26</A> from "doing service." The exact meaning cannot be determined. It appears to denote something kindred to service, but of a less exacting nature, perhaps the camping round the tent and the guardianship of the articles on the march. We shall see hereafter by comparison with other books that in P it does not bear the same meaning as elsewhere.<P>(2) Other Legal Provisions.<P>The Levites were to act under the orders of Aaron and his sons, who were to assign to each man his individual functions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,\'1-\');">Nu 3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,\'1-\');">4</a>, etc.). They were to undergo a special rite of purification (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',8,1);">Nu 8</a>), but not of consecration. They were taken in place of the firstborn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,\'1-\');">Nu 3</a>). The age for beginning service is given in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,\'1-\');">Nu 4</a> as 30 years, but in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',8,24);">Nu 8:24</a> as 25 years, if the text is sound. The age for ceasing to serve was 50. In many passages the versions suggest that a good many phrases are textually doubtful, and it is probable that when a critical text of the Pentateuch is formed on scientific principles, a good many superfluous expressions will be found not to be original; but there is no reason to suppose that any real difference in the meaning of the passages would be revealed by such a text.<P>The story of Korah is easily misunderstood. It appears from <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,3);">Nu 16:3</a> that his real object was to put himself on an equality with Moses and Aaron, and this is the "priesthood" referred to in <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,10);">16:10</a>. <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,\'1-\');">Nu 18</a> reinforces the earlier passages. It is noteworthy as showing that in the conception of the legislator the Levites were not to come near the vessels or the altar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,3);">18:3</a>). The penalty is death for both Levites and priests.<P>(3) Contrast with Ezekiel and Chronicles.<P>The impression as to the meaning of P which may be gathered from an examination of its statements is powerfully reinforced when they are tested by reference to Ezekiel and Chronicles, <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,\'9-14\');">Eze 44:9-14</a> seems to demand of the Levites some service as gatekeepers, the slaying of burnt offering and sacrifice for the people and a keeping of "the charge of the house, for all the service thereof," which in the light of <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,7);">44:7</A>f appears to mean in his terminology, not a service of transport, but an entry into the house and the performance of certain duties there. The Priestly Code (P), on the contrary, knows nothing of gatekeepers, regards the slaying of the burnt offering and sacrifice as the duty of the individual sacrificant (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',1,\'1-\');">Le 1</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',3,\'1-\');">3</a>), and<6E>if, as Wellhausen thinks, it refers to the temple<6C>it would have visited with death a Levite who was present in the places in which Ezekiel requires him to minister. Similarly with the Chronicler. For instance, he the Levites being \'for the service of the...in the courts and over the chambers, and over the cleansing of every holy thing\' (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,28);">1Ch 23:28</a>), but P knows nothing of any chambers, would not have allowed the Levites to touch (much less clean) many of the holy things, and regarded service simply as porterage. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,31);">1Ch 23:31</a> the Levites are to offer burnt offerings on certain occasions; in P their approach to the altar would have meant death both to themselves and the priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',18,3);">Nu 18:3</a>). Other instances will be found in PS, 238 f.<P>(4) What the Foregoing Proves.<P>In view of these facts it is impossible to hold that the Levites in P represent a projection of the Levites of the second temple or any post-Mosaic age into the desert period. To P they are a body of sacred porters. The temple of course could not be carried about, and it cannot be held that in this respect the legislation mirrors later circumstances. "Secondly, the net result of such a scheme would be to create a body of Levites for use during the period of wanderings and never thereafter. As soon as the desert age was over the whole tribe would find their occupation gone. How can we conceive that any legislator deliberately sat down and invented such a scheme centuries after the epoch to which it relates, well knowing that in so far as his scheme purported to be a narrative of events it was fictitious from beginning to end, and in so far as it might be regarded as a legislation applicable to his own or any future day, there was not a line in it that could conceivably be put into practice? If any theorist can be conceived as acting in this way, how are we to suppose that his work would meet with acceptance?...Thirdly, P neither embodies the views of Ezekiel nor finds an accurate reflection in Chronicles. The facts are such as to enable us to say definitely that P is not in line with them. It is impossible to assume that he appointed the death penalty for certain acts if performed by Levites because he really wished the Levites to perform those acts" (PS, 241f).<P>2. Aaron and His Sons:<P>Priests and Levites also speaks of Aaron the priest and the sons of Aaron the priest. It is doubtful whether the expression "the sons of Aaron the priests," which occurs frequently in the Massoretic Text, is ever original; the Massoretic expression is nowhere supported by all the authorities. "The phrase \'Aaron the high priest\' is entirely unknown to Priests and Levites. Where the high priest\'s name is given the only qualifying apposition possible in his usage is \'the priest.\' " Aaron and his sons, unlike the Levites, were consecrated, not merely purified.<P>At this point two features only of the legislation need be noticed: the inadequacy of the staff to post-conquest conditions and the signs of date. For example, the leprosy laws (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',13,\'1-\');">Le 13</a>f) postulate the presence of priests to inspect and isolate the patient. "Remembering that on the critical theory P assumes the capital at Jerusalem as self-evident, we must ask how such provisions were to work after the conquest. During the desert period nothing could have been simpler, but what was to happen when the Israelites dwelt all over Canaan from Beersheba to Dan?" (PS, 246). The difficulty is immensely increased if we postulate an exilic or post-exilic date, when the Jewish center of gravity was in Babylonia and there were large colonies in Egypt and elsewhere. And "What are we to say when we read of leprous garments (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',13,47);">Le 13:47</a>)? Was a man to make the pilgrimage from Babylonia to Jerusalem to consult a priest about a doubtful garment? And what about the leper\'s offerings in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,\'1-\');">Le 14</a>? Could they conceivably have been meant to apply to such circumstances?" (PS, 247). The case is no better with the law of leprous houses, which is expressed to apply to the post-conquest period (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',4,\'33-\');">Le 4:33</a>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',5,1,2,3);">5:3</a>). The notification to the priest and his inspections require a priesthood scattered all over the country, i.e. a body far more numerous than the house of Aaron at the date of the conquest. Such instances could easily be multiplied from the legislation; one more only will be cited on account of its importance to the history of the priesthood. According to Leviticus, the individual sacrificant is to kill the victims and flay the burnt offerings. How could such procedure be applied to such sacrifices as those of Solomon (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,63);">1Ki 8:63</a>)? With the growth of luxury the sacrifices would necessarily become too large for such a ritual, and the wealthy would grow in refinement and object to performing such tasks personally. This suggests the reason for later abuses and for the modifications of Ezekiel and the representations of the Chronicler.<P>Result of the Evidence.<P>Thus, the evidence of P is unfavorable alike to the Wellhausen and the mediating views. The indications of date are consistently Mosaic, and it seems impossible to fit the laws into the framework of any other age without reading them in a sense that the legislator can be shown not to have contemplated. On the other hand P is a torso. It provides a large body of Levites who would have nothing to do after the conquest, and a corpus of legislation that could not have been administered in settled conditions by the house of Aaron alone.<P>III. The Other Portions of the Pentateuch.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',19,22,24);">Ex 19:22,24</a> we read of priests, but a note has come down to us that in the first of those verses Aquila had "elders," not "priests," and this appears to be the correct reading in both places, as is shown by the prominence of the elders in the early part of the chapter. In Hebrew the words differ by only two letters. It is said by Wellhausen that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',33,\'7-11\');">Ex 33:7-11</a> (E) Joshua has charge of the ark. This rests on a mistranslation of <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',33,7);">Ex 33:7</a>, which should be rendered (correcting English Versions of the Bible), \'And Moses used to take a (or the) tent and pitch it for himself without the camp.\' It is inconceivable that Moses should have taken the tent of the ark and removed it to a distance from the camp for his private use, leaving the ark bared and unguarded. Moreover, if he had done so, Joshua could not have been in charge of the ark, seeing that he was in this tent while the ark (ex hypothesi) remained in the camp. Nor had the ark yet been constructed. Nor was Joshua in fact a priest or the guardian of the ark in E:<P class="in15">(1) in the Book of Joshua E knows of priests who carry the ark and are quite distinct from Joshua (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',3,\'1-\');">3</a>ff);<P class="in15">(2) in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',31,14);">De 31:14</a> (E) Joshua is not resident in the tent of meeting;<P class="in15">(3) in E, Aaron and Eleazar are priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,6);">De 10:6</a>), and the Levitical priesthood is the only one recognized (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,10);">De 33:10</a>);<P class="in15">(4) there is no hint anywhere of Joshua\'s discharging any priestly duty whatsoever.<P>The whole case rests on his presence in the tent in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',33,\'7-11\');">Ex 33:7-11</a>, and, as shown in the article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PENTATEUCH">PENTATEUCH</a> (which see), this passage should stand after <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',13,22);">Ex 13:22</a>.<P>Then it is said that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,14);">Ex 4:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',17,7);">Jud 17:7</a>, "Levite" denotes profession, not ancestry. In the latter passage the youth whom Micah made a priest was of Levitical descent, being the grandson of Moses (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',17,13);">Jud 17:13</a>), and the case rests on the phrase, "of the family of Judah." Neither of the Septuagintal translations had this text (Field, Hexapla, at the place), which therefore cannot be supported, since it cannot be suggested that Moses belonged to the tribe of Judah. As to <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,14);">Ex 4:14</a>, the phrase "Aaron thy brother the Levite" is merely an adaptation of the more usual, "Aaron, son of Amram, the Levite," rendered necessary by the fact that his brother Moses is the person addressed. The Wellhausen theory here is shown to be untenable in PS, 250 and RE3, XI, 418.<P><a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',32,\'26-29\');">Ex 32:26-29</a> foreshadows the sacred character of Levi, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,6);">De 10:6</a> (E) knows the hereditary Aaronic priesthood. In D the most important passage is <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',18,\'6-8\');">De 18:6-8</a>. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',18,7);">18:7</A> three Septuagintal manuscripts omit the words "the Levites," and if this be a gloss, the whole historic sense of the passage is changed. It now contains an enactment that any Levite coming to the religious capital may minister there "as all his brethren do, who stand there," etc., i.e. like the descendants of Aaron. "The Levites" will then be the explanation of a glossator who was imbued with the latest post-exilic ideas, and thought that "his brethren" must mean those of his fellow-Levites who were not descended from Aaron. The passage is supplemented by <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,5);">21:5</A>, giving to the Levites judicial rights, and <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,8);">24:8</a> assigning to them the duty of teaching the leprosy regulations. Together with <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',30,10);">33:10</a> (E), \'they shall teach thy judgments to Jacob and thy law to Israel: they shall put incense in thy nostrils and whole burnt-offering on thine altar,\' these passages complete the provisions of P in giving to the Levites an occupation in place of their transport duties, and providing the necessary staff for administering the legislation when the Israelites were no longer massed together in a single camp, but scattered over the country. We shall see in the next section that this view of the meaning of the Law was taken by every writer of the second part of the Canon who touches on the subject. Everywhere we are confronted with the legitimacy of a Levitical priesthood; nowhere is there any mention of an exclusive Aaronic right. Smaller points which cannot be discussed here are examined in PS. It only remains to notice that these provisions fully explain the frequent Deuteronomic locution, "the priests the Levites." One other remark must be made. Though it is not expressly stated, we may assume that consecration would be necessary in the case of any Levite acting on the provisions of <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',18,\'6-8\');">De 18:6-8</a>, and was not mentioned because in Hebrew antiquity it went without saying that every priest must be consecrated (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',17,\'1-\');">Jud 17</a>).<P>IV. From Moses to Malachi.<P>1. The Sources Other than Ezekiel:<P>Joshua adds but little to our information. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',18,7);">18:7</a> the priesthood is called the inheritance of the Levites, and it is singular that the Wellhausen critics attribute this to a priestly redactor, though such a writer should ex hypothesi have been jealous to withhold the priesthood from the Levites. It is very interesting to find that in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',3,\'1-\');">Jos 3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',4,\'1-\');">4</a>, all the different critical documents speak in exactly the same terms of "the priests that bare the ark." The priestly writer ought, on the Wellhausen theory, to have said "the Levites." The expression "the priests the Levites" is found alternating with the expression "the priests." All this points to the construction put upon the provisions of the Law in the preceding section, and finds fresh confirmation in Judges, where we see Micah rejoicing at having a Levite as a priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',17,13);">Jud 17:13</a>), thus showing that the sacred character of the tribe was recognized in the earliest post-Mosaic times. The lay sacrifices in this and the following books are explained under <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SANCTUARY">SANCTUARY</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a> (which see).<P>The period of the early kings shows us kings blessing the people (e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,18);">2Sa 6:18</a>). It is claimed that this is the priestly blessing, but without evidence, and there seems no more reason to see special priestly rights here than in David\'s blessing his household (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,20);">2Sa 6:20</a>), or the frequent blessings of the Bible (e.g. Genesis passim, especially "in thee will Israel bless," <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',48,20);">Ge 48:20</a>), while in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,55);">1Ki 8:55</a>ff we actually have the words of the blessing delivered on one of those occasions by Solomon, and it is quite unlike the blessing of the priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,22);">Num 6:22</a>ff).<P>Textual criticism disposes of the supposed priesthood of certain non-Levitical persons. In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',8,18);">2Sa 8:18</a> the Massoretic Text makes David\'s sons "priests," but this reading was unknown to the Septuagint, Symmachus, and Theodotion (Field, ad. loc.). The Septuagint has "aularches," i.e. chamberlains. That this represents a different Hebrew word is proved by the Septuagintal list of <span class="noTag">3 Ki 2:46</A> (not extant in Hebrew), where we read that Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, was "over the aularchy and over the brick-making." It cannot be suggested that this represents an original Hebrew "over the priesthood and over the brick-making," and accordingly we must concede the existence of some secular court office which was rendered by this Greek phrase. Hitzig and Cheyne conjecture that tsokhenim should be read for kohanim. This word gives the sense required (see <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',22,15);">Isa 22:15</a>) Revised Version margin "steward"). In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',20,26);">2Sa 20:26</a> we read that Ira, ha-ya\'iri ("the Jairite"), was a priest, but the Syriac version supported by Lucian and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',23,38);">23:38</a> reads ha-yattiri ("the Jattirite"). Jattir was a priestly city. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,5);">1Ki 4:5</a> Nathan\'s son is described as \'priest friend of the king,\' but the Septuagint reads only "friend of the king" (compare especially <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,33);">1Ch 27:33</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',15,32);">2Sa 15:32</a>), and at another period Nathan\'s son held the kindred secular office of king\'s counselor (the Septuagint <span class="noTag">3 Ki 2:46</a>, a fact that is certainly unfavorable to the view that he ever held priestly office). There can therefore be no doubt that the word "priest," kohen has arisen through dittography of the preceding word nathan, Nathan.<P>Various dealings with the ark and the age of Samuel require notice. As a boy, Samuel himself is given into the service of Eli. It has been argued that he really officiated as a priest, though probably (if the Chronicler\'s data is rejected) not of the Levitical descent. The answer is to be found in his age. Weaning sometimes took place at as late an age as three, and accordingly, the boy may have been as much as four years old when he was taken to Shiloh (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',1,24);">1Sa 1:24</a>). His mother used to bring him a little cloak (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,19);">1Sa 2:19</a>) every year, and this notice also shows his extreme youth. In view of this, it cannot be seriously contended that he performed any priestly service. He must have been something like a page, and he performed some duties of a porter, opening the door-valves of the temple at Shiloh (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',3,15);">1Sa 3:15</a>).<P>(1) The Custody of the Ark<P>When the ark was captured by the Philistines, it was in the charge of priests. When David brought it to Jerusalem, it was again placed in priestly custody, but there is an interregnum of some 20 years (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,2);">1Sa 7:2</a>).<P>It must be remembered that whatever may have happened during this period of great national confusion, the practice of all the rest of history, extending over some 600 or 700 years, is uniform and would far outweigh any irregularities during so short and troubled a period.<P>(2) On Its Return from the Philistines<P>The first difficulty arises on <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14,15);">1Sa 6:14,15</a>. In the second of these verses the Levites come up after the Beth-shemites have finished, and, in Wellhausen\'s words, "proceed as if nothing had happened, lift the ark from the now-no-longer-existent cart, and set it upon the stone on which the sacrifice is already burning" (Prolegomena, 128). It is therefore suggested that <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,15);">6:15</A> is a gloss. But there is difficulty in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14);">6:14</A> which tells of the breaking up of the cart, etc., without explaining what happened to the ark. The trouble may be met by a slight transposition, thus: \'<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14);">14a</a> and the cart came into the field,...and stood there, and there was there a great stone: <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,15);">15a</a> and the Levites took down the ark, etc. and put them on the great stone: <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,14);">14b</A> and clave the wood of the cart,\' etc., followed by <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',6,15);">15b</A>. This makes perfect sense.<P>(3) In Abinadab\'s House<P>The second difficulty is made by <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',7,1);">1Sa 7:1</a>, where we read that the ark was brought to the house of Abinadab \'and Eleazar his son they sanctified to guard\' it. Its old abode, the house at Shiloh, had apparently been destroyed (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',7,12,14);">Jer 7:12,14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',26,6,9);">26:6,9</a>). There it enjoyed considerable importance, for Poels is unquestionably right in identifying the Gibeah of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',10,5);">1Sa 10:5</a>) with the Gibeah (hill) of the ark. Thus, there was a high place there and a Philistine garrison (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',13,3);">1Sa 13:3</a>, where Septuagint and Targum have "Gibeah"). There remains the difficulty caused by the guardianship of Eleazar. Poels may be right in reading we\'eth bene\' El\'azar, "and the sons of Eleazar," for we\'eth \'El\'azar beno, "and Eleazar his son"; but in the entire absence of information, alike as to Eleazar\'s functions and as to his tribe, nothing definite can be said. The narratives of the slaughter among the Beth-shemites and the fate of Uzzah make it certain that Eleazar\'s custody of the ark kept him at a respectful distance from it.<P>When David at the end of this period removed the ark, it was first taken in a cart. This proved fatal to Uzzah, and the ark was deposited in the house of Obededom the Gittite. The text of Samuel knows nothing of any guardianship of the ark by Obed-edom. Probably he took very good care not to go near it in view of Uzzah\'s fate. Then it was transported to Jerusalem by bearers (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,13);">2Sa 6:13</a>)<29>presumably of Levitical descent. No further irregularities are urged.<P>More important is the change of priesthood; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'27-36\');">1Sa 2:27-36</a> clearly threatens Eli, whose house had been chosen in Egypt, with a transference of the high-priesthood to another line. Careful comparison with <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',2,27);">1Ki 2:27</a> makes it certain that the prophecy was fulfilled when Zadok was placed by Solomon in the place of Abiathar. Who was Zadok? According to Chronicles (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,8,53);">1Ch 6:8,53</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,3);">24:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',27,17);">27:17</a>) he was descended from Aaron through Eleazar, and this is accepted by Orr, Van Hoonacker and many others, who take Chronicles in a literal sense. According to Ezekiel he was a Levite (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,46);">40:46</a>, etc.). It is noteworthy that throughout the prophetical books we always hear of the Levitical priesthood, not the Aaronic (see especially <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',12,31);">1Ki 12:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',33,\'18-22\');">Jer 33:18-22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mal\',2,\'1-\');">Mal 2</a>), and the "father\'s house" of <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'27-36\');">1Sa 2:27-36</a> that was chosen in Egypt could only be the house of<P>Aaron, not of Ithamar, if the passage is to be taken in its natural sense. On this view Zadok\'s appointment could only have fulfilled the prophecy if it terminated the Aaronic succession. It would seem therefore that the high-priesthood was transferred to a family of non-Aaronic Levites. For the alternative view see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ZADOK">ZADOK</a>.<P>The prophet\'s speech in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,\'27-36\');">1Sa 2:27-36</a> is also important for the light it throws on the organization of the priesthood. The high priest has in his gift a number of priestly offices with pecuniary and other emoluments. This postulates a far more advanced hierarchy than that of Priest.<P>The reference to "the priests and the Levites" in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',8,4);">1Ki 8:4</a> was unknown to the Septuagint, but in other passages the Books of Kings show further advances in hierarchical organization. There is not merely the high priest<73>generally like Aaron in the Priestly Code (P) called "the priest," but sometimes the high priest<73>but also the second priest (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,18);">2Ki 25:18</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,24);">Jer 52:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',23,4);">2Ki 23:4</a>, according to the Targum), three keepers of the threshold (ubi supra, and <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',12,10);">2Ki 12:10</a>) and "elders of the priests" (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',19,2);">2Ki 19:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',37,2);">Isa 37:2</a>; perhaps also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',19,1);">Jer 19:1</a>). See also <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',20,1);">Jer 20:1</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',29,26);">29:26</a> for priestly organization and jurisdiction in the temple precincts. All this contrasts strikingly with the simplicity of the Pentateuchal organization.<P>2. Ezekiel:<P>Ezekiel is entirely in line with the other sources for this period, but he seeks to institute certain reforms. He writes, "Her priests have done violence to my law, and have profaned my holy things: they have made no distinction between the holy and the common, neither have they caused men to discern between the unclean and the clean," etc. (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',22,26);">Eze 22:26</a>). If these words have any meaning they signify that he was acquainted with a law which followed the very words of <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',10,\'1-\');">Le 10</a> and other passages of the Priestly Code (P), and was intended to reach the people through the teaching of the priests. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',40,\'1-\');">Ezekiel 40-48</a>, there is a vision of the future which stands in the closest relation to the Pentateuch. Three views have been held of this. The old view was that Ezekiel could not be reconciled with the Pentateuch at all, and that the difficulties presented were insoluble. Wellhausen and his followers maintain that the prophet is prior to the Priestly Code (P), and here introduces the distinction between priests and Levites for the first time. The third alternative is to hold that Ezekiel was familiar with P and drew from it the inspiration to make a fresh division among the Levites, giving the sons of Zadok a position similar to that occupied by the sons of Aaron in the wilderness period, and reenacting with slight modifications the legislation applicable to the sons of Aaron, this time applying it to the sons of Zadok. The crucial passage is <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,\'6-16\');">44:6-16</a>, from which it clearly appears that in Solomon\'s temple aliens had performed sundry tasks that should have been executed by more holy persons, and that Ezekiel proposes to degrade Levites who are not descended from Zadok to perform such tasks in the future as a punishment for their ministrations to idols in high places. Either of the two latter views would explain the close connection that evidently exists between the concluding chapters of Ezekiel and the Priestly Code (P), and, accordingly, in choosing between them, the reader must consider four main points:<p class="in15">(1) Is P shown on the internal evidence to be early or late? Is it desert legislation, or is it accurately reflected in Chronicles? This point has already been discussed in part and is further treated in <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PENTATEUCH">PENTATEUCH</a> (which see).<p class="in15">(2) Is theory of the late composition of P psychologically and morally probable? On this see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PENTATEUCH">PENTATEUCH</a> and <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=POT">POT</a>, 292-99.<p class="in15">(3) Is it the case that the earlier history attests the existence of institutions of P that are held by Wellhausen and his followers to be late<74>e.g. more national offerings than the critics allow? On this see EPC 200ff, and passim; POT, 305-15, and passim; SBL and OP passim, and article <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PENTATEUCH">PENTATEUCH</a>.<p class="in15">(4) Does Ezekiel himself show acquaintance with P (e.g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',22,26);">22:26</A>), or not? On this too see SBL, 96; PS, 281 f.<P>With regard to the non-mention of the high-priesthood and certain other institutions in Ezekiel\'s vision, the natural explanation is that in the case of these the prophet did not desire to institute any changes. It is to be noted that Ezekiel does not codify and consolidate all existing law. On the contrary, he is rather supplementing and reforming. In his ideal temple the prince is to provide the statutory national offerings (45:17), i.e. those of <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',28,\'1-\');">Nu 28</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',29,\'1-\');">29</a>. Apparently the king had provided these earlier (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',16,13);">2Ki 16:13</a>). But in addition to these there had grown up a "king\'s offering," and it is probably to this only that <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',45,22);">Eze 45:22</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',46,\'2-15\');">46:2-15</a> relate. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',46,13);">46:13</a> Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, and some Hebrew manuscripts preserve the reading "he" for "thou."<P>V. Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles.<P>Whatever the course of the earlier history, there is general agreement that in these books a distinction between priests and Levites is established (see e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,37);">Ne 10:37f (38f)</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,1);">12:1</a>f). We also find singers and porters (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,5);">Ne 13:5</a>, etc.), Nethinim and the sons of Solomon\'s servants (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',7,7,24);">Ezr 7:7,24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,23);">10:23</a>f; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',10,28);">Ne 10:28 (29)</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,3);">11:3</a>, etc.). It must not be assumed that these classes were new. The story of the Gibeonites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',9,\'1-\');">Jos 9</a>) gives us the origin of some of these grades, and the non-mention of them in many of the earlier books is easily explained by the character of those books. We know from such passages as <a onClick="return mV(\'Amo\',5,23);">Am 5:23</a> that there were musical services in far earlier times (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,42);">Ne 12:42</a>).<p>1. Estimates of the Chronicler:<P>Chronicles presents an account of the earlier history of the priests and Levites that in many respects does not tally with the older sources. Many modern writers think that the author\'s views of the past were colored by the circumstances of his own day, and that he had a tendency to carry back later conditions to an earlier period. On the other hand it is impossible to deny fairly that he used some sources which have not been preserved to us elsewhere. Again, there is evidence to show that his work was not intended to be taken for history and would not have been so regarded by his contemporaries. Talmudical authorities held some such view as this. The historical value of his work has yet to be appraised in a more critical and impartial spirit than is exhibited in any of the current discussions. For the present purpose it is only possible to notice the effect of some of his statements, if interpreted literally. As there are passages where he has clearly substituted Levites for the less holy personages of the older sources (contrast e.g. <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',11,\'4-12\');">2Ki 11:4-12</a> with <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',23,\'1-11\');">2Ch 23:1-11</a>), it may be that Levites have also been substituted by him for other persons in notices of which no other version has survived.<P>2. His Data:<P>David and Solomon recognized the hierarchy. The former king instituted the musical services (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',6,3);">1Ch 6:3</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',16,4,25);">16:4ff; 25</a>). The Levites were divided into courses (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,6);">1Ch 23:6</a>) and were rendered liable to service from the age of twenty by his enactment (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,27);">1Ch 23:27</a>). There were also 24 courses or divisions of priests, 16 of the sons of Eleazar and 8 of the sons of Ithamar (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,24);">1Ch 23:24</a>). The courses were divided by lot. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,\'1-7\');">Ne 12:1-7</a> we read of "chiefs of the priests," but these are only 22 in number, while <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,\'12-21\');">12:12-21</a> give us 21 in the time of Joiakim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,26);">12:26</a>). But not much importance can be attached to such lists, as names could easily fall out in transmission. According to <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,26);">1Ch 9:26</a> the four chief porters were Levites, and Levites were also over the things baked in pans and the shewbread (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',9,31);">9:31f</a>). This of course is not in accordance with the Law, but is found elsewhere in Chronicles. In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,\'1-\');">1Ch 23</a> the Levites from 30 years old and upward number 38,000, of whom 24,000 oversee the work of the house of the Lord, 6,000 were officers and judges, 4,000 were doorkeepers and 4,000 were musicians. David altered the age of beginning service to 20, and an account of their functions is given in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',23,\'27-32\');">1Ch 23:27-32</a> (see, further, <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MUSIC">MUSIC</a>). All these arrangements were confirmed and enforced by Solomon (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',8,14);">2Ch 8:14</a>). There is often uncertainty as to whether the Chronicler identifies priests and Levites in particular cases or not, e.g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',30,27);">2Ch 30:27</a>, "the priests the Levites" bless the people according to the ordinary text, but many authorities read "the priests and the Levites." Hezekiah appears to have undertaken some reorganization (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,\'1-\');">2Ch 29</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',30,\'1-\');">30</a>, <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',31,\'1-\');">31</a>), but the details are not clear. Jehoshaphat established in Jerusalem a court composed partly of Levites and priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',19,\'8-11\');">19:8-11</A>). Previously he had sent priests and Levites and others to teach the Law in Judah (<a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',17,\'1-\');">2Ch 17</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',29,34);">2Ch 29:34</a> it is clearly the duty of the priests to flay burnt offerings (contrast <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',1,\'1-\');">Le 1</a>). It is impossible to draw any consistent picture from the Chronicler because he gives different data for different periods; it is doubtful whether he meant his statements to be taken as historical, e.g. in <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',25,\'1-\');">1Ch 25</a> we find Levites whose names Giddalti (= "I have magnified"), etc., are really words forming part of a prayer, and it is difficult to believe that either the Chronicler or his public intended this chapter to be interpreted in any but a spiritual sense (see PS, 284-86).<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,40);">Ezr 2:40</a> the number of Levites who returned with Zerubbabel is given as 74, as against 973 priests (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,36);">2:36</A>), 128 singers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,41);">2:41</A>), 139 children of the porters (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,42);">2:42</A>), 392 Nethinim and children of Solomon\'s servants (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,58);">2:58</a>), and the figures are the same in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,\'1-\');">Ne 7</a>, except that there the singers number 148 (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',7,44);">7:44</A>) and the porters 138 (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',7,45);">7:45</a>). When Ezra went up, he was at first joined by no Levites (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,15);">8:15</A>), but subsequently gathered 38 Levites and 220 Nethinim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',8,\'18-20\');">8:18-20</A>). We get glimpses of the organization in <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,\'44-47\');">Ne 12:44-47</a> and <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',13,10);">13:10</A>ff. It appears that in this period genealogies were carefully scrutinized in the case of doubtful claims to priestly descent (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',2,61);">Ezr 2:61</a>ff; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',7,63);">Ne 7:63</a>). In <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',6,19);">Ezr 6:19</a>ff the Levites are represented as killing the Passover.<P>Of these books no satisfactory account can be given in the present state of textual criticism and Biblical science generally. Some writers, e.g., hold that the Chronicler had before him a source to which the Levites were entirely unknown, others that he invented freely, others again that he reproduces trustworthy pre-exilic information. The student has only an assortment of theories from which to choose. The bedrock fact is that the statements of these books, if taken in their natural meaning, convey an entirely different impression from the statements of the earlier books construed similarly. Modern research has not yet been seriously addressed to the question whether all the statements were really intended to be interpreted as mere history.<P>VI. Legal Provisions.<P>Aaron and his sons underwent consecration to fit them for their duties. <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',28,\'1-\');">Ex 28</a>f prescribes their garments and consecration (see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DRESS">DRESS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BREASTPLATE">BREASTPLATE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=EPHOD">EPHOD</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=ROBE">ROBE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=COAT">COAT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=MITRE">MITRE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GIRDLE">GIRDLE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=URIM+AND+THUMMIM">URIM AND THUMMIM</a>), and the account of the latter may be read in <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',8,\'1-\');">Le 8</a>f. In individual sacrifices brought to the religious capital the priests performed the part of the ritual which related to the altar (sprinkling, burning, etc.) (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',1,\'1-\');">Le 1-4</a>). See <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a>. A principal function was the duty of teaching the people the law of God (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',10,11);">Le 10:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',14,\'54-57\');">14:54-57</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',24,8);">De 24:8</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',33,10);">33:10</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,23);">Eze 44:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',4,\'1-6\');">Ho 4:1-6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hag\',2,11);">Hag 2:11</a>ff, and many passages in the Prophets).<P>The priests were subject to special laws designed to maintain their purity (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lev\',21,\'1-\');">Le 21</a>f; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',44,\'1-\');">Eze 44</a>). The rules aim at preventing defilement through mourning (save in the case of ordinary priests for a near relation) and at preventing those who were physically unfitted from performing certain functions, and those who were for any reason unclean from approaching the holy things. See further <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=STRANGER+AND+SOJOURNER">STRANGER AND SOJOURNER</a>. They performed several semi-judicial functions (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',5,5,11);">Nu 5:5ff, 11ff</a>, etc.; see <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JUDGE">JUDGE</a>). They also blessed the people (<a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',6,22);">Nu 6:22</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',10,8);">De 10:8</a>, etc.).<P>LITERATURE.<P>Wellhausen, Prolegomena, chapter iv, for the Graf-Wellhausen view; Wiener, Wiener, Pentateuchal Studies, 230-89, for the view taken above; S.I. Curtiss, Levitical Priests, for the conservative view. This writer afterward changed to the critical view. James Orr, POT; A. Van Hoonacker, Le sacerdoce levitique (important); W. Baudissin, article "Priests and Levites" in HDB, IV, for mediating views. The best account in English of the details of the priestly duties is contained in Baudissin\'s article, where a further bibliography will be found.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BLESSING">BLESSING</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SACRIFICE">SACRIFICE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=TITHE">TITHE</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FIRSTLING">FIRSTLING</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FIRST-FRUITS">FIRST-FRUITS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=LEVITICAL+CITIES">LEVITICAL CITIES</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=AGRARIAN+LAWS">AGRARIAN LAWS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=CHEMARIM">CHEMARIM</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=NETHINIM">NETHINIM</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SOLOMON\'s+servants">SOLOMON\'S SERVANTS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SINGERS">SINGERS</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=DOORKEEPER">DOORKEEPER</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=SERVING-WOMEN">SERVING-WOMEN</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=JUDGE">JUDGE</a>`193';
isbe[7096]='Primogeniture`pri-mo-jen\'-i-tur (bekhorah, from bekhor, "firstborn," from bakhar, "to act early"; prototokia):<P>1. Recognition of Doctrine:<P>The right of the firstborn to inherit the headship of the family, carrying with it certain property rights and usually such titles as those of the high-priesthood or kingship. The writings of the Hebrews take for granted the recognition of a doctrine of primogeniture from the earliest times. In the most ancient genealogies a distinction is drawn between the firstborn and the other son (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',10,15);">Ge 10:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',22,21);">22:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,13);">25:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',35,23);">35:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',36,15);">36:15</a>). In the bestowal of parental blessings in patriarchal times great importance was attached to preferring the firstborn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,31);">Ge 25:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',27,29);">27:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',48,13);">48:13</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,3);">49:3</a>). The feud between Jacob and Esau (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',27,\'1-\');">Ge 27:1</A>-<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',28,\'1-21\');">28:21</a>) grew out of the stealing of the firstborn\'s blessing by the younger brother. Joseph was displeased when, in his blessing, Jacob seemed to prefer Ephraim to Manasseh, his firstborn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',48,18);">Ge 48:18</a>). The father in such cases seems to have had the right to transfer the birthright from one son to another, from the days of Abraham in the case of Ishmael and Isaac, through those of Jacob in the matter of Reuben and Joseph and in the matter of Ephraim and Manasseh, down to the days of David in the selection of a successor to the kingship. Nevertheless, the Mosaic code, which declared (rather than enacted) the law of primogeniture, prohibited the abuse of this parental privilege in the case of a younger son by a favorite wife (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,16);">De 21:16</a>f).<P>2. The Double Portion:<P>The manner of acknowledging the firstborn incidentally referred to in Deuteronomy is "by giving him a double portion of all that he hath" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,17);">De 21:17</a>), that is to say, double the share of each of the other brothers. Jewish tradition (Bekho. 46a, 47b, 51a, 51b; Babha\' Bathra\' 122a, 122b, 123a, 124a, 142b) accepts and elaborates on this right of the firstborn son. Thus, it applies only to the firstborn and not the eldest surviving son; it does not apply to daughters; it has reference only to the paternal estate, and not to the inheritance left by a mother or other relative, nor to improvements or accessions made to an estate after the death of the father.<P>3. Reasons for the Custom:<P>The object of the doctrine may be that the eldest son might be enabled to preside over the affairs of family with proper dignity, or that he might assume additional responsibilities, such as the support of unmarried sisters. Hence, one\'s birthright could be waived or sold (<a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,31,34);">Ge 25:31,34</a>). On the other hand it may be based in the ultimate analysis on the primitive feeling of favoritism for the firstborn reflected in the disappointment of Jacob, when he speaks of Reuben as his firstborn, his might, and the beginning of his strength (re\'shith \'on, <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',49,3);">Ge 49:3</a>; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,17);">De 21:17</a>). This theory would be in accord with the right of the parent to transfer the right to a younger son. The suggestion of favoritism conveyed by the Hebrew bekhor is manifested in its figurative use: of Israel (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',4,22);">Ex 4:22</a>), of Ephraim (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',31,9);">Jer 31:9</a>), of one dearly beloved (<a onClick="return mV(\'Zec\',12,10);">Zec 12:10</a>); (compare figurative usage in the New Testament: <a onClick="return mV(\'Rom\',8,29);">Ro 8:29</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,23);">Heb 12:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',1,6);">1:6</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,5);">Re 1:5</a>).<P>4. The Firstborn in Ancient Society; Sacrifice and Redemption:<P>Light is thrown on the attitude of the ancient world toward the firstborn, and hence, on the history of primogeniture, by the language used in connection with the plague of the firstborn: "from the first-born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the first-born of the maidservant that is behind the mill" or "the captive that was in the dungeon." Apparently no more dreadful catastrophe for all classes of society could be thought of than this slaying of the firstborn (<a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',11,5);">Ex 11:5</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',12,29);">12:29</a>). The misguided fervor of the ancient Semites who offered their firstborn as the thing most dearly beloved as a sacrifice to their gods must be considered in this light, whether it appears among the Moabites, the Phoenicians or the Hebrews themselves (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',32,35);">Jer 32:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',20,26,31);">Eze 20:26,31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',28,3);">2Ch 28:3</a>). It is difficult to predicate a connection between the basis of the doctrine of primogeniture and that of the Redemption of the First-born, other than that both are ultimately based on the importance of a firstborn son and the fondness of his parents for him. It is interesting to note, however, that the tradition of redemption and the law of primogeniture are kept so distinct that, while the latter has reference only to the firstborn of a father, the former has reference only to the firstborn of a mother (Bekho, viii. l, 46a; compare peter rechem, "whatsoever openeth the womb," <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',13,2);">Ex 13:2</a>). In a polygamous society such as that presupposed in <a onClick="return mV(\'Deu\',21,\'1-\');">De 21</a> it is natural to suppose that the distinction between paternal and maternal primogeniture would be clearly before the minds of the people.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=BIRTHRIGHT">BIRTHRIGHT</a>; <a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=FIRSTBORN">FIRSTBORN</a>`81';
isbe[7097]='Prince`prins: This word occurs quite frequently in our English Bible, mostly in the Old Testament. While it is never used to denote royal parentage (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',29,24);">1Ch 29:24</a>), it often indicates actual royal or ruling power, together with royal dignity and authority. As a rule, the name is given to human beings; in a few instances it is applied to God and Christ, the angels and the devil.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',2,6);">Mt 2:6</a> the word rendered "princes" might be translated "princely cities"; at least, this seems to be implied. Here the term hegemon, "leader," "ruler," "prince," is used, undoubtedly to hint at the fact that Bethlehem was the native city of a great prince. In the other New Testament passages the word archon, "a potentate," "a person in authority," "a magistrate," occurs most frequently (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',9,34);">Mt 9:34</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',12,24);">12:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mat\',20,25);">20:25</a> (the Revised Version (British and American) "ruler"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Mar\',3,22);">Mr 3:22</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',12,31);">Joh 12:31</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',14,30);">14:30</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jhn\',16,11);">16:11</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Cr\',2,6,8);">1Co 2:6,8</a> the King James Version; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eph\',2,2);">Eph 2:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Rev\',1,5);">Re 1:5</a> (the Revised Version (British and American) "ruler")). In most of these instances the term "prince" refers to the devil.<P>In <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',3,15);">Ac 3:15</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Act\',5,31);">5:31</a>, the word archegos, "leader," is employed referring to Christ as the author of life and salvation (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Hbr\',12,2);">Heb 12:2</a>, where the term archegos is rendered "author" (Revised Version) or "captain" (Revised Version margin)).<P>The Old Testament contains a number of different words mostly rendered "prince" or "princes" in the English Versions of the Bible.<P>(1) sar: In <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',5,14);">Jos 5:14</a> the mysterious armed stranger seen by Joshua near Jericho calls himself the "prince of the host of Yahweh": a high military title applied to a superhuman being. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',9,6);">Isa 9:6</a>, the name is given to the child representing the future Messiah. The term "Prince of Peace" denotes the eminent position and the peaceful reign of the Messianic king: the highest human title in its most ideal sense. <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,11);">Da 8:11</a>: here, again, as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',5,14);">Jos 5:14</a>, occurs the phrase "prince of the host." In <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',8,25);">Da 8:25</a> "the prince of princes" refers to God Himself: the highest human title in its absolute sense applied to God. <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',10,21);">Da 10:21</a>: "Michael your prince." Michael the archangel is here called the prince of the Jewish people. He is the princely representative of God\'s people in the sight of God, a royal title suggesting high power and alliance with God in the great struggle going on between Him and the powers of darkness. <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',12,1);">Da 12:1</a>: here Michael is called "the great prince" who standeth for the children of Israel; supplementing <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',10,21);">Da 10:21</a>. In <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',10,13);">Da 10:13</a>: "the prince of the kingdom of Persia" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',10,20);">10:20</A>, "the prince of Persia," "the prince of Greece"), the expression is used in the same general sense as in <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',10,21);">Da 10:21</a>. Each individual nation is represented as guided by a spiritual being that may or may not be an ally of God in His combat with the devil. In the majority of cases, though, the term sar is applied<P>(a) to men exercising royal or ruling power: <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',8,16);">Pr 8:16</a>: "By me princes (margin "or rulers") rule" <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',32,1);">Isa 32:1</a>: "Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in justice." Judicial power is included (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',2,14);">Ex 2:14</a>: "Who made thee a prince and a judge over us?" and <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',148,11);">Ps 148:11</a>: "princes and all judges of the earth"). In some passages the word sar, having been rendered "prince," stands for "chief"; so <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',7,25);">Jud 7:25</a>: "They took the two princes of Midian" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',8,14);">Jud 8:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',29,4);">1Sa 29:4</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',10,3);">2Sa 10:3</a>, etc.).<P>(b) To royal officers of a high rank: <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',12,15);">Ge 12:15</a>: "the princes of Pharaoh" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',24,14);">2Ki 24:14</a>: "Jerus and all the princes"; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',29,24);">1Ch 29:24</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ch\',24,23);">2Ch 24:23</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,21);">Jer 36:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,10);">52:10</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hsa\',5,10);">Ho 5:10</a>, etc.). "Ambassadors" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',36,14);">Jer 36:14</a>); "governors" (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',20,14);">1Ki 20:14</a> "By the young men (margin "or, servants") of the princes of the provinces"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,3,14);">Es 1:3,14</a>, "the seven princes"); "the chief of the eunuchs" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',1,7);">Da 1:7</a>); a "quartermaster" (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',51,59);">Jer 51:59</a> "Seraiah was chief chamberlain" (margin "or, quartermaster")). The King James Version renders it "a quiet prince," i.e. a prince having rest, instead of procuring rest (sar menuchah, "a sar of rest"). In post-exilic times: <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',9,1);">Ezr 9:1</a>: "The princes drew near unto me." They were the political leaders of the people (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',10,8);">Ezr 10:8</a>: "the princes and the elders"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',9,38);">Ne 9:38</a>: "our princes, our Levites, and our priests"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',11,1);">Ne 11:1</a>: "The princes of the people dwelt in Jerus"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Neh\',12,31);">Ne 12:31</a>: "the princes of Judah"). Of course, they were all subject to the authority of the Persian kings.<P>(c) To the priesthood: <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,5);">1Ch 24:5</a>: "princes of the sanctuary, and princes of God" (of <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',43,28);">Isa 43:28</a>).<P>(d) On account of great achievements: <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',3,38);">2Sa 3:38</a>: "Know ye not that there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel?"<22>an honorary title. Generally speaking, a prince is a wealthy man (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',34,19);">Job 34:19</a>: "That respecteth not the persons of princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor"), and he is a prominent man embodying true, although mortal, manhood (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',82,7);">Ps 82:7</a>: "Nevertheless ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes).<P>(2) nasi\':usually derived from nasa\', "to lift," hence, "exalted"; otherwise: a "speaker."<P>(a) An honorary title (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',23,6);">Ge 23:6</a>: "Thou art a prince of God among us." The distinction is conferred upon Abraham by the children of Heth).<P>(b) A name given to the heads of the Israelite tribes, families and fathers\' houses: <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,24);">Nu 3:24</a>: "the prince of the fathers\' house of the Gershonites" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,30,35);">3:30,35</A>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',3,32);">3:32</A>: "Eleazar...shall be prince of the princes of the Levites, and have the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',4,34);">Nu 4:34</a>: "the princes of the congregation." They seem to be identical with the "rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Exd\',18,21);">Ex 18:21</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',16,2);">Nu 16:2</a>). <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',7,2);">Nu 7:2</a>: "the princes of Israel, the heads of their fathers\' houses...the princes of the tribes" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',7,2,6);">17:2,6</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',34,18);">34:18</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',22,14);">Jos 22:14</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',4,38);">1Ch 4:38</a>).<P>(c) Equivalent to chief or king: <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',17,20);">Ge 17:20</a>: "Twelve princes shall he beget" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',25,16);">25:16</A>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Gen\',34,2);">Ge 34:2</a>: "Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Num\',25,18);">Nu 25:18</a>: "Cozbi, the daughter of the prince of Midian" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',13,21);">Jos 13:21</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',11,34);">1Ki 11:34</a>: "I will make him prince all the days of his life." This was said of Solomon, which shows the term equivalent to king. Of special interest is the use of the word nasi\' in Ezekiel. The name is given to the Jewish king (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',12,10);">12:10</A>: "This burden concerneth the prince in Jerusalem"). Then, again, it is applied to the future theocratic king (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',34,24);">34:24</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',37,25);">37:25</a>, etc., and especially chapters <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',45,\'1-\');">45</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',46,\'1-\');">46</a>). It is also used of foreign potentates and high officers (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',26,16);">26:16</a>: "the princes of the sea"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',28,2);">28:2</A>: "the prince of Tyre"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',30,13);">30:13</A>: "a prince from the land of Egypt"); <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',32,29);">32:29</A>: "Edom, her kings and all her princes"; and, likewise, of high Jewish officers (<a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',21,12);">21:12</A>).<P>(d) A title bestowed upon Sheshbazzar (<a onClick="return mV(\'Ezr\',1,8);">Ezr 1:8</a>).<P>(3) nadhibh: <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',2,8);">1Sa 2:8</a>: "To make them sit with princes" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',113,8);">Ps 113:8</a>). The original meaning of the term is willing or obliging; then generous ("liberal"; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',19,6);">Pr 19:6</a>: "Many will entreat the favor of the liberal man"; yet, it might safely be rendered here "prince", margin) or noble-minded; a gentleman, a nobleman, a person of rank, a prince. <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',12,21);">Job 12:21</a>: "He poureth contempt upon princes" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',107,40);">Ps 107:40</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',21,28);">Job 21:28</a>: "Where is the house of the prince? And where is the tent wherein the wicked dwelt?" The context here suggests the thought of a wicked prince, a tyrant. <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',47,9);">Ps 47:9</a>: "The princes of the peoples are gathered together" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',118,9);">Ps 118:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',146,3);">146:3</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',17,7);">Pr 17:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',25,7);">25:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Sgs\',7,1);">So 7:1</a>).<P>(4) naghidh: According to Gesenius, this term denotes originally either a high-minded person (compare the preceding word, nadhibh) or a speaker, a spokesman; then a prince, a king. <a onClick="return mV(\'1Sa\',13,14);">1Sa 13:14</a>: "Yahweh hath appointed him to be prince over his people" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',5,2);">2Sa 5:2</a>: "Thou shalt be prince (the Revised Version margin "leader") over Israel"; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',6,21);">6:21</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',7,8);">7:8</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',1,35);">1Ki 1:35</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',14,7);">14:7</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',16,2);">16:2</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',29,9);">Job 29:9</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Job\',31,37);">31:37</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',76,12);">Ps 76:12</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',28,16);">Pr 28:16</a>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',28,2);">Eze 28:2</a>: "prince of Tyre"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,25);">Da 9:25</a>: "the anointed one, the prince," the King James Version the "Messiah the Prince"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',9,26);">Da 9:26</a>: "the prince that shall come" (the Roman emperor?); <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',11,22);">11:22</a>: "the prince of the covenant" (either a high priest or some Egyptian king, Ptolemeus Philometor?).<P>(5), (6) razon, and rozen, "a high official," "a prince," usually associated with the word "king" or "judge." <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',14,28);">Pr 14:28</a>: "In the multitude of people is the king\'s glory; but in the want of people is the destruction of the prince" (razon); <a onClick="return mV(\'Jdg\',5,3);">Jud 5:3</a>: "Hear, O ye kings; give ear, O ye princes" (rozenim); <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',8,15);">Pr 8:15</a>: "By me kings reign, and princes (rozenim) decree justice" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Pro\',31,4);">31:4</A>; <a onClick="return mV(\'Hab\',1,10);">Hab 1:10</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',40,23);">Isa 40:23</a>: "that bringeth princes (rozenim) to nothing; that maketh the judges of the earth as vanity."<P>(7) nacikh, derived from nacakh, "to install a king" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',2,6);">Ps 2:6</a>); hence, a prince: <a onClick="return mV(\'Jos\',13,21);">Jos 13:21</a>: "the princes of Sihon" (compare <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',83,11);">Ps 83:11</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',32,30);">Eze 32:30</a>: "the princes of the north"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Mic\',5,5);">Mic 5:5</a>: the Revised Version (British and American) "principal men," the Revised Version margin "princes among men"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',11,8);">Da 11:8</a>: the Revised Version (British and American) "molten images," the Revised Version margin "princes."<P>(8) qatsin, "a judge," "a military leader," "a prince"; <a onClick="return mV(\'Dan\',11,18);">Da 11:18</a>: "A prince (the Revised Version margin "captain") shall cause the reproach...to cease" (probably a Roman consul; a Roman general?).<P>(9) shalish: The usual explanation, "one of the three men on a war-chariot" is highly improbable; Gesenius suggests that it is a loan-word, and renders it "hero." <a onClick="return mV(\'Eze\',23,15);">Eze 23:15</a>: "All of them princes to look upon" ("picked men," Gesenius).<P>(10) chashmannim: <a onClick="return mV(\'Psa\',68,31);">Ps 68:31</a>: "Princes shall come out of Egypt." Septuagint renders it presbeis, "ambassadors," Vulgate (Jerome\'s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) legati. But the meaning is uncertain.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=GOVERNOR">GOVERNOR</a>`8';
isbe[7098]='Princes, the Seven`prin\'-sez, -siz.`<a href="./study/isbe/search.html?string=PRINCE">PRINCE</a>`1';
isbe[7099]='Princess`prin\'-ses: The Hebrew term is sarah (compare sar, prince, and "Sarah"); it means<P>(1) a queen (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',49,23);">Isa 49:23</a>, the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) both "queen");<P>(2) the consort of a king contrasted with his concubines (<a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',11,3);">1Ki 11:3</a>, "He had seven hundred wives. princesses, and three hundred concubines");<P>(3) the wife of a prince (<a onClick="return mV(\'Est\',1,18);">Es 1:18</a> the "princesses of Persia and Media");<P>(4) it is metaphorically used of the city of Jerusalem (<a onClick="return mV(\'Lam\',1,1);">La 1:1</a>).``1';
isbe[7100]='Principal`prin\'-si-pal: Appears in the King James Version as a translation of nine Hebrew words (fewer in the Revised Version (British and American)), in one case (<a onClick="return mV(\'Isa\',28,25);">Isa 28:25</a>) being used quite wrongly and in <a onClick="return mV(\'2Ki\',25,19);">2Ki 25:19</a> (<a onClick="return mV(\'Jer\',52,25);">Jer 52:25</a>); <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ch\',24,31);">1Ch 24:31</a> gives a wrong sense (all corrected in the Revised Version (British and American)). In <a onClick="return mV(\'1Ki\',4,5);">1Ki 4:5</a>, "principal officer" (the American Standard Revised Version "chief minister") is an arbitrary translation of kohen to avoid "priest" (so the English Revised Version; compare <a onClick="return mV(\'2Sa\',8,18);">2Sa 8:18</a>).``1';
</script>
<script src="./study/isbe/author.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./study/isbe/isbeDisplay.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script src="./js/MainFooter.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink