Full text of "A dictionary of Christ and the Gospels"

i ■■:;■

' /'■"■,

I - " . '

i' i i '

. i ■.'■„•

^^HiB,

y ■■■-■'-{

*':-i'i

. ',, ^ ' I ; .

' ' ' .' ^ ^^^^^^1

'•"!'.'
-•;■,■'

:'-:\'v\ • :'

iiUfJI

-v'l pi..

■-"■;■ J ';''■;■., -

\ \

J- ; 'i

■1

'"]

'■]

',;:i

• . ' ' * ' "

:t..-'.'.' '";^

:'::;:-.!;

Dictionary of Christ
and the Gospels

'■^^L

^0 &'.

1^^ ^

■x.-^)

<^?.,''^

''""\,l''„. ;

Vyy4 "

«7>v

•"-^^

\pq"

««*%,. f"-'**-fc- '•.#..

\ I

#*i^

.«'

~1^

! ) ^-'

A-#'''i. ->*'■'"

4/%

%V"<t.

#ife

..-■"■■a-''

i^'

Dictionary of Christ
and the Gospels

EDITED BY

JAMES HASTINGS, D.D.

WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF

JOHN A. SELBIE. D.D.

AND (in the reading OF THE PROOFS) OF

JOHN C. LAMBERT, D.D.

VOLUME I
AAEON - KNOWLEDGE

New YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER^S SONS

Edinburgh: T. & T. CLARK

1906

h^-

The above copyright notice is for the protection of articles copyrighted in the United States.

Messrs. Clmrles Scribner's Sons, New York, have the sole right of publication of this
Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels in the United States and Canada.

PREFACE

The Purpose of this Dictionary is to give an account of everything that relates to
CHEIST— His Person, Life, Work, and Teaching.

It is in a sense complementary to the Dictionary of the Bible, in which, of
course, Christ has a great place. But a Dictionary of the Bible, being occupied
mainly with things biographical, historical, geographical, or antiquarian, does not give
attention to the things of Christ sufficient for the needs of the preacher, to whom
Christ is everytliing. This is, first of all, a preacher's Dictionary. The Authors of
the articles have been carefully chosen from among those Scholars who are, or have
been, themselves preachers. And even wlien the articles have the same titles as
articles in the Dictionary of the Bible, they are written by new men, and from a new
standpoint. Tt is thus a work which is quite distinct from, and altogether independent
of, the Dictionary of the Bible.

It is called a Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, because it includes
everything that the Gospels contain, whether directly related to Christ or not.
Its range, however, is far greater than that of the Gospels. It seeks to cover all that
relates to Christ throughout the Bible and in the life and literature of the world.
There will be articles on the Patristic estimate of Jesus, the Mediaeval estimate, the
Eeformation and Modern estimates. There will be articles on Christ in the Jewish
writings and in the Muslim literature. Much attention has been given to modern
thought, whether Christian or anti-Christian. Every aspect of modern life, in so far
as it touches or is touched by Christ, is described under its proper title

Still, the Gospels are the main source of our knowledge of Christ, and it will be
found that the contents of the Gospels, especially their spiritual contents, have never
before been so thoroughly investigated and set forth.

/
/

vi PREFACE

It will be observed at ouce that a large number of the titles of the articles
are new. Thus — to take the first letter of the alphabet — there are no articles in
the Dictionary of the Bible (unless the word happens to be used in some obsolete
sense) on Abgar, Abiding, Above and Below, Absolution, Accommodation, Activity,
Affliction, Agony, Amazement, Ambassage, Ambition, Announcements of Death,
Annunciation, Arbitkation, Aristeas, Aristion, Arrest, Asceticism, Attraction of
Christ, Attributes of Christ, Authority of Christ, Authority in Eeligion, Aw^e.
These articles are enough to give the present work distinction

Again, there are certain topics which are treated more fully here than in the
Dictionary of the Bible, because they have specially to do with Christ. In the letter
A may be named Acceptance, Access, Alpha and Omega, Anger, Anointing,
Ascension, Assurance, Atonement.

All these articles, moreover, have a range which is greater than the corresponding
articles in the Dictionary of the Bible, if they occur there. They describe some aspect
of Christ's Person or Work, not only as it is presented in the Bible, but also as it
has been brought out in the history of the Church, and in Christian experience.

And even when the articles are confined to the Gospels they have a character
of their own. The ground that has to be covered being less, the treatment can be
fuller. It has also been found possible to make it more expository. Take the
following examples — Abba, Amen, Angels, Apostles, Archelaus, Art, Augustus.

Thus, in a word, there are three classes of topics, each of which contributes
something towards the distinction of this work. There are topics, like Authority
of Christ, which are wholly new. There are topics which may or may not be
wholly new, like Attraction (which is new) and Atonement (which is not), but
which have a wider range than any topics in the Dictionary of the Bible. And
there are topics, like Angels, which have a narrower range, having no occasion to
go beyond the limits of the Gospels, but within that range are fuller, and of more
practical value for the preacher.

The subject is inexhaustible. It has not been exhausted in this work. Perhaps
the most that has been done is to show how great Christ is.

Many scholars have rendered valuable assistance. In addition to the services of
Dr. Selbie and Dr. Lambert, the Editor desires especially to acknowledge those of
Professor Howard Osgood of Eochester Theological Seminary, New York, who
examined the Gospels minutely to see that no topic had been omitted, and added
some useful titles to the list.

The Dictionary will be completed in two volumes, of which this is the first.

LIST OF ABBEEVIATIONS

I. General

Alex. = Alexandrian.

Apoc. — Apocalypse, Apocalyptic.

Apocr. = Apocrypha, Apocryphal.

Aq. =Aquila.

Arab. = Arabic.

Aram. — Aramaic.

Assyr. ^ Assyrian.

Bab. = Babylonian.

c. —circa, about.

Can. = Canaanite.

cf. = compare.

ct. = contra.st.

D = Deuteronomist.

E = Elohist.

edd. = editions or editors.

Egyp-= Egyptian.

En{,^ = Englisii.

Eth. = Ethiopic.

f. = and following verse or page : as Ac lO**^-.

ft". = and following venses or pages : as Mt 11'®"^-.

Gr.= Greek.

H = Law of Holiness.

Heb. = Hebrew.

Hel. = Hellenistic.

Hex. = Hexateuch.

Isr. = Lsraelite.

J = Jahwist.

J" = Jehovah.

Jerus. = Jerusalem.

Jos. =Josephus.

LXX = Septuagint.

MSS = jNIanuscripts.

MT = ^Lassoretic Text.

n. =note.

NT = New Testament.

Onk. =Onkelos.

OT = Old testament.

P — Priestly Narrative.

Pal. = Palestine, Palestinian.

Pent. = Pentateuch.

Pers. = Persian.

Phil. = Philistine.

Phoen. = PluL-nician.

Pr. Bk. = Prayer Book.

R — Redactor.

Rom. = Roman.

Sam. = Samaritan.

Sem. = Semitic.

Sept. = Septuagint.

Sin. = Sinaitic.

Symm. =Symmachus.

Syr. = Syriac.

Talm. = Talmud.

Targ. = Targum.

Theod. = Theodotion.

TR = Textus Receptus.

tr. = translate or translation.

VSS = Versions.

Vulg. = Vulgate.

WH = \Vestcott and Hort's text.

II. Books of the Bible

Old Testament.

Gn = Genesis.

Ex = Exodus.

Lv — Leviticus.

Nu = Numbers.

Dt = Deuteronomy.

Jos=:Jo.shua.

Jg = Judges.

Ru = Ruth.

1 S, 2 S = 1 and 2 Samuel.

1 K, 2K=1 and2 Kings.

1 Ch, 2 Ch = 1 and 2

Chronicles.
Ezr = Ezra.
Neh = Nehemiah.
Est = Esther.
Job.

Ps = Psalms.
Pr = Proverbs.
Ec = Ecclesiastes.

A'pocrypha.
1 Es, 2 Es = l and 2 To = Tobit.
Esdras. Jth= Judith.

Ca = Canticles.
Is = Isaiah.
Jer = Jeremiah.
La = Lamentations.
Ezk = Ezekiel.
Dn = Daniel.
Hos = Hosea.
Jl = Joel.
Am = Amos.
Ob = Obadiah.
Jon = Jonah.
Mic^^Micah.
Nah=Nahum.
Hab= Habakkuk.
Zeph = Zephaniah.
Hag = Haggai.
Zec = Zechariah.
Mal = Malachi.

Ad. Est = Additions to Sus = Susanna.

Esther.
Wis = Wisdom.

Bel = Bel
Draeon.

and the

Sir = Sirach or Ecclesi- Pr. Man = Prayer of

asticus.
Bar = Baruch.
Three = Song of

Three Children.

the

Manasses.
1 Mac, 2 Mac = I and 2
Maccabees.

New Testament.

Mt = Matthew.

Mk = Mark.

Lk = Luke.

Jn = John.

Ac = Acts.

Ro = Romans.

1 Co, 2 Co = 1 and 2

Corinthians.
Gal = Galatians.
Eph = Epliesians.
Ph = Philippians.
Col = Colossians.

1 Th, 2 Th = I and 2

Thessalonians.
1 Ti, 2 Ti = 1 and 2

Timothy.
Tit = Titus.
Philem = Philemon.
He = Hebrews.
Ja = James.

1 P, 2 P = l and 2 Peter.
1 Jn, 2 Jn, 3 Jn = l, 2,

and 3 John.
Jude.
Rev = Revelation.

VllI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

III. English Versions

1380, OT c. 1382,
Pent. 1530.

Wyc. = Wyclif's Bible (NT c.

Purvey's Revision c. 1388).
Tind.=Tindale's NT 1526 and 1534,
Gov. = Coverdale's Bible 1535.
Matt, or Rog.= Matthew '.s (i.e. prob. Rogers')

Bible 1537.
Cran. or Great = Cranmer's 'Great' Bible 1539.
Tav.=Taverner's Bible 1539.
Gen. = Geneva NT 1557, Bible 1560.

Bish.= Bishops' Bible 1568.

Tom.=Tomson's NT 1576.

Rhem. = Rhemish NT 1582.

Don. = Douay OT 1609.

AV = Authorized Version 1611.

AVm = Authorized Version margin.

RV = Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885.

RVm = Revised Version margin.

EV=Auth. and Rev. Versions.

IV. For the Literature

^iZ^r= Ancient Hebrew Tradition.

AJSL = Ainer'wan Journal of Sem. Lang, and

Literature.
.<4J"TA = American Journal of Theology.
AT= Altes Testament.
5L = Bampton Lecture.
BM= British Museum.
iii2P=; Biblical Researches in Palestine.
C/6r = Corpus Inscriptionum GrEecarum.
C/iy = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.
C/,S'= Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum.
CO 7"= Cuneiform Inscriptions and the OT.
D5— Dictionary of the Bible.
DCA = Dictionary of Christian Antiquities.
Z)it^ = Dictionary of Religion and Ethics.
EHH=Y,3iY\y History of the Hebrews.
£a;/j2'=Exi)ository Times.
6'.4P = Geographie des alten Palastina.
C6p^^ = Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen.
6-'6^A=Nachrichten der konigl. Gesellschaft der

Wissenschaften zu Gottingen.
G</K=Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes.
GF/=Geschichte des Volkes Israel,
if CJ/= Higher Criticism and the Monuments.
H E —Wiatoria, Ecclesiastica.
ifGiri/ = Historical Geog. of Holy Land.
i//= History of Israel.
HJP—\l\sto\'y of the Jewish People.
//Pilf= History, Prophecy, and the Monuments.
HPN= Hebrew Proper Names.
/•/G^ = Israelitische und Jiidische Geschichte.
t/i?i/= Journal of Biblical Literature.
J^/)rA = Jahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theologie.
J^(>^ = Jewish Quarterly Review.
Ji2^»S'= Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.
JSL = Journal of Sacred Literature.
J^TAiS'^ = Journal of Theological Studies
KAT=\yiQ Keilinschriften und das Alte Test.
/ir(?Z^=Keilinschriften u. Geschichtsforschung.
^/S = Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek.
Xj5 = The Land and the Book.
ZC5^=Literarisches Centralblatt.
LOr=Introd. to the Literature of the Old Test.

i»fiVZ'PF=Mittheilungen u. Nachrichten d.

deutschen Pal. -Vereins.
NHWB = Neuhebraisches Worterbuch.
NTZG = Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte.
OA=Otium Norvicense.
OP = Origin of the Psalter.
07^6'= The Old Test, in the Jewish Church.
Pi? — Polychrome Bible.
Pii'P^ Palestine Exploration Fund.
PEFSt = Quarterly Statement of the same.
FSB A = Proceedings of Soc. of Bibl. Archajology.
PP£' = Real-Encyklopadie fiir protest. Theologie

und Kirche.
§PP = Queen's Printers' Bible.
BB = Revue Biblique.
REJ= Revue des Etudes Juives.
PP= Records of the Past.
P6' = Religion of the Semites.
SBE = Sacred Books of the East.
6'P0r = Sacred Books of Old Test.
<S'A'=Studien und Kritiken.
»9P = Sinai and Palestine.

,S'1FP = Memoirs of the Survey of W. Palestine.
ThL or 7'APZ=Theol. Literaturzeitung.
rAr=Theol. Tijdschrift.
T.S'= Texts and Studies.

TSBA = Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Archaeology.
i'[/ = Texte und Untersuchungen.
TFyl i= Western Asiatic Inscriptions.
Jf^ZA'.li^ Wiener Zeitschrift fiir Kunde des

Morgenlandes.
ZA = Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie.
ZAW or Z^iTr= Zeitschrift fiir die Alttest.

Wissenschaft.
Zi'JiG = Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen-

Ijindischen Gesellschaft.
Zi)PF= Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paliistina-

Vereins.
ZA'S'P- Zeitschrift fiir Keilschriftforschung.
Z7irjr= Zeitschrift fiir kirchliche Wissenschaft.
ZAP ir= Zeitschrift fur die Neutest. Wissen-
schaft.
ZP/iir= Zeitschrift f. Theologie u. Kirche.

A small superior number designates the particular edition of the work referred to : as KAT^, LOT^.

AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN VOL. I

Rev. Robert M. Adamson, M.A., Ardrossan.

Rev. Walter F. Adkxey, D.D., Professor of
Theology and Principal of tlie Lancashire
College, Manchester.

Rev. P. Henderson Aitken, B.Sc, B.D.,

Glasgow.
Rev. Gross Alexander, S.T.D., late Professor of

New Testament Greek and Exegesis in Vander-

bilt University, Nashville.

Rev. WiLLOUGHBY C. Allen, M.A., Chaplain,
Fellow, and Lecturer in Theology and Hebrew,
Exeter College, Oxford.

Rev. William P. Armstrong, D.D., Professor
of New Testament Literature and Exegesis in
Princeton Theological Seminary, N.J.

Rev. Benjamin Wisner Bacon, D.D., Professor
of New Testament Criticism and Interpreta-
tion in Yale University, New Haven.

Rev. P. Mordaunt Barnard, B.D., late Rector
of Headley, Epsom.

Rev. Francis R. Beattie, Ph.D., D.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Apologetics and Systematic
Theology in the Presbyterian Theological
Seminary of Kentucky.

Very Rev. John Henry Bernard, D.D., Dean of
St. Patrick's, Fellow of Trinity College, and
Archbishop King's Lecturer in Divinity in the
University of Dublin.

Rev. Harry Bisseker, M. A.,Tlie Leysian Mission,
London.

Rev. Archibald Bisset, Ratho.

Rev. Andrew N. Bogle, M.A., Leith.

Rev. Albert Bonus, M.A., Alphington, Exeter.

Rev. George H. Box, M.A., late Hebrew Master,
Merchant Taylors' School, London, Rector of
Linton, Ross.

Rev. E. P. Boys-Smith, M.A., Vicar of Hordle,
Brockeii hurst.

Rev. J. B. Brlstow, B.D., Rector of Clondalkin,
Co. Dublin.

Rev. MORISON Bryce, Baldernock, Milngavie.

Rev. A. E. Burn, D.D., Rector of Handsworth,
Birmingliam, and Prebendary of Lichfield.

Rev. DuGALD Clark, B.D., Glassary, Loch-
gilphead.

Rev. John S. Clemens, M.A., Principal of Ran-
moor College, Sheffield.

Rev. Arthur W. Cooke, M.A., Newcastle -on-
Tyne.

Rev. James Cooper, D.D., Professor of Ecclesi-
astical History in the University of Glasgow.

Rev. Hugh H. Currie, B.D., Keig, Aberdeen-
shire.

Rev. Edgar Daplyn, London.

flight Rev. Charles Frederick D'Arcy, D.D.,
Bishop of Clogher.

Rev. Ednvin Charles Dargan, D.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Homiletics and Ecclesiology in the
Southern Baptist Theological Seminarj', Louis-
ville, Ky.

Rev. W. Theophilus Davison, D.D., Professor of
Theology in Richmond Theological College,
Surrej'.

Rev. Percy Dearmer, M.A., Vicar of St. Mary's
the Virgin, Primrose Hill, London.

Rev. Francis Brigham Denio, D.D., Professor of
Old Testament Language and Literature in
Bangor Theological Semmary, Maine.

Rev. James Denney, D.D., Professor of New
Testament Language, Literature, and Theology
in the United tree Church College, Glasgow.

Rev. C. T. DiMONT, M.A., Vicar of Holy Trinity,
Halifax.

Rev. Marcus Dods, D.D., Professor of Exegetical
Theology in the New College, Edinburgh.

Rev. Henry E. Dosker, D.D., Professor of
Church Historj' in the Presbyterian Theo-
logical Seminary of Kentucky.

Rev. F. Homes Dudden, B.D., Fellow of Lincoln
College, Oxford.

Rev. Alexander A. Duncan, B.D., Auchterless,
Aberdeenshire.

Rev. Hugh Duncan, B.D., Garturk, Coatbridge.

Rev. W. H. DuNDAS, B.D., Curate Assistant of

St. Thomas's, Belfast.
Rev. William Henry Dyson, Edgerton, Hudders-

field.
Rev. George Boardman Eager, D.D., Professor

of Biblical Introduction and Pastoral Theology

in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,

Louisville, Ky.

Rev. William Ewing, M.A., Edinburgh, for-
merly of Tiberias, Palestine.

Rev. J. W. Falconer, B.D., Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Rev. R. A. Falconer, D.Litt., D.D., Principal of
the Presbyteiian Theological College, Halifax,
Nova Scotia.

AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN VOL. I

Rev. George Farmer, formerly Vicar of Hartlip,
Kent.

Ilev. J. H. Farmer, Professor in M'Master Uni-
versity, Toronto.

Kev. C. L. Feltoe, D.D., Rector of Duxford,
Cambridge.

Rev. Adam Fyfe Findlay, M.A., Arbroath.

Rev. J. Dick Fleming, B.D., Tranent.

Rev. Frank Hugh Foster, Ph.D., D.D., lately
Professor of Systematic Theology in the Pacific
Seminary, Berkeley, Cal.

Rev. William Barrett Frankland, M.A.,
late Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, and
Assistant-Chaplain at Giggleswick School.

Rev. Robert Sleighthouse Franks, M.A.,
B.Litt., Birmingham.

Rev. Norman Fraser, B.D., Edinburgh.

Rev. Henry William Fulford, M.A., Fellow of
Clare College, Cambridge.

Rev. C. E. Garrad, M.A., Fellow of Clare College,
and Vice- Principal of the Clergy Training
School, Cambridge.

Rev. Alfred Ernest Garvie, D.D., Professor
of Ethics, Theism, and Comparative Religion
in New and Hackney Colleges, London.

Rev. Owen H. Gates, Ph.D., Professor in Andover
Theological Seminary, Mass.

Rev. LuciEN Gautier, Ph.D., Honorary Pro-
fessor of Old Testament Exegesis and History,
Geneva.

Rev. Alfred S. Geden, M.A., Professor of
Biblical Literature and Exegesis in Richmond
College, Surrey.

Rev. George Holley Gilbert, Ph.D., D.D., late
Professor of New Testament Literature and
Interpretation in Chicago Theological Semi-
nary.

Rev. Richard Glaister, B.D., Kirkcudbright.

Terrot Reaveley Glover, M.A., Fellow and
Classical Lecturer, St. John's College, Cam-
bridge.

Rev. Calvin Goodspeed, D.D., Professor of
Systematic Theology in Baylor University,
Waco, Texas.

Rev. George Pearce Gould, M.A., Principal of
Regent's Park College, London.

Rev. James Gordon Gray, D.D., Rome.

Rev. Thomas Gregory, M.A., Kilmalcolm.

Rev. Canon Charles T. P. Grierson, B.D.,
Rector of Seapatrick, Banbridge, Co. Down.

Rev. James O. Hannay, M.A., Rector of Augh-
aval, Westport, Co. Mayo.

Rev. Charles Harris, D.D., Vicar of Claverley,
Wolverhampton, late Lecturer in Theology in
St. David's College, Lampeter.

Rev. John Herkless, D.D., Professor of Church

History in the University of St. Andrews.
Rev. F. R. Montgomery Hitchcock, B.D.,

Rector of Kinnitty, King's Co.
Rev. Caspar Wistar Hodge, D.D., Lecturer in

Systematic Theology in Princeton Theological

Seminary, N.J.

Rev. A. Mitchell Hunter, M.A., Cardross,
Dumbartonshire.

Rev. William Ralph Inge, D.D., Vicar of All
Saints', Ennismore Gardens, London, late
Fellow aud Tutor of Hertford College, Oxford.

Rev. James Iverach, D.D., Professor of Apolo-
getics and Dogmatics, Principal of the United
Free Church College, Aberdeen.

Rev. H. L. Jackson, M.A., Vicar of St. Mary's,
Huntingdon.

Rev. Arthur Jenkinson, Innellan, Greenock.

A. J. Jenkinson, M.A., Fellow of Brasenose
College, Oxford.

Rev. E. Griffith- Jones, B.A., London.

Rev. W. S. Kerr, B.D., Vicar of Bally waiter, Co.
Down.

Rev. Thomas B. Kilpatrick, D.D., Professor
of Systematic Theology in Knox College,
Toronto.

Rev. Richard John Knowling, D.D., Canon of
Durham, and Professor of Divinity in the
University of Durham.

Rev. David M. W. Laird, M.A., Edinburgh.

Rev. John C. Lambert, DD., Fenwick, Kil-
marnock.

Rev. Robert Leggat, Berwick-on-Tweed.

Rev. John Robert Legge, M.A.,Buckhurst Hill,

Essex.

Rev. William F. Lofthouse, M.A., Professor in
the Theological College, Handsworth, Bir-
mingham.

Rev. Charles Scott Macalpine, B.D., Man-
chester.

Rev. A. B. Macaulay, M.A., Dundee.

Rev. George M'Hardy, D.D., Kirkcaldy.

Rev. George M. Mackie, D.D., Chaplain to
the Church of Scotland at Beyrout, Syria.

Rev. Duncan A. Mackinnon, M.A., Marykirk,
Kincardineshire.

Rev. Robert Mackintosh, D.D., Professor of
Christian Ethics, Apologetics, and Sociology
in the Lancashire Indei)endent College, Man-
chester.

Right Rev. Arthur John Maclean, D.D., Bishop
of Moray.

Rev. A. H. M'Neile, B.D , Fellow and Dean
of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge.

Rev. James Edmond M'Ouat, B.D., Logiealmond,
Perthshire.

Rev. William M. M'Pheeters, D.D., Professor
of Old Testament Literature and Exegesis,
Columbia Tlieological Seminary, S.C.

Rev. Robert Macpherson, D.D., Elgin.

Rev. Joseph T. L. Maggs, D.D., Leeds.

Rev. John Turner Marshall, D.D., Principal
of the Baptist College, Manchester.

Rev. A. Stuart Martin, B.D., Scone, Perth.

Rev. G. CURRIE Martin, D.D., Professor of New
Testament Theology and Patristics in the
United College, Bi'adford.

E. W. Gurney Masterman, M.D., F.R.C.S.,
F.R.G.S., D.P.H., Jerusalem, Syria.

Rev. Shailer Mathews, D.D., Professor of New
Testament History and Interpretation in the
University of Chicago.

Rev. J. H. Maude, M.A., Rector of Hilgay,
Downham Market.

Late Rev. Prebendary F. Meyrick, M.A.,

Rector of Blickling, Aylesham.

AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN VOL. I

Rev. Andrew Miller, M.A., Glasgow.

Kev. W. J. S. Miller, B.D., Houndwood, Reston.

Rev. George Milligan, D.D., Caputh, Perth-
shire.

Rev. James Moffatt, D.D., Dundonald, Ayrshire.

Rev. W. S. Montgomery, B.D., Abbeyleix,
Queen's County.

Rev. W. W. Moore, D.D., President of Union
Theological Seminary, Richmond, Va.

Rev. W. Morgan, M.A., Tarbolton, Ayrshire.

Rev. R. Waddy Moss, D.D., Professor of Classics
in the Didsbury College, Manchester.

Rev. John Muir, B.D., Kirkcowan, Wigtownshire.

Rev. Joseph Muir, B.D., Edinburgh.

Rev. Lewis A. Muirhead, D.D., Broughty Ferry.

Rev. George Murray, B.D., Sauchie, Alloa.

Rev. James Ross Murray, M.A., Manchester.

Eberhard Nestle, Ph.D., D.D., Professor at
Maulbronn.

Rev. M. R. Newbolt, B.A., Vicar of Iffley,
Oxford.

Rev. Albert Henry Newman, D.D., LL.D. ,
Professor of Church Histoiy in Baylor Uni-
versity, Texas.

Rev. Thomas Nicol, D.D., Professor of Biblical
Criticism in the University of Aberdeen.

Rev. W. O. E. Oesterley, B.D., Organizing
Secretary of the Parochial Missions to the
Jews at Home and Abroad.

Rev. J. W. Oman, D.Phil., Alnwick.

Rev. James Patrick, B.D., B.Sc, Burntisland.

Rev. William Patrick, D.D., Principal of
Manitoba College, Winnipeg.

Arthur S. Peake, B.D., Professor of Biblical
Exegesis and Dean of the Faculty of Theology,
Victoria University, Manchester.

Rev. John Robert van Pelt, Ph.D., Lewisburg,
Pa.

Rev. Alfred Plummer, D.D., late Master of
University College, Durham.

Rev. E. B. Pollard, Georgetown, Ky.

Rev. Cyril Henry Prichard, M.A., Rector of
Wiston, Steyning, Sussex.

Rev. F. S. Ranken, M.A., Rector of South
Walsham, Norwich.

Rev. W. M. Rankin, B.D., Glasgow.

Rev. John Reid, M.A., Inverness.

Rev. J. S. Riggs, D.D., Professor of Biblical
Criticism in the Theological Seminary of
Auburn, N.Y.

Rev. C. W. Risk ELL, D.D., Professor of Historical
Theology in Boston University, Mass.

Rev. John Edward Roberts, B.D., Manchester.

Rev. Archibald Thomas Robertson, D.D., Pro-
fessor of Interpretation of the New Testament
in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisville, Ky.

Rev. James Robertson, D. D., Whittingehame.

Rev. F. E. Robinson, B.D., Professor of Hebrew
in the Baptist College, Bristol.

Rev. George Livingston Robinson, Ph.D.,
Professor of Old Testament Literature and
Exegesis in the M'Cormick Theological
Seminary, Chicago.

Rev. Andrew E. Ross, B.D., Rector of Portrush,
Co. Antrim.

Rev. Alfred Norman Rowland, M.A., London.

Rev. John Richard Sampey, D.D., LL.D., Pro-
fessor of Interpretation of the Old Testament
in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisville, Ky.

Rev. William Sand ay, D.D., LL.D., D.Sc, Lady
Margaret Professor of Divinity, and Canon of
Christ Church, Oxford, Chaplain in Ordinary
to H.M. the King.

Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, M.A., London.

Rev. Ernest F. Scott, B.A., Prestwick.

Rev. Robert Scott, M.A., Professor in Wilson
College, Bombay.

Rev. Henry Clay Sheldon, D.D., Professor of
Systematic Theology in Boston University.

Rev. Edward Shillito, M.A., Brighton.

Rev. S. J. Ramsay Sibbald, B.D., Crathie,
Ballater.

Rev. J. G. Simpson, M.A., Principal of the Clergy
School, Leeds.

Rev. David Smith, M.A., Tulliallan.

Rev. Harold Smith, M.A., Rector of Grimley,
Worcester.

Rev. J. Cromarty Smith, B.D., Coatdyke, Coat-
bridge.

W. Taylor Smith, M.A., Seven oaks, Kent.

Rev. Harry Herbert Snell, B.A., Reading.

Late Rev. J. Soutar, M.A., Tiberias, Palestine.

Alexander Souter, M.A., Litt.D., Yates Pro-
fessor of New Testament Exegesis in Mansfield
College, Oxford.

Rev. W. B. Stevenson, B.D., Professor of Hebrew
and Old Testament Introduction in the Theo-
logical College, Bala.

Rev. George Wauchope Stewart, B.D., Aber-
deen.

Rev. Robert Laird Stewart, D.D., Professor in
Lincoln University, Chester Co., Penn.

Rev. Darwell Stone, M.A., Pusey Librarian,
Oxford.

Rev. G. Gordon Stott, B. D. , London.

Rev. R. H. Strachan, MA., Elie.

Rev. A. Pollok Sym, B.D., Lilliesleaf,

Rev. John G. Tasker, D.D., Professor of Biblical
Literature and Exegesis in Handsworth Col-
lege, Birmingham.

Rev. R. Bruce Taylor, M.A., Aberdeen.

Rev. Milton Spencer Terry, D.D., LL.D., Pro- '

fessor of Christian Doctrine in the Garrett
Biblical Institute, Northwestern University.

Rev. G. W. Thatcher, B.D., Professor of Hebrew
and Old Testament History in Mansfield Col-
lege, Oxford.

Rev. W. H. Griffith Thomas, D.D,, Princijial of
Wyclitte Hall, Oxford.

Rev. William D. Thomson, M.A., Edinburgh,

Xll

AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN VOL. I

Harper Titchmarsh, M.A.

Rev. Edward

Sheffield.

Kev. Geerhardus Vos, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of
Biblical Theology in Princeton Theological
Seminary, N.J.

Rev. G. H. 8. Walpole, D.D., Rector of Lambeth.

Rev. Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, D.D.,
LL.D., Professor of Theology in Princeton
Theological Seminary, N.J.

Rev. George C. Watt, B.D., Edinkillie.

Rev. Thomas H. Weir, B.D., M.R.A.S., Lecturer
in Hebrew and Arabic in the University of
Glasgow.

Professor Dr. Johannes Weiss of the University
of Marburg.

Rev. Newport J. D. White, D.D., Lecturer in
Hebrew and Divinity in the University of
Dublin, and Canon of St. Patrick's Cathedral.

Rev. B. Whitefoord, D.D., Prebendary of Salis-
bury Cathedral and Principal of the Theological
College, Salisbury.

Rev. A. R. Whitham, M.A., Principal of the
Culhani Training College, Abingdon.

Rev. J. R. Willis, B.D., Rector of Preban and
Moyne, Rathdrum, Co. Wicklow.

Herbert G. Wood, M.A., Fellow of Jesus Col-
lege, Cambridge.

Rev. Nathan E. Wood, President of the Theo-
logical Seminary, and Professor of Christian
Theology, Newton Centre, Mass.

Rev. Arthur W. Wotherspoon, M.A., Glasgow.

Rev. T. H. Wright, Edinburgh.

Rev. Andrew C. Zenos, D.D., Professor of
Biblical Theology in the M'Cormick Theo-
logical Seminary, Chicago.

DICTIONARY OF CHRIST
AND THE GOSPELS

AARON. — The name occurs only 5 times in the
NT. Three of tlie passages contain historical
references only ; Lk 1'' where Elisabetli is de-
scribed as ' of the daughters of Aaron ' ; Ac 7^"
which refers to tlie request of tlie Israelites that
Aaron would ' make tliem gods ' ; and He 9^
'Aaron's rod that budded.' The other two pas-
sages refer to Aaron's office as liigli priest, and are
directly concerned with the Christian doctrine of
tiie priesthood of Christ. In He 5* we read, ' And
no man taketli the honour unto himself, but when
he is called of Gotl, even as was Aaron ' ; and He 7"
speaks of anotlier priest after the order of Mel-
chizedek, wiio should 'not be reckoned after the
order of Aaron.' It is as the representative high
priest that Aaron has been regarded as a type of
Christ.

The two points on which the writer of Hebrews
insists are, one of comparison, and one of contrast.
On the one hand, Christ, like Aaron, did not take
His priestly office on Himself, hut was directly
appointed by God (5^) ; on tlie other, the Aaronic
type of priesthood is sharply distinguished from
tliat of our Lord in certain fundamental respects.
Christ was indeed divinely appointed : He was
prepared for service, in being made like His
brethren (2'^), and fitted by His sympathy (4'6)
and lidelity to un<lertake jiriestly work on their
behalf ; througli His death on the cross He ottered
Himself as a sacrifice, apparently on earth and
certainly in heaven as a temple not made w'ith
hands (9^^) ; He is able to save to the uttermost
those wlio come to God through Him as priest,
seeing He ever lives to make jiriestly intercession
for them (7^). Thus far He was Aaron's antitype.
But the analogy fails most seriously in certain
imi)ortant features, as the writer of Hebrews
shows. Christ's priesthood was not according to
the Law. If He were on earth. He would not be
a priest at all, springing as He did from Judah,
not from Levi (7^^). He did not hold His office in
virtue of earthly descent, nor was He limited to
an earthly sanctuary, nor did He present to God
a sin-offering which could be, or needed to be,
frequently repeated (9^'-). None of tiie sacrifices
of the Law could ' make perfect as pertaining to
the conscience ' {9'-'). At best they procured only
a limited access to God. Into tlie holiest place
the higli [)riest was permitted to enter only once
a year, and then in virtue of sacrifices offered for
VOL. I. — I

his own sins, as well as the people's (9''). Christ's
priesthood was 'after the order of Melchizedek '
(6-"), eternal : His sacrifice was a spiritual one,
offered once for all ; it is impossible to think of
tiie repetition on earth of that offering which
'tiirough (tiie) eternal Spirit' (9'^) our glorified
Higli Priest presents continually in 'a more per-
fect tabernacle' (v.") in heaven itself, for us. He
was made a priest, not according to any legal
enactment belonging to eartli and finding its ex-
pression in the Mesh ; but dj'namically, according
to tlie enduring pow'er of an indissoluble life (7^®).

Thus Christ may well be spoken of as the second
Adam, but not as a second Aaron. The lines of
Bishop Wordsworth's hymn, ' Now our heavenly
Aaron enters. Through His blood within the veil,'
can be defended only in so far as the name Aaron
is synonymous with high priest. The personal
name suggests just those hmitations which the
generic name avoids, and which the writer of
Hebrews expressly warns us must on no account
be attributed to our great High Priest who has
passed into the heavens. So far as the doctrine
of Christ is concerned, it is well to follow Scripture
usage and to speak of Him as our Eternal High
Priest, rather than to press an analogical or typical
relation to Aaron, which fails at many cardinal
points.

LiTERATrRE.— For the further discussion of the subject see
Westeott and A. B. Da\idson on Hebrews, especially the
detached note of the latter on the Priesthood of Christ ; also
Milliffan's Baird l^ectures on The Ascension and Heavenly
Priesthood of our Lord, and the art. of Dr. Denneyon 'Priest-
hood in NT' in Hastings' DB, vol. iv. \V. T. DavISON.

ABBA. — An Aramaic word preserved by St.
Mark in our Lord's prayer in Gethsemane (14^®
'A/3/3a 6 warrip, wavra SvuaTo. aoi), and given twice
in the same association witli 6 Trar-qp by St. Paul
(Ro 8^* ekd^ere Trvtiifxa vioOecrias iv y Kpa^ofieu, 'A/3/3a
6 irarrip ; and Gal 4® i^awicrTeiKfv 6 Qebs to HufOfia tov
viov aiiToD fis rds KapSias 7]/j.u>v Kpa^ov, 'A/3/3a 6 Trarrjp).
A difficulty arises botli as to the spelling and the
pronunciation of the word Abba, and also as to its
being found in all the above passages joined to
6 iraxTjp.

1. Abba {dppS.) corresponds to the Aramaic tcztf
abbd, which is the definite state of 3K dbh (con-
struct state 3!;! abh), and means ' Father,' tinless it
is used for ' my Father ' (n2N for 'rs) as in Gn 19*^"
(Targ. of Onkelos and pseudo-Jonathan ; see Dal-

man, Aramdisrh-Neuhebrdisches Worterbiich, s.v.,
Gramm. p. 162, and Words of Jesus, p. 192 [Dal-
nian says that the suffix of 1 pers. sing, is ' deliber-
ately avoided with 3x and is supplied by the de-
terminative form']). It is not, however, quite
certain that tlie word was pronounced abba in
iPalestine in our Lord's time. As the points were
not invented till many centuries after, we cannot
be sure that abba was then tlie detinite state rather
than abhd as in Syriac ; and we have no indication
except the Greek transliteration that the b was then
doubled. But the fact that, when points were first
used (A.D. 700?), the daghesh was employed for the
delinite state of this word in the Targuinic litera-
ture, coupled with the doubling of the |3 in the
Greek, affords a presumption that the b was hard
and doubled in this word at the beginning of our
era [Dalman gives for the detinite .state n|!< Gn
44''', or Np Nu 25", or in Palestinian Targum also
NZN ; with other pronominal suffixes we have taiv.,
etc., and the pi. dehnite state is xnc^f^]. The
Syriac, on the other hand, has b aspirated through-
out, »^| abh, 1^1 abhA (pron. av, avd, or aw,

awd), etc., and the distinction between \a\ abd,
a spiritual father, and \^\ avd, a natural father,

which the grammai-ians make, appears not to be
founded on any certain basis, nor to agree with
the manuscripts (Payne-Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus,

s.v.). The proper name \^\ also in Syriac has
always aspirated b, whila Dalman [Worterbuch]
gives for Targumic n|x, and says it is an ab-
breviation of n;-N;. In Mk 14=*** (Peshitta) Pusey

and Gwilliam give ^C)) as in Massora 1 in the

British Museum (Codex Additionalis 12138, Nes-
torianus, A.D. 899); the American edition prints

|iD( (i.e. with s^) in all three NT places ; but this

is rather a following of tlie grammarians than of
good manviscripts. It is very noteworthy, however,
that the ^Jarkleian version in the JSIarkan passage

spells the word (,£i.i:5|, transliterating the Greek
directly back into Syriac, rather than using the
Syriac word itself.

John Lightfoot (Horce Hcbraicw on Mk 14^)
remarks that the Targum, in translating the OT,
never renders a ' civil ' father, i.e. a master, prince,
lord, etc., by n|.x, but only a natural father, or a
father who adopts ; in the former sense they use
some other word. But this throws no light on the
pronunciation of Abba.

It is to be noticed that it is not certain how
the Greeks of the 1st cent, themselves pronounced
d/3^a, whether ahbd or, as the modern Greeks pro-
nounce it, awd. The word is not found in the
LXX. It passed into ecclesiastical Latin with a
doubled b, and gave us such words as ' abbot,'
'abbacy,' etc.

But does it mean ' Father ' or ' my Father ' ? If
it be a Jewish formula or lixed manner of begin-
ning prayer, it may well be the latter. We must,
however, note that whatever be the way of ac-
counting for 'A/3/3a 6 trarrip (see lielow), the origina-
tors or originator of that phrase in Greek, whether
the Jews, or our Lord, oi" St. Paul, or the Second
Evangelist, seem to have taken 'A/3/3a to mean
merely 'Father.' And the same is probably true
of the translators of the Peshitta. The Sinaitic

Syriac, however, appears to read - « *"^| my Father

(see below). The Curetonian Syriac is wanting here.

2. We have next to account for the association
of 'A,8/3a in its Greek dre-ss with 6 irarrip in all the
three places where it occurs in NT. In Mk 14^"^

the Peshitta reads u-uTD ( ^O | ' Father, my

Father,' and the Sinaitic Syriac has simply ...i. '^ l

'my Father.' In Ro 8^^ and Gal 4^ the Peshitta

reads ^Q-OJ \^\. All these appear to be mere
expedients adopted to avoid the awkwardness of

repeating \^\, and they do not really throw light
on the origin of the Greek phrase.

We may first take as a suppo.sition that our
Lord, praying in Gethsemane, used the Aramaic
language, and therefore said 'Abba' only, and
that 6 iraTrip is the Evangelist's explanation, for
Greek readers, of the Aramaic word. St. Mark
undoubtedly reports several Aramaic words, and
except in the case of the well-known ' Rabbi,'
' Rabboni ' (9^ lO^^ etc.), explains them. But then
he always uses a formula, 6 eanv (3^^ 7"- ^*) or li ian
IxeQepfx-qvevbuevov [5^^ 15^). It is suggested that in
the case of Abba the familiarity of the word would
make the connecting formula unnecessary ; but
the same consideration would make it unnecessary
to explain it at all. Another suggestion is that the
solemnity of the context would make the formula
incongruous. The stronge-st argument for 6 iraT-fip
being an addition of the Evangelist is that, what-
ever view we take of our Lord's having made use
of Greek in ordinary speech, it is extremely un-
likely that His prayers were in that language ;
and if He prayed in Aramaic, He would only say
'Abba.' It isthe common experience of bilingual
countries tliat though the acquired language may
be in constant use for commerce or the onlinary
purposes of life, the native tongue is tenaciously
retained for devotion and prayer. Sanday- Head-
lam's supposition (Romans, in loc), that our Lord
used both words spontaneously, with deej) emotion,
might be quite probable if He prayed in the foreign
tongue, Greek ; but scarcely so if He prayed in the
native Aramaic (see, however, below).

If 6 iTa.Tr)p be due to St Mark, it is probably not
a mere explanation for the benefit of Greek readers.
The suggestion that 'A/3/ia 6 Trarijp had become a
quasi-liturgical formula, possibly even among the
Jews, or more probably among the Christians, would
account for its introduction in a prayer, where
interpretations would be singularly out of place.
And this suggestion would account for St. Paul's
using the phrase twice, in two Epistles written
about the same time, indeed, but to two widely
distant Churches. St. Paul is not in the habit of
introducing Aramaic words (' Maran atha ' in 1 Co
16" is an exception), and if he were not quoting
a well-known form, it is unlikely that he would
have introduced one in writing to the Romans and
Galatians. It is not probable, however, that he is
quoting or thinking of our Lord's words in Geth-
semane, for there is nothing in the context to
suggest this.

if the phrase be a liturgical formula, we may
account for it in various ways. J. B. Lightfoot
(Galatians, in loc.) suggests that it may have
originated among Hellenistic Jews ; or else among
Palestinian Jews, after they had learned Greek,
as ' an expression of importunate entreaty.' He
prefers the latter view, thinking that perhaps our
Lord Himself used both words. He apparently
means that Jesus took the Greek word into His
Aramaic prayer; and he quotes from Schottgen a
similar case where a woman entreats a judge and
addresses him as 'td ns ' My lord, lord,' the second
word being equivalent to the first, except for the

ABEL

ABGAR

possessive suffix, and being a transliteration of
Kvpie. Chase ('The Lord's Prayer in the Early
Church,' in the Cambridge Texts and Studies, vol.
i. p. 23) has suggested another origin for tlie phrase,
■which would place its home, not among the Jews
(for which there is no evidence), but among the
Christians. He suggests that it is due to the
shorter or Lukan form of the Lord's Prayer (Lie
jljir.j The Aramaic shorter form would begin
with Aljba, for the Greek begins with Ildrep ; and
the hypothesis is that the early Christians in the
intensity of their devotion repeated the lirst word
of tlie prayer in either language. A somewhat
similar phenomenon is seen in the repetitions for
emjjliasis in Ilev 9" 12'' 20-, where the names are
given in both languages. Such a repetition is
possible only in a bilingual country. That it is
the shorter form of the Lord's Prayer that is used
(if Dr. Chase's hypothesis be true), is seen from the
Aramaic n3X Abba. If the longer form had been
in question, Ildrep t^/uojc, the initial word of tlio
Aramaic Avould have had the possessive pronominal
suffix of 1 pers. pi., and would be n.;on clbhiind.
It is a conlirraation of this theory that the words
wiiich follow, ' Not what I will but what thou
wilt,' recall 'Thy will be done' of the Lord's
Prayer ; compare especially Mt 26^- yevq^rjTw to
6e\r]fid ffov, the exact words of the longer form of
tiie Lord's Prayer. This shows that both Evangel-
ists had that prayer in their minds when relating
the agony. The only consideration which militates
against tlie theory is that 6 irarrip is used for Ildrep.
The nominative Avith the article is, however, often
used in NT, by a Hebrew analogy, for an emphatic
vocative, and the desire for emphasis may account
for its use here. A. J. Maclean.

ABEL (^5n, "A/3eX). — 1. The name occurs in the
Gospels only in Mt 23^^ || Lk IFS where Jesus
declares that tlie Ijlood of the prophets will be
required of this generation. The passage is one
of a series of invectives against Pharisaism, col-
lected in Mt 23, parts of which are preserved in
Lk II. 13. 14. 20. 21. Abel is named as the first of
the long line of martyrs whose blood had been
shed during the period covered by the OT, the
last being Zachariah (which .see). ' In both cases
the iK^riTijcns is indicated: "the voice of thy
larother's blood crieth unto me from the ground "
(Gn 4^") ; " the Lord look upon it, and require it"
(2 Ch 2422).' In St. Matthew the words are ad-
dressed to the Pharisees in the 2nd person : ' that
upon you may come every righteous blood [i.e.
the blood of each righteous person] shed ujjon the
earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous, until
the blood of Zachariah . . . etc' In St. Luke the
passage is thrown into the 3rd person : ' that the
blood of all the prophets which hath been shed
from the foundation of the world may be required
of this generation, from the blood of Abel until
the blood of Zachariah . . . etc'

The description of Abel in St. Matthew as ' the
righteous ' is noteworthy, and should be compared
with He U*. In the story of Abel nothing what-
ever is said as to his moral character ; the contrast
between him and his brother lay in the fact that
' Jehovah had respect unto Abel and to his otter-
ing ; but unto Cain and to his ottering he had not
respect.' The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews
says that it was faith which led Abel to otter the
more excellent sacrifice ; but wherein the excellence
consisted the narrative of Genesis does not explain.
But the expression tou SiKaiou seems to reflect the
Pliarisaic conception of righteousness as that which
'consisted primarily in the observance of all the
rites and ceremonies prescribed in the law ' (cf.
Lk 1"). Abel's ottering must have been preferred
presumably because it was in some way more to

God's liking — more correct. This, however, was
not consonant with Christ's idea of righteousness —
' except your righteousness shall abound beyond
that of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall not
enter into the kingdom of heaven ' (Mt 5-"). It
may be concluded, therefore, that St. Luke has
preserved the more original form of Christ's words,
and that 'the righteous' is an addition in Mt 2.3"^
due to current Jewish conceptions.

2. It is possible that Christ had the story of
Abel in mind when He spoke of the devil as being
' a murderer (avOpuiroKTovo^) from the beginning,'
i.e. the instigator of murder as he is of lies(JnS"'^).
But the passage may be a reference to the intro-
duction of death into the world by the fall of
Adam.

3. In He 122^ the ' blood of Abel ' is contrasted
with the ' blood of sprinkling ' under the ncM' dis-
pensation. In Gn 4^" God says : ' Hark ! ("rip) thy
brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground,'
i.e. it pleads for vengeance. But the blooil of
sprinkling 'speaketh something better' (KptlrTov
XaXovvTi) : it is the blood shed in ratification of a
New Covenant, whose mediator is Jesus.

Literature.— The most recent commentaries on Matthew and
Luke (arf luce.) ; Wrifcht, Synopsis of the GosiicU in Greek, p. 232 ;
Saiidaj'-Headlam, Romans, pp. 28-31, on S/z«;<)? and its coy nates ;
Driver, Genesis (in Westminster commentaries) ; Hillniann,
'Genesis,' in Kurzgef. exeget. Handb. z. AT [Eng. tr. by
Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1897]; Marcus Dods, 'Genesis' in Ex-
positor's Bible. A. H. M'Neile.

ABGAR.— Between the years B.C. 99 and A.D. 217
eight (or ten) kings or toparchs of Edessa in
Osrhoene bore this name. It is with the toparch
that ruled in the time of our Saviour, Abgar
UkkamaCthe Black,' c. B.C. 13 to a.d. 50 [Giit-
schmid], B.C. 9 to A.D. 46 [Dionysius of Telmahar]),
that we are here concerned, owing to the legendary
accounts of his correspondence Avitli Jesus, accepted
as historical fact by Eusebius, and by him given
wide currency. Eusebius [HE i. 13) relates, with-
out any suggestion of scepticism, that ' king Ab-
gar, who ruled with great glory the nations beyond
the Euphrates, being afflicted with a terrible disease
which it was beyond the power of human skill to
cure, when he heard of the name of Jesus and His
miracles, . . . sent a message to Him by a courier
and begged Him to heal tlie disease.' Eusebius
proceeds to impart the letter of Abgar and the
answer of Jesus, which he claims to have derived
directly from the archives of Edessa, and to have
translated (or caused to be translated) literally
from Syriac into Greek. The letter of Abgar
reads as follows : —

' Abgar, ruler of Edessa, to Jesus the excellent Saviour who
has appeared in the country of Jerusalem, },'reetin<r. I have
heard the reports of thee and of thy cures as pertormed by
thee without medicines or herbs. For it is said that with a
word only thou makest the blind to see and the lame to walk,
that thou cleansest lepers and easiest out impure spirits and
demons, and that thou healest those afflicted with linj;eiing
diseases, and also that thou raisest the dead. And having heard
all these things concerning thee, I have concluded that one of
two things must be true : either thou art God and hast come
down from heaven to do these things, or else thou who doest
these things art the Son of God. Wherefore I have written to
thee to ask thee that thou wouldest take the trouble to come
even to me and heal the disease which I have. For I have been
informed that the Jews are murmuring against thee and are
plotting to injure thee. But I have a city, small indeed yet
honourable, which may sufflce for us both.'

The answer of Jesus runs—

' Blessed art thou who hast believed in me when thou thyself
hast not seen me. For it stands written concerning me, that
they who have seen me will not believe in me, and that they
who have not seen me will believe and be saved. But in regard
to what thou hast written me, that I should come to thee, it is
necessary for me to fulfil all things here for which I have been
sent, and after I have fulfilled them thus to be taken up again
to Him that sent me. But after I have been taken up I will
send to thee one of my disciples, that he may heal thy disease
and give life to thee and those who are with thee,'

ABGAR

ABIATHAR

From an accompanying narrative in the Syriac
language, giving an account of the fuliihiient of
Christ's promise, Eusebius quotes at considerable
length. A brief summary of the contents of this
document must here suffice. Judas, also called
Thomas, is said to have sent Thadda>us, one of the
Seventy, to Edessa, soon after the ascension of
Jesus. Arriving in Edessa he took lodgings, and
■without reporting himself at the court engaged
extensively in works of healing. When the king
heard thereof he suspected tliat he was the disciple
promised by Jesus, and had him brought to court.
On the appearance of Thaddieus 'a great vision
appeared to Abgar in the countenance of Thad-
dajus,' which led the former to prostrate himself
before the latter, to the astonisliment of the
courtiers, who did not see the vision. Having
become assured that his guest is the promised
disciple of Jesus, and tliat he has come fully em-
powered to heal and to save on condition of his
exercise of faith, Abgar assures Thadda;us that his
faith is so strong that, had it not been for the
presence of the Romans, he would have sent an
army to destroy the Jews that crucified Jesus.
Thaddajus assures him that in fiillilment of the
Divine plan of redemption Jesus has been taken
up to His Father, and, on a further profession of
faith in Father and Son, Thaddanis lays his hands
upon the king and heals him. Many other healings
follow, accompanied by the preaching of the gospel.
At Thaddseus' suggestion the king summons the
citizens as a body to hear the preaching of the
word, and afterwards offers him a rich reward,
which is magnanimously refused. According to
the Syriac document from which Eusebius quotes,
the visit of Thaddanis occurred in the year 340 of
the era of the Seleucid.-e (corresponding, according
to K. Schmidt in FEE\ sub voc, to A.D. 29;
according to others, A.D. 30, 31, or 32).

From the same Edessene materials Moses of
Chorene, the Armenian historian of the middle of
the 5th cent., prepared independently of Eusebius
an account of the intercourse between Abgar and
Christ and His disciples, which attests the general
correctness of Eusebius' work. The fact that
Moses was for several years a student in Edessa
enhances the value of his account. He represents
the reply of Jesus as having been written on His
behalf by Thomas the Apostle. In Moses' accoiint
occurs the statement that after his conversion
Abgarus wrote letters to the emperor Tiberius, to
Narses, kingof Assyria, to Ardaches, king of Persia,
and others, recommending Christianity (//i.';?'. Arm.
ii. 30-33). Here also appears the legend that
Christ sent by Ananias, the courier of Abgar, a
picture of Himself impressed upon a handkerchief.
This part of the story was still further elaborated
by Cedrenus {Hist. Comp. p. 176), who represents
Ananias, the courier of Abgar, as himself an
artist, and as so overcome by the splendour of the
countenance of Jesus when attempting to depict
it that he was obliged to desist ; whereupon Christ,
having washed His face, wiped it with a towel
which retained His likeness. This picture was
taken by Ananias to his master, find it became for
the city a sort of talisman. This miraculously
produced jiortrait, or what purported to be such, is
said to have been tiansferred to the church of St.
Sophia at Constantino)ile in the 10th cent., and
later to have passed thence to the church of St.
Sylvester in Rome, where it is still exhibited
for the edification of the faithful. A church in
Genoa makes a rival claim to the possession of the
original handkerchief ])ortrait.

Any suspicion that Eusebius fabricated the docu-
ments that he professes to translate was set aside
by the discovery and publication of Avhat have
been accepted as the original Syriac documents

(The Doct. of Addai the Apostle, with an English
Translation and Notes, by G. Phillips, London,
1876). The Syriac document contains the story of
the portrait, which was probably already current
in the time of Eusebius. The Syriac version of
the story given by Cureton in his, Ancient Syriac
Documents seems to be an elaborate expansion of
that of Eusebius, and to have been composed con-
siderably later.

The letter of Christ to Abgar was declared by a
Roman Council in 494 or 495 to be spurious. Tille-
mont sought to prove the genuineness of the corre-
spondence (Memoirs, i. pp. 3G2, 615), and similar
attempts have 1 een made by AVelte (Tiibingen
Qnartalschr. 1842, p. 335 ff.), Rinck (Zeitschr. f.
Hist. Theol. 1843, ii. pp. 3-26), Phillips (preface
to The Doct. of Addai), and Cureton (Anc. Syr.
Doc).

It may be assumed that the documents were
forged some time before Eusebius used them.
Christianity seems to have been introduced into
Osrhoene during the 2nd cent. A.D. Tlie first
king known to have favoured Christianity was
Abgar VIII. (bar-Manu), who reigned 170-213, and
is said to have been on very intimate terms with
Bardesanes, the scholarly Gnostic. A Christian
church building modelled after the temple in Jeru-
salem existed in Edessa some time before 202,
until, according to the Edessene Chronicle, it was
destroyed (middle of the 6th cent.) by flood. As
Edessa grew in importance as a Christian centre,
with its theological school, its ambition for dis-
tinction may have led some not over-scrupulous
ecclesiastic to fabricate these documents and to
palm them off on the too credulous authorities.
The forgery may have occurred early in the 3rd
cent. (Zahn), but more probably early in the 4th.
The only piece of real information that has come
down to us regarding the Abgar of the time of
Christ is a very uncomplimentary reference in
Tacitus (Ann. xii. 12. 14).

LrrERATURE.— In addition to the works already mentioned,
special reference should be made to Lipsius, Die cdcsseiiische
Abgarsage, 18S0, where the available materials are brought
under review and critically tested ; cf. also Matthes, Die edes-
senische Abgarsage avf Hire Fortbihhmg tmtcrsucht, 1S82 ;
Tixeron, Les origines de Veglise d'Edesse et la Ugende d' Abgar,
1888 ; Farrar, Christ in Art, p. 79 f.

Albert Henry Newman.
ABIA (AV of Mt V, Lk P).— See Abijaii.

ABIATHAR.— The son of Ahimelech, the son of
Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli. He is
mentioned in Mk 2-^--'^ ' Have ye never read Avhat
David did, when he had need, and was an hungred.

priest.' The reference is evidently to 1 S 21,
where, according to the Hebrew text, Ahimelech
gives David the sacred bread. There is thus a
discrepancy between the two passages. The facts
are these :— The AV, cited above, follows tlie
reading of A and C (iiri'A^ia0ap tou dpxi^peojs), RV
follows that of B and J< (which omit the article)
and the Vulgate ('sub Abiathar principe sacer-
dotum'). The clause is omitted altogether by D.
In the MT of 1 S 21 and 22 and in Ps 52'^ (title)
the high priest is Ahimelech the son of Ahitub
and the father of David's friend Abiathar. In
the Greek text of all these passages, however, the
name is Ahimelech. In 2 S S^^ and 1 Ch 24"
Ahimelech (in 1 Ch 18^" Ahimelech) the son of
Abiathar is priest along with Zadok, but it is
generally supposed that Abiathar the son of
Ahimelech is meant. Ahimelech is usually held
to be identical also Avith Ahijah the son of Ahitub
of 1 S 14- i«.

ABIDING

The discrepancy between Mk 2^^ and 1 S 21 f.
has been sought to be accounted for in several
ways. It may readily be due to a mere lapsus
memorice or calami, Abiathar, David's high priest,
being a mucli more familiar figure than his father,
just as in Jer 27' ' Jehoiakim ' is a slip for Zede-
kiah. It is not impossible that father and son
may each liave borne both names, according to
Arab usage, Abiathar corresponding to the Arab
ktivyah, and Ahimelech being the ism or lakab, or
name proper. It has been suggested that tlie
reference in St. Mark is not to 1 S 21 at all, but
to some later unrecorded incident, such as might
have occurred during tlie flight from Absalom.
But this is very improbable.* T. H. Weir.

ABIDING. — Of the three possible renderings of
the Greek fj.ov-q and iiivw, ' remaining, to remain,'
'dwelling, to dwell,' 'abiding, to abide,' the
last is the most satisfactory. The first has the
advantage of being akin to the Greek in deriva-
tion, but it is too passive in its sen.se, and in so
far as it includes the conception of expectation
it is misleading ; the second is too local, and is
rather the fitting rendering of KaroLKia, KaroiKeoj ;
the last is an adequate though not a perfect
rendering. ' Mansions' (RVm 'abiding-places') is
the stately rendering (AV and liV), through the
Vulg. mansiones, of the noun in Jn 14- ; but it be-
comes impossible in v.-'' of the same chapter when
the translators fall back on 'abode.' Further, in
the English of to-day ' mansion' suggests merely a
building, and that of an ostentatious type. The
Scottish 'manse,' self-contained, modest, and
secure, would be a nearly exact equivalent if it
carried with it more than the idea of a dwelling-
house ; yet neither it nor ' mansion ' has any corre-
spondent verb.

Students who desire to get at the full meaning
of verb or noun will find all that is needful in the
etymological paragraph sub voc. /jl^voj in the larger
edition of Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon. They
will discover how rich in language product is the
root of this word. The inquiry cannot be pursued
further here. It is enough to say that locality
enters very slightly into its conception, and that
what is dominant is ethical. The leading idea is
that of steadfast continuance. This is apparent
the moment one turns to the derivative viro/xourj
(cf. llo 2^), the term of Stoic virtue boldly incor-
porated and transmuted in Ciiristian usage and
experience. The primitive noun, however {/J-our)),
reminds Christians more clearly of the sphere in
which it is contained, of a life in which it survives,
of a power not its own on which it depends, and
which in turn it exercises. If, as will be shown,
the ethical import of m^j'w and novrj is dominant in
the Gospels, the instances where the verb has a
purely local .sense, the sense of stopping or staying,
may be dismissed. As a matter of fact, the
instances are almost entirely confined to the
Synoptists, and occur but in twelve passages ; the
use of the noun is purely Johannine. Only twice
in the Synoptists does the verb occur in relation to
persons, viz. Lk 242^ in the pathetic appeal of
Cleopas and his anonymous comrade, and the
gracious response of the risen Christ ; and even
here there is no ethical significance, for the pre-
positions which link the verb and the personal
pronouns imply only association (^uetj'o;' /xed' iifj-iiv),
or joint action [elartKdev rod fietvai aiiv avToh).

As soon as the student turns from the Sj'noptists
to the Johannine literature, the idea of ' mansion '
(one could wish it were a theological term) becomes
full, luminous, and suggestive. St. John uses the
verb ixivij3 only thrice in its literal sense in the

* Swete {St. Mark, ad foc.)sup:grests that the clause ItJ W^txikp
apxifpiiu;, which is pecuUar to Mark, may be an editorial note.

Gospel (2'^ 4'*" lO'*") ; he seems almost jealously to
reserve it for metaphorical, i.e. ethical, application.
We are not here concerned with St. John's letters,
but it is pertinent to observe that /x^yw occurs 2.3
times therein, while it is used in the Gospel some
35 times. Moreover, as if the Evangelist and
letter-writer would not sufler the spiritual point to
be lost, he perpetually reminds liis readers and
children of the sphere of ' mansion,' and the source
of its power. With a singular and marked uni-
formity, he employs the preposition ii> in connexion
with the verb. The Evangelist presses the idea not
only of intimate relationsliip, but also of resultant
power and blessing.

It is to be observed that, until we reach the
great discourses in the chamber and on the way
(chs. 14 and 15), we have only pas.sing hints of
the nature of the Abiding. The former chapter
unfolds its meaning. The difficulties besetting the
interpretation of these discourses are familiar to
all students of the Fourth Gospel, and need not be
dealt with here. They are not adequately met by
references to the subjectivity or mysticism of the
Evangelist. Our modes of thought, as Bishop
Westcott reminds us,* follow a logical sequence ;
Hebrew modes of thought follow a moral sequence.
The sermon to the Apostles in the chamber, especi-
ally, bears this moral impress throughout, and
is rightly interpreted as the complement to the
Sermon on the Mount. But while the connexion
is thus somewhat precarious to the reader, certain
great ideas or conceptions of the Abiding stand
luminously forth for the devout mind. Here is set
forth — (1) the Abiding of Christ in the Father;
(2) the Abiding of Christ in the Church, as in
the individual believer ; (3) the issues of the
Abiding.

1. The Abiding of Christ in the Father. — Here
the student is, indeed, on ground most holy. He
may not add to the Lord's words, he trembles as
he ventures to interpret them. He feels with the
patriarch that this place in the Scriptures is dread-
ful — full of a holy awe. Thus mucli, however, may
be said, that the abiding of Christ in the Father
belongs wholly to the operation and energy of the
Holy Spirit. The keynote of this truth is struck
by the testimony of the Baptist in the preamble of
the Gospel (Jn 1^-'-). It is important to notice
that that which was the object of sight to the
Baptist was not merely the descent of the Holy
Spirit, but the Abiding. And here the careful
student will observe that, though the preposition
used in these verses is not if but iiri, yet tlie
employment of the latter is necessary as linking
the descent and the continuous indwelling of tlie
Spirit in the Son. But if any hesitation remains
as to the view that the character and sphere of
Christ's abiding in the Father lies in and through
the indwelling Spirit, it must disappear on con-
sideration of our Lord's words (Jn 14^"), ' At that
day [the day of realized life] ye shall come to know
[by the Spirit what is at present a matter of faith
only] that I am in my Father.' The thought is
inevitably linked with the Spirit's work both in
Him and for them. When, therefore, the Lord
invites His own to abide in His love (15'"), He does
not merel}' imply that His love is the atimosphere
of their discipleship, but, as St. Augustine t sug-
gests. He invites them to abide in that Holy
Spirit whose love as fully permeates Him as it is
imperfectly exhibited in His disciples.

2. The Abiding of Christ in the Church, as in
the individual believer. — Our Lord's teaching as to
the Abiding in Him refers even more closely to
the Church than to the individual. Jn 14 and 15
are penetrated through and through by Pente-

* Introd. to the Gospel of St. John, ii. 7.
t Horn, in Joan. xiv. No. Ixxiv, ad Jin.

ABIJAH

ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION

cost.al thouglit and Pentecostal expectations.
Christ looked eagerly forward to the birthdaj^ of
tiie Si)irit-bearing body. He could and does,
indeed, inUy abide in the heart of each individual
believer ; but that believer is not a mere unit
standing solitary and unsupported. The indivi-
dual disci[)le will be a terrible loser unless he
realize his incorporation, his oneness with the
universal body, the ])ody of Christ. But as if to
make sure that this great truth should never
escape His own down the ages, Christ introduces
the great iigure of the Vine and tlie branches (15'"^).
The vine was already the symbol of the ancient
Church ; * Christ speaks of Himself as the true,
the ideal Vine. But it is as a fornmla incomplete
without the complement of v.^ ' I am the Vine, ye
are the branches.' As a vine is inconceivable
without branches,+ so in all devoutness it may be
said He is inconceivable without His disciples.
Again, they draw their life from abiding in Him.
The life may be imperfectly realized, the fruitage
may be disappointing, it may be nothing but
leaves (l\It 21'-') ; the task of discipline, or of
cleansing {KaOaipeiv, Jn 15'-''-) is in the hands of the
Great Husbanilman. Thus as in ancient Israel
union with the Church nation was the condition of
life, so in the new dispensation the condition of
life was to be the abiding in Christ. As apart
from the vine the branches are useless since the
living sap is therein no longer, so separated from
Christ there can be no productiveness in Christian
lives. ,St. John bears record of one more thought
of the highest consolation to Christian hearts.
Tliere is a true analogy and correspondence between
the abiding of Christ in the Father and the abiding
of believers in Him (15'"). Our abidings in Christ,
often so sadly brief, uncertain, precarious, through
the consequences of sin, have still their sublime
counterjjart in the abiding of Christ in the
Father.

3. The issues of the A bidincj. — We have seen that
the Abiding hnally depends upon the Sjjirit's work,
whether in the Church or in the individual heart.
The lirst fruit of that Spirit is love. The Spirit
moves in this sphere. He manifests and expresses
Himself in love. Thus love furnishes the test of
the indwelling, as truly as it contains the pledge
of a fruitful issue. According, moreover, to
I Johannine teaching, this love sjjreaxl abroad in
the hearts of believers is not a stagnant or senti-
mental afiection. Of the basal or abiding virtues
(1 Co 13'^) it is the greatest because of its fruitful
action. St. John presents another aspect of this
truth when he shows that obedience and love are
strictly correlated (Jn 15^"). This love is seen in
action. It doetli the will, and the reward of such
loving obedience is final and complete. Those
who in this dutiful and afi'ectionate temper keep
the commandments are raised by Christ from the
ba.se of bond-service to the height of friendship. It
is enough — the fiat has gone forth — 'such ones I
have called friends.' J

Literature.— A. Maclaren, Holy of Holies, 190 ; A. Murray,
Abide in Christ ; T. I). Bernard, Central Teaching oj' Jesus
Christ, 219; J. H. Jowett, Apostolic Optimism, 22.''>; B. F.
Wcstcott, Peterhvrourjh Sermons, 49, 61 ; Sir A. Blackwoofl,
Christian Service, 46; G. B. Stevens, Johannine Theology, 2')8.

B. Whitefoord.
ABIJAH (■^;3^?, 'A/3td, ' Jah is my father ' ; or more
probably without the particularizing pronoun, ' Jah
is father '). — 1, Son of Rehoboam (Mt V) by Maacah
(2 Ch 11-0— see art. < Maacah' No. 3 in Hastings' DB
iii. 180). Abijah reigned over Judah from about
B.C. 920, and the impressions made by him are
given with some variety in 1 K 15^ and by a later
tradition in 2 Ch 13^'"-. His name is introduced
by St. Matthew simply as a link in the })edigree,

* HoslOi, Is.'")!"'-, Jtr22i.

t Westcott's Commentary, in loco. X Jn lOi'-

in which it is shown that Jesus was both of Jewish
and of royal stock.

2. A descendant of Eleazar, son of Aaron. The
name was attached to the eighth of the twenty-
four courses into which the priests were alleged
to have been divided by David (I Ch 24i"). Mem-
bers of only four courses seeni to have returned
from the Captivity (Neli 7"»-^-, Ezr 2^^-'^^ 10'«--^).
According to Jerus. Talm. Taanith, iv. 68, these
men were divided into twenty-four courses with a
view to restore the ancient arrangement. The
authority for this statement is not of the best
kind ; but the statement itself is substantially
confirmed by Neh 12^"'', where twenty-two groups
are referred to (in Neh 12^-"-' the number has fallen
to twenty-one, and two of the courses are grouped
under a single representative), and by Ezr 8-, where
two other priestly families are mentioned. Slight
changes were probably made in the classification dur-
ing the process of the resettlement of the country ;
but by the time of the Chronicler the arrangement
seems to have become fixed. The course of Abijah
is not mentioned amongst those that returned from
the Exile ; but in one of the later rearrangements
the name was attached to a course that afterwards
included Zacharias (Lk 1''). Each course was on
duty for a week at a time, but all were expected
to officiate as needed at the three great annual
festivals. It is not possible with our present
materials to determine exactly how the various
services were divided amongst the members of a
course, or at what times in the year Zacharias
would be on duty. Nor does his inclusion in the
course of Abijaii carry with it lineal descent
through that line from Aaron. R. \V. Moss.

ABILENE.— Mentioned in Lk 3^ as the district
of which Lysanias was tetrarch in the loth year
of Tiberius It was called after its capital Abila,
situated on the Barada, about 18 miles from Dam-
ascus, and represented by the modern village of
Suk. The identity of Suk with Abila is confirmed
by a Roman rock-inscription to the west of the
town. According to jwpular ti'adition, the name
Abila is derived from Abel, who was buried by
Cain in a tomb which is still [)ointed out in the
neighbourhood. Little is known of the histoiy of
Abilene at the time referred to by St. Luke ; but
when Tiberius died in A.D. 37, some ten years
later, the tetrarchy of Lysania.s was bestowed by
Caligula on Herod Agripjia I. (Jos. Ant. XVIII. vi.
10), and this grant was confirmed in A.D. 41 liy
Claudius (XIX. V. 1 ; BJ II. xi. 5). On the death
of Agrippa I. (A.D. 44) his dominions pa.ssed into
the charge of Roman procurators [Ant. xix. ix. 2;
BJ II. xi. 6), but in A.D. 53 some parts of them,
including Abilene, were granted by Claudius to
Agrippa II. (Ant. XX. vii. 1 ; BJ II. xii. 8), and
remained in his possession till his death in A.D.
100; See Lysanias.

Literature. — Schiirer, HJP i. ii. 335 ff. Robinson, Later
BItP 479 ff. ; Porter, Giant Cities of Bashan, 352 f. ; Conder,
Tent Work in Pal. 127 ; SWP, Special Papers.

James Patrick.
ABIUD ('A^ioi/5).— A son of Zerubbabel, Mt \^'\
The name appears in the OT in the form Abihitd
(ii,T5t! ' Father is glory'), 1 Ch 8^.

ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION (t6 /^SAiY^ja

TTjs ep7?A'w<recos). — This phrase is found in the NT
only in jNIt 24'^ and Mk 13^^, in both cases forming
part of the passage in which Christ predicts the
Avoes to come on the Jews, culminating in the de-
struction of Jerusalem. St. Mark's words, which
are probably more exact than those of St. [Matthew,
are : iirav 5e i5t]T€ to j35e\vy/j.a rrjs ipTjixuiaeois effTijKOTo,
oirov ov Sel (6 a.Payti'waKWV voeiTco), Tore oi ei> rrj 'lovdaig.
(fnvyerwaau eh to. oprj, k.t.X. Three points in this

ABOMIXATIOX OF DESOLATION

ABOVE AXD BELOW

account are to be noticed : (1) the change of gender *
TO ^0€\vy/j.a — eaTTjKOTa (cf. 2 Th 2'^-'', Kev 21''*); (2)
the ' editorial note ' 6 dfayivwaKwv voeirw, callin"
special attention to the proiihecy (cf. Dn 9'-'', Rev
2' 13^*) ; (3) the command to flee to the mountains,
which seems to have been obeyed by the Cliristians
ivho escaped to I'ella (Eusel). HE lii. 5 ; Epiphan.
Hccrcs. xxix. 7). St. Matthew cliaracteristically
adds tlie words (absent from the best jNISS [NBL] of
St. ^lark) TO prjdev dia AapirjX tov irpo<p-qTov ; substi-
tutes tlie neuter ecrrds for the masc. eaTtjKOTa ; and
instead of the quite general phrase oirov ov del has
the more detinite ev Tuwqi 071^, — an expression which
may refer to the Temple (cf. Ac 6'^ 21-'*), but (with-
out the article) may mean nothing more than 'on
holy ground.' To the Jews all Jerusalem (and,
indeetl, all Palestine) was holy (2 Mac V 3^). St.
Luke, writing most probably after the destruction
of Jerusalem, omits the 'editorial note'; and for
oTav 'LOr]T€ TO pSeXiJ-yfia Tf|s ep-qfiucrecos substitutes
oTav LO-qTe KVKX.ovp.cvT]v viro o-TpaToire'Swv 'Upov-
o-aXrifi (21-").

Tlie phrase we are considering occurs three times
in the LXX of Daniel : 1 9-^ (/i5. tQv ip-qixwaeuv), IP^
(/3o. ip-qixdicrews) and 12'^ (cf. 8^^), and is quoted in

1 Mac 1"^. Tiie original reference is clearly to the
desecration of the Temple by tiie soldiers of Antio-
chus Epiphanes, the ceasing of the daily burnt-
oti'ering, and the erection of an idol-altar upon the
great Altar of Sacrifice in B.C. 1(58 (I Mac l^-^s* ;
Jos. Ant. XII. V. 4, BJ 1. i. 1). Thus it is plain
that Christ, in quoting tiie words of Daniel,
intends to foretell a desecration of tlie Temple (or
perhaps of the Holy City) resembling that of
Antiochus, and resulting in the destruction of the
national life and reli<non. Josephus {Ant. X. xi. 7)
draws a similar parallel between tiie Jewish mis-
fortunes under Antiochus and tlie desolation caused
by the Romans (6 AavirfKos koI irepl r^s 'Vwfiaiojv
ijyefioviai aveypa\f/€, Kai otl vir' avrOiv eprjuwOrjcreTai).
Rut the precise reference is not so clear.

(1) Bleek, Alford, Man.sel, and others explain it
of tiie desecration of the Temple Ity the Zealots
just before tlie investment of Jerusalem by Titus
(Jos. BJ IV. iii. 6-8, vi. 3). Having seized the
Temple, they made it a stronghold, and ' entered
tlie sanctuary witii polluted feet' (/JLep-Laa/jL^vois to2s
■troal wapfitaav els to ayiov). In opposition to Ananus,
tiiey set up as higli priest one Piiannias, ' a man
not only unworthy of tlie high priestliood, but
ignorant of wiiat the higii priesthood was' {dvrjp ov
p-ovov dva^ios dpxLfpevs dX\' ovd' ewi(TTdp.evos aatpCis tI
■KOT ^v dpxtepbjcrvvT]). The Temple precincts were
deliied with blood, and Ananus was murdered.
His mui'der, says Josephus, was the beginning of
tiie capture of tlie city {ovk hv dp.dpToi.p.L 5' eiiruv
dXuxrews dp^ai ttj iroXei tov Avdvov ddvaTov). In sup-
port of tills view it is urged (a) that the 'little
Apocalypse' (2 Th 2'"'-, a passage closely resem-
bling tills) clearly contemplates a Jewish apostasy ;
{It) tiiat tiie word used in Daniel (Y^p-^ = ^8e\vyp.a) is
properly used not of idolatry in tiie abstract, but of
idolatry or false worship adopted by Jeics (1 K 11-^,

2 K 23'^, Ezk 5'') ; ('•) tliat there was among tlie
Jews a tradition to the effect tliat Jerusalem would
be destroyed if their own hands siiould pollute the
Temple of God {idv xeFpes oiKelai wpofudvudL to tov
6eov Tipevos, Jos. BJ IV. vi. 3).

* Dr. A. Wright {Synopsis'^, 131) says that the masculine indi-
cates that St. Mark interprets to jShikvy/Mx. to signify a man.
But this does not seem necessary. The masc. appears to denote
a personification rather than a person. Such personifications
are not uncommon in prophetic and apocalyptic literature
(Ezli 38, Rev 21 [icyyiXn;] 220 ['UJa^sX] 12^ [hpayMv]). In 2 Th 2^
ccvOpuro; rr,; a.tou.ia; (S5."73 IT' X = BsX/ap) may denote not a
person, hut a sin (icroe-ronricc); see Nestle in Expos. Times, July
190:"., p. 472 f.

t The Hebrew text and its meaning are doubtful (see A. A.
Devan, Ihutid, ]\ 192). Our Lord adopted the current view
witli which tlie LXX had made the Jews familiar.

(2) Others (Bengel, Swete, Weiss) exi^lain it
by reference to the investment of Jerusalem by
tiie Roman armies. A modification of tliis view
is that of H. A. W. Meyer, who explains it of tlie
' doings of the heatiien conquerors during and
after the capture of tlie Temple.' When the city
was taken, sacrifices were otlered in tlie Temple
to the standards {BJ Vl. vi. 1, cf. Tertullian,
Apol. 16). Between tiie first appearance of the
Roman armies before Jerusalem (A.D. 66) and the
final investment by Titus (just before Passover
A.D. 70), there w^ould be ample time for flight 'to
the mountains.' Even after the final investment
there would be opportunities for ' tiiose in Jud;ca'
to escape. St. Luke's words (21-*') aie quoted in
sup]3ort of tills view.

(3) Theodoret and other early Commentators ,
refer tlie prophecy to the attempt of Pilate to set
up effigies of the emperor in Jerusalem {BJ ii.
ix. 2).

(4) Spitta {Offenb. des Joh. 493) thinks it has to
do with the order of Caligula to erect in the
Temple a statue of himself, to which Divine
honours were to be paid {Ant. XVIII. viii. 8). This
order, thougii never execut-ed, caused widespread
apprehension among the Jews.

(5) Jerome (Commentary on Mt 24) suggests
that the words may be understood of tlie eques-
trian statue of Hadrian, which in his time stood
on tlie site of tlie Holy of Holies. Similarly,
Chrysostom and others refer them to the statue of
Titus erected on tiie site of tlie Temple.

(6) Bousset treats the passage as strictly esclia-
tological, and as referring to an Antichrist wlio
should appear in the ' last days.' *

Of these views (1) and (2) are the most probable.
Considerations of chronology make (3), (4), and (.5)
more than doubtful, while the warnings that the
events predicted should come to pa^s soon (Mt
2433.34^ Mk 13-«-=i", Lk21-''-^^) and the command to
flee ' to tiie mountains ' seem fatal to (6). Between
(1) and (2) the clioice is not easj', thougli the
balance of evidence is on the wliole in favour of (1).
St. Luke's language {iJTav i5r]Te KVKXovpevrjv inrb
aTpaToweduv 'lepovcraXrjp.) is not decisive. He may
not have intended his words to be an exact repro-
ducticn of Christ's Avords so niucli as an accommo-
dation of them which would be readily understood
by his Gentile readers.

LiTKRATURE.— R. W. Newton on Mt 24 (1S79) ; Bousset, Der
Antichrist (ISSa), English tr. by A. H. Keane, 1896 ; J. H. Russell,
The Paronsia (1S87) ; articles in Hastings' I)B (by S. R. Driver),
Encyc. Bibl. (by T. K. Cheyne), Smiths DB'^ (hyW. L. Bevan) ;
the Commentaries of Bengel, Cornelius a Lapide, H. A. \V.
Meyer, Alford, Wordsworth, Mansel (in Speaker's Commentary
on NT, i. 139), H. B. Swete, St. Mark, ad loc. ; A. A. Bevan,
The Book of Daniel, ad loc. H. W. FULFOED.

ABOVE AND BELOW.— 1. As cosmologkal terms.
Like all similar expressions (ascent, descent, etc.),
tiiey presented to early ages a clear - cut image,
which has disappeared witli the rise of modern
astronomy. But this is ratlier a gain tiian a loss.
Here, as in so many other cases, tiie later know-
ledge is an aid to faith. At the beginning of the
Christian era tlie earth was still regarded as a
fixed body placed at the centre of the Universe,
with the heavens surrounding it as vast splieres.
But we know now that it is only a small planet
revolving round the sun, wliicli also has a ' solar
waj%' so immense and oljscure tliat it is not yet
determined : while tlie whole sidereal system — of
which our constellation forms a 'mere speck' — is
' alive with movements ' too complex to be under-

* Some (Keim, Holtzmann, Cheyne) hold the passage to be
part of an independent Jewish (or Jewish-Christian) Ajwcalypse
inserted subsequently in the Gospels. But it occui-s in all the
Synoptists, and ' it is difficult to think that even these wordg
. ". . are without a substantial basis in the words of Christ'
(Driver).

ABOVE AND BELOW

ABRAHAM

stood. While, therefore, 'above and below' (like
' east,' ' west,' ' north,' ' south ') would have for the
ancients an absolute and cosmic, they can have for
us only a relative and phenomenal, sij^nihcance. We
stilJ use the old terms, just as we still speak of the
rising sun, but we do so with a new interpretation.
They have no meaning in a boundless Universe
save in relation to our observation, and appearances
are misleading. But these wider views of the Uni-
verse should help us to realize that all language
involving conceptions of time and space is utterly
inadequate to express spiritual realities.

2. For the spiritual signilicance of these and
kindred terms we turn tirst of all to Jn S-^^- ■*-• ^^.
Manifestly, 'I am from above' (eK rdv &vt,i) = ^l
came forth and am come from God'; and clearly
also, ' Ye are from beneath ' (e/c tQjv Karw) = ' Ye are
of this world,' 'Ye are of your father, the devil.'
' The source of My life is above, i.e. in My Father;
ye draw your inspiration from below, i.e. from a
malign spirit of darkness.' This is the spiritual
signilicance of 'above and below.' To be 'born
again,' or 'born from above' (dvudev) (Jn 3^), is to
be ' born of God ' (Jn P^). To receive power ' from
above' (di^wdev), as in the case of Pilate (Jn 19'^),
is to receive it from God (Ro 13'). The wisdom
which is from beneath is ' earthly, sensual, devilish '
( Ja 3'^) ; while the wisdom which is ' from above '
'is of God' (cf. P 3''). Tlie following passages
may also be consulted: Jn 3^3.31 (jm iqjs 26",
Ko 106-8, Col 31. 2,

3. But, as has been already suggested, in using
these and all similar terms, it is important to bear
in mind their inadequacy and limitations. Not
merely has theology suffered to an extent that is
little realized, but the spiritual life of thousands
has been impoverished through a tenacious clinging
to an order of ideas in a region where they no
longer apply. The difficixlty, of course, is that
we must employ such categories of tliought even
though we are compelled to recognize their inade-
quacy. ' A danger besets us in the gravest shape
when we endeavour to give distinctness to the
unseen world. We transfer, and we must transfer,
the language of earth, the imagery of succession
in time and space, to an order of being to which,
as far as we know, it is wholly inapplicable. We
cannot properly employ such terms as " before " and
"after," " here " and " there," of God or of Spirit.
All ift, is at once, is present, to Him ; and the
revelations of the Risen Lord seem to be designed
in part to teach us tliat, though He resumed all
that belongs to the ])erfection of man's nature. He
Mas not bound by tlie conditions which v.e are
forced to connect with it' (Westcott, The Historic
Faith, p. 74). We invoke ' our Father in heaven,'
not as One who is divided from us by immeasurable
tracts of space, but as far beyond our ignorance
and sin — infinitely above us, yet unspeakably near.

' Speak to Him thou for lie hears, and Spirit with Spirit can

meet, —
Closer is He than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet.'

So, when the Apostle bids us 'seek those things
which are above, where Christ sitteth at the right
hand of God' (Col 3'), we must shake off the in-
cumbent thought of imnieasurable distances to be
crossed. And when we think of Christ's Ascension
into heaven, we must not conceive of it as a flight
into some far-off region, but as His passing into a
state of existence (of which we gain hints during
the great forty days) which we can describe only
by employing words which, in the very act of using
tiiem, we see to be utterly inadeqiiate. He has
gone into a state which we cannot even imagina-
tively picture to ourselves without robbing it of
much of its truth.

LlTBRATURE.— Westcott, Gospel of St. John ; F. D. Maurice,
The Oonpel of St. John [especially valuable]. If the reader

wishes to pursue the subject of the inadequacj- of the cate-
gories of the understanding, and of the concepts of time
and space in relation to spiritual realities, he will find an
ample field of investigation by beginning with Kant's Critiqiie
of the Pure Reason, and then, if he cares to, following
the discussion into more recent works of Philosophy. He
will find two valuable chapters (vi. and vii.) in Caird's Intm-
duction to the Philunophy of Religion, dealing with the sub-
ject. Arthur Jenkinson.

ABRAHAM. — It is noteworthy that while in
the Synoptic Gospels references to the patriarch
Abraham are comparatively frequent, and his per-
sonality and relation to Israel form part of tlie
historical background which they presuppose, and
of the thoughts and conceptions which are their
national inheritance, in the Gospel of St. John his
name does not appear except in ch. 8. In tlie
Synoptists he is the great historical ancestor of
the Jews, holding a unique place in their reve-
rence and att'ections ; he is their father, as they .are
each of them his children (Mt 3^ || Lk 3», Lk 13'6
1624.30 i99)_ To this the introductory title of St.
Matthew's Gospel testifies ; it is ' the book of the
generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the
son of Abraham.' And in the genealogical record
that follows, his name stands at the head (Mt P),
and through eqvially graduated stages, — epochs
marked by the name of Israel's most famous king,
and by the nation's most bitter humiliation (v.^'j,
— the ascent of the Christ is traced to the great
fountain and source of all Jewish privilege and life.
It is otherwise in the genealogy of St. Luke ; and
the ditt'erence indicates the different standpoints of
Jewish and Gentile tliought. Here the historian
records no halting-places in his genealogy, but
carries it back in an uninterrupted chain, of which
the patriarch Abraham forms but one link (Lk 3*^),
to its ultimate source in God. See art. Gene-
alogies.

Other references in the Synoptists are on the
same plane of thought, and presuppose a prevalent
and accejjted faith, which not only knew Abraham
as the forefather and founder of tlieir national life
in the far-off ages of the past, but realized that in
some sort or other he was still alive ; and it was
believed that to l)e with him, to be received into
his bosom (Lk 16--), was the highest felicity that
awaited the righteous man after death. Both St.
Matthew and St. Mark bear emphatic testimony
to this belief, in their narrative of the incident of
our Lord's solution of the dilemma presented by
the Sadducees with their tale of the seven brothers.
Jesus quotes Ex 3" in proof of the fact of the
patriarchs' resurrection and continued existence
(Mt 22^- II Mk 12-6 Li^ 20^'), inasmuch as the Divine
sovereignty here asserted over Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob necessarily implies the conscious life of those
who are its subjects. In the Songs of Mary and
Zacharias, again (Lk l'*"-^'*- '"*■''*), Abraham i.s the
forefather of the race, the recipient of the Divine
promises (confirmed by an oath, Lk 1") of mercy
and goodwill to himself and his descendants (cf.
Gal 3'6- 1«, He 6'^ Ac 7'', Ro 4^^) ; and his name is
a pledge that the same mercy will not overlook or
cease to care for his chihlren (Lk P'). And, Anally,
to be with Abraham and his great sons, to 'sit
down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the
kingdom of heaven' (Mt 8"), is the desire and re-
ward of the faithful Israelite. This reward, how-
ever, Christ teaches, is not confined to the Jews,
the sons of Abraham according to the flesh, still
less is it one to which they have any right by
virtue of the mere fact of physical descent from
him ; it is one that will be enjoyed by ' many ' faith-
ful ones from other lands, even to the exclusion of
the ' sons of the kingdom,' if they prove themselves,
like His present opponents, faithless and unworthy
(Lk 13-«).

The expression 'Abraham's bosom' (Lk 16") or

ABRAHAM

ABSOLUTION

• bosoms' (v. 23) * is hardly to be understood as con-
veying the idea of an eminent or unusual degree of
happiness. It is practically equivalent to ' Para-
dise.' And the new condition of blessedness in
which Lazarus tinds himself is pre-eminent only in
the sense that it is so striking a reversal of the
relations previously existing between Dives and
himself. The parable says nothing of any superior
piety or faith exhibited by Lazarus, which might
win for him a more exalted position than others.
As far as his present and past are concerned, it but
sets forth retributive justice redressing for him and
Dives alike the unequal balance of earth. ' Abra-
ham's bosom,' like the Hades in wliicii the rich
man lifts up his eyes, is part of the figurative or
pictorial setting of the parable, and indicates no
more tlian a haven of repose and felicity, the home
and resting-place of the righteous with Abraham,
who is the typical example of righteousness. The
parable is on the plane of jwjpular belief, and of set
puri)Ose employs the imagery which would be most
familiiir and intelligible to the hearers. f

In conformity with the general character of St.
Joiin's Gospel, the references to Abraham there
Avould seem to imply a more mystical, less matter
of fact and as it were prosaic manner of regarding
the gi-eat patriarch. He is spoken of in the 8th
chapter alone, in the course of a discussion with Jews
who are said to be believers in Jesus (v.^'). Here
also Abraham is the father of the Jews, and they
are liis children, his seed (vv.'^^- 3"- ss) . and this posi-
tion they claim with pride (vv.'"*"*"-^^). It is a
name and position, however, which Clirist declares
is Ijelied by their conduct, in that, though nomi-
nally Abraham's seed, they do not Abraham's works,
in [(articular when they conceive and plot the death
of an innocent man (vv.^**- ^"). To the charge itself
they liave no answer, except to reassert their son-
ship, in this instance of God Himself (v.^'*), and to
rej>eat the otiensive imputation of demoniacal pos-
fsession ( v.^). But with almost startling abruptness,
taking advantage of a phrase quietly introduced,
which they interpret to imply freedom from physi-
cal death for those who accept Christ's teaching,
they interrupt with the assertion that Abraham
died ' and the prophets' (v.^-), in apparent contra-
diction to the tenor and assumption of the language
which a moment before they had employed. Pro-
bably they meant no more than that he and they,
like all otiier men, had pa.ssed through the gate of
death which terminates life on earth ; and were
more intent on gaining a dialectic advantage than
on weighing the implications of their own words.
But, in spite of them, for the few moments tliat are
left the discourse preserves the high level of other-
worldliness, to which Christ's last words have
raised it ; and gives occasion for one of the most
striking and emphatic as.sertions in which He is
recorded to have passed beyond the boundaries and
limitations of mere earthly experience. Alnaham
has seen His day (v.*^). And by silence He con-
cedes and affirms the half-indignant, half-con-
temptuous and protesting question of the Jews ;
He nas seen Abraham, and is greater even than
their father (vv.^*- ^''). The climax is reached in
v.''*',— in a brief sentence, which, if it did not bear
so evidently the stamp of simplicity and truth,
would be said to have been constructed with the
most consummate skill and the finest touch of
artistic feeling and insight. ' Before Abraham
came into being,' — the speaker gathers up and

* The plural form is frequently used by the Greek Fathers,
e.g. Chrys. Horn. XL in Gen.: o-avTsj o< Sixaioi . . . dx^i^ ipy*

TOiOVVTOti tU TOVi KOX^OV? TOW rroLTpi»pXf>^ XflCTaVTVjVjei.

t On the phrase ' Abraham's bosom,' see Trench, Parables'^3,
p. 461 fT., and the references there given ; Lightfoot, Horce Ueh.
et Talm. ill. p. 167 ff.; Stevens, Theology of the Neiv Testament,
p. 82 ; Meyer, and the commentators, in loc. Cf. also Salmond
in Hastings' I»£ i. 17b f.

utilizes Jewish belief in its past and reverence for
its liead, — 'I am.' Abraham iyivfTo; Chri.st is.
Thus was conveyed the answer to their question,
' Art thou greater 't ' (v.^^) ; and thus was reasserted
with emphasis the measureless distance betAveen
Himself and the greatest of the Jews, and a
fortiori, as it would appear to the company around,
of the whole human race.

It is remarkable and suggestive that in the only notice of the
patriarch Jacob that is contained in the Fourth Gospel, ch.
45f. V2^ the same question is addressed by the woman of Samaria
to Christ: 'Art thou greater than our father Jacob,' — the
Dispenser of the new water with its marvellous properties than
the actual giver of the well? It was natural and inevitable
that one of the questions that more particularly forced itself
upon the attention of His contemporaries should be the relation
of the Teacher, who had arisen in their midst and who claimed
so great things, not only to the earlier prophets, but to the
patriarchs and ancestors of the Jewish nation. See further
art. Jacob.

The figure of Abraham, therefore, in the Gospels
is idealized, and invested with a simple grandeur
as the head and founder of the race in the indis-
tinct ages of the past, to whom are owing its present
privileges, and around whom gather its future hopes.
There is, however, no indication of iiero-worship, as
in the case of the more or less mythical ancestors
of other peoples. This conception, moreover, apart
from St. John's Gospel, is purely patriarciial. The
characteristic Pauline presentation of Abraham as
the father of the faithful in a moral and spiritual
sense, as the type and pattern of all righteousness
and obedience, as it is developed in the Epistles to
the Romans and Galatians, is absent (cf. also He
ll'*"''-, Ja 2-'-"^). References to the details of his
history are not indeed wanting in the remaining
books of the New Testament, but thej^ are all, as it
were, with a moral and didactic purpose : Gal 4'--, the
two covenants; He T'*"^*, Abraham and Mekhizedek ;
Ro 4''*^- and He 11^- ^^, faith exhibited in the aban-
donment of his fatherland, in the birth and ottering
up of Isaac ; Ac 7" ^'', the same abandonment of his
country and the purchase of a tomb from the sons
of Emmor in Syciiem ; cf. 1 P 3^ with a possible
reference to Gn 18'-.

Later Hebrew literature discussed especially this
aspect of his character, and the historical view was
superseded by the ethical or theological. Cf., for
example, PirLe Ahoth v. 4, of the ten testings or
trials (ni;rD:) of Abraham, and Taylor, in loc;
'Testament of Abiaham,' ed. M. R. James, Texts
and Studies, ii. 2.

Literature. — Tlfe authorities cited above, with articles on
' Abraham ' in Bible Dictionaries, and the Conmientaries.

A. S. Gkden.

ABSOLUTION.— 1. Our Lord's tvords vn Absolu-
tion. — We find these in the following passages:
Mt le'^""*, especially this word spoken to Peter, ' I
will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of
heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on e.irth
shall be bound in heaven : and whatsoever tliou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven ' ;
Mt IS'* (spoken to all the Apostles), 'Verily I
say unto you. What things soever ye shall bind on
earth shall be bound in heaven : and wiiat things
soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven'; Jn '20'-'''- 'Jesus therefore said to them
again. Peace be unto you : as the Father hath
sent me, even so send I j'ou. And when he had
said this he breathed on them, and said unto
them. Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whose soever
sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them :
whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.'

Tlie first of the sayings — that about the keys
and the binding and loosing — we might have been
under some compulsion to t<ake as for Peter alone,
if it had not been that the like saying is repeated
to all tiie Apostles afterwards. The words Avere
special to Peter, as the early history of the Acts
snows ; but they Avere not limited to him. And

ABSOLUTION

following as they do on his great confession — being
a prize and reward of that confession — they belong
to him as a man who had attained by the revela-
tion of the Father to a true faith that Jesus was
the Christ the Son of God : they belonged to all the
Apostles as men of like faith : and they belong to
the whole Church of which these twelve were the
nucleus, in proportion as that faith is alive in it.
In regard to the saying (in Jn 2U-*) about the for-
giveness and retaining of sins, it was spoken in ' a
general gathering of the believers in Jerusalem '
(see Lk 24'*^), and ' there is nothing in the context
to show that tlie gift was confined to any particu-
lar group (as the Apostles) among the whole com-
pany present. The commission, therefore, must be
regarded properly as the commission of the Chris-
tian society and not as that of the Christian
ministry' (Westcott, in loco).

The 'keys' may be understood as the keys of
the porter at the outer door of the house, and as
symbolic of authority to admit into the kingdom
of heaven or to exclude from it. Or they may be
taken as the keys of the steward for use inside the
house, and as symbolic of authority to open the
stores or treasuries of the household of God and to
give forth from these treasuries according to the
requirements of the household. It is rather in this
second sense that authority is given to bind and to
loose, which in Rabbinical usage meant to forbid
and allow in matters of conduct ; that is to say, to
interpret the will of God and to enjoin rules of
life in harmony with that will. This is the work
of the steward of the mysteries of God, and has to
do directly with things, not persons. But the lirst
sense, that of admitting and excluding, which has
to do with persons, is what is chiefly meant by the
power of the keys, and it is as an exercise of this
power and of the power given in the words, 'Whose
soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them,'
that absolution must be considered.

Our Lord's words seem at first reading to invest
the Church with absolute authority, and to promise
that Heaven Avill follow and ratify the action of
the Church on earth, whatever that action may
be, in forgiving or judging, in admitting into the
kingdom of heaven or excluding from it. But we
recoil from this as impossible. There is no Church,
how great soever its claims in regard to absolution,
which does not admit that God alone forgives sin.
We feel, however, that we must find a gre.at sense
in whicli to understand so great words as those of
our Loi'd in these commissions. And we observe
that before the words in Jn 20'-^ our Lord breathed
ui)on His disciples and said, ' Receive ye the Holy
Gliost.' He imparted to them His own very Spirit,
so enabling them to be His representatives and
equipping them to continue His work. (The faith
which Peter had by revelation of the Father, that
is to say, by the same Spirit, was an equivalent
endowment before he received the promise of the
keys). It was evidently the purpose of the Lord
Jesus that His Church should continue the exercise
on earth of the power which He constantly exer-
cised and set in the forefront of His ministry, the
power of saying to the penitent, ' Thy sins are for-
given thee' ; and of saying this witii such assured
knowledge of the truth of God and such symjia-
thetic discernment of the spirits of men, tliat wliat
was done by the Church on earth sliould be valid
in heaven, and the word of Christ by the Church
powerful to give comfort to truly ]ienitent souls.

The Lord is concerned not only that men be for-
given, but that His disciples should know that
they are forgiven. The grace of forgiveness has
not its proper power in transforming their lives
unless tlic-y know that they have it. As long as
men are under fear and doubt they are not Christ's
freemen : their religion is still only regulative. It

is when thej' have an assured sense of forgiveness
and reconciliation to God that a great impulse of
gratitude, with a new life in their souls, makes
them free indeed, and strong in their freedom to
serve God. Christ accordingly equips His Church
to convey this assurance of forgiveness, and if a
Church does not succeed in doing this, esjiecially
if, as often, the current idea in the Churcli is that
to be assured of forgiveness is abnormal and
unusual, the Church is greatly failing in its
mission. If the form of our Lord's promise in
Jn 20-'* 'Whose soever sins ye forgive,' etc., seem
too absolute, we must remember that the gift of
the Holy Spirit, Avhich He then gave the sign of
imparting, is a gift of exceeding power, and that
no linut can be set to the degree in which God
through Christ is willing to give the Spirit. ' He
giveth not the Spirit by measure' (Jn 3^^). Ard
our Lord is speaking, according to His wont, to the
ideal Church, to the Church which receives in the
fulness with which He is willing to bestow. Just as,
speaking at the high level of the ideal. He says
to His servants in another jdace (Lk 10^"), ' He
that hearetli you heareth me : and he that de-
spiseth you despiseth me' ; so He says here, ' Whose
soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven,' etc. But
all these and such like promises depend for their
fulfilment on the Spirit of Christ working, nay,
reigning, in the Church. This power and reign of
the Spirit ebbs and flows according to the faith
and receptivity of the Church ; and while it is the
duty of the Church to believe in God being with it,
and while the Church ought to clothe itself with
the mighty assurance of heaven assenting to its
judgments, it can dare to do so, and will be able
to do so, only in proportion as it has sought and
obtained the indwelling of the Spirit.

The words of our Lord before us certainly do
not mean that forgiveness by the mouth and at
the will of man is always to be followed by a
ratification of God in heaven, even though that
man be an apostle. But they do imply that when
Christ's servants do their work in the enlighten-
ment and guidance of the Spirit, they will be able ,
to convey messages of grace which will be accord-
ing to the truth of things, and therefore valid in
heaven : they will be able also to convey assur-
ances of forgiveness, which will be owned of -Ciod
as true, and will be made effective by His Spirit in
penitent souls. So then the great and chief means
by which the Church has in all ages fulhlled
the work which is sustained by these startling
promises, is the preaching of the gospel of recon-
ciliation by Jesus Christ. By preaching in the
power of the Spirit, thousands of souls have been
in all ages receiving remission of sins and an
assurance of forgiveness. Although the preaching
is public, and the preacher has little or no separate
knowledge of individual hearts, there is a ' privacy
of publicity ' in which whatever message he has
from God is made an absolution Divine in power
and assurance to one and another of the hearers.
So effectual is preaching in the Spirit, that it may
perhaps be found that in the Churches in which
there is no ordinance with the title of ' private
absolution,' the sense of forgiveness of sins is truer,
deeper, and more widely spread than in those
which have such an ordinance, and count it neces-
sary. Obviously another means by which the
Church carries out the Lord's purpose of convejdng
absolution to the penitent is by the sacraments.
But there is great occasion also for the Church to
afl'ord full opportunity for individual help to souls
in spiritual trouble, and such individual dealing as
may in its issue amount to private absolution. In
every revival of religion the need for this is felt.
There are souls in doubt whether tliL'ir repentance
and faitli are true, and whether they are them-

ABSOLUTION

selves accepted of God. Such souls seek the help
of the Church, and often greatly profit by it.
' Inquiry-rooms ' have been of notable service in
modern 'missions,' and it is a common thing for
people in trouble of conscience about some s^jecial
.sin to long to unbosoui themselves about it to one
whom they feel to have spiritual authority. Evan-
gelical religious newspapers have found that they
supply a demand by setting apart a column, often
largely used, for the answers of some minister of
reputation to men who open their nunds to him,
confess their chief sins, doubts, or temptations,
and seek comfort through him. All the Churches,
to a greater or less extent, supplement the preach-
ing of the word by ' discipline,' and their admis-
sion to communion and exclusion from it tell
ix)\verfully on the individual conscience. The
elfectiveness of all such dealing has a natural basis
in the fact of experience that a man's judgment of
himself is greatly inlluenced by the judgment of
his fellow-men. It belongs to human nature that
the judgment of the community in which a man
lives so tells upon his spirit that it is hard for
him to bear up against it. This is caiTied to a
higher {wwer in the Church, in the sphere wherein
the Spirit of Christ works. The testimony of men
who are spiritually minded and in communion
^\ith God is felt to have an authoi'ity such that
great relief is given to souls by the Church's
absolution, and great burden imposed by its re-
fusfil. And justly, for the discernment of spirits
is one of the gifts of the Spirit of Christ to His
servants. They all have it in some measure, some
in a wonderful mea.sure (1 Co 2'5, 1 Jn 2-'* 4'), and
it may be recalled that after our Lord promised to
Peter that on him He would build His Church, He
did not say, as we should have expected, ' I will
give thee tlie keys of the Church,' but ' the keys of
the kingdom of heaven ' : from which we infer
tiiat, while the Church and the kingdom are not
conterminous, the Church is meant to be a true
realization of the kingdom, and its judgments
valid for that kingdom. In an ideal Cliurch this
would be fullilled. In any actual Church the
j)o\ver s[)oken of, at once gracious and awful, varies
in its eli'ectiveness according to the fulness of the
Spirit in its office- beai'ers and members.

2. History of Absolution in the Church.— \n the NT age there
is no trace of the practice of private confession to ministers of
the Church for private absolution (Ja S**" cannot be so inter-
preted). But very early in the history of the Church it became
customary for those who, after baptism, had fallen into gross
sins, especially the sins of idolatry, afiultery, or murder, to be
cut off from fellowship, and to be" readmitted after repentance
manifested by public confession in the church. This readniis-
sion was an absolution, which came to be spoken of as the
Church's power to forgive sins,— a power, however, declared by
Tertullian (de Pudic. xxi.) to belong to the Church only in so
far as she is composed of spiritual men. This power in the
2nd cent, w-as claimed as vested in the whole episcopate, and,
by and bv, in everv single bishop ; still later, in every priest.
And from" the time of Leo the Great (Bishop of Rome a.d. 440),
the custom grew of private confession and private absolution.

In the Middle Ages there were many discussions as to whether
the priest had |X)wer simply to declare the forgiveness of sins,
God alone having power to' forgive, or whether the priest truly
himself e.xercises a power to forgive as representative of God.

The final doctrine of the Church of Rome, as fixed by the
Council of Trent, combines both these views. Gwl alone
forgives sins, and He does this solely on account of the sinner's
repentance. But the priest is the necessary instrument of God.
God has been pleased to make the priest's absolution the means
by which the grace is conveyed, and the word of the priest is a
judicial .act in which he passes sentence on the penitent. The
priest is entitled to use the words of the ritual, ' I absolve thee
from thy sins in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost.'" It is a^lniitted that 'perfect sorrow for sin without
addition of external rite blots out the stains, and restores the
peace of (iod in the soul ' ; vet this perfect sorrow involves m a
well-instructed Catholic the intention of confessing and receiv-
ing the priest s absolution when opportunity offers. Protestants
truly penitent m.ay indeed receive the peace of God, because
this'desire of confession may be regarded as implicit in them.
But confession to the priest is a necessary dut}-, and priestly
absolution may not be omitted without loss of salvation.

The Lutheran Church did not entirely abolish confession and

absolution ; but Luther made changes which very greatly altered
its character. Confession was not made compulsor\' : it was a
free opportunitj' that might be used in case of sins about which
the penitent could not otherwise attain to peace. Luther made
it unnecessary in confession to enunierate every individual sin ;
and so little was absolution sacerdotal that it might be given by
a Christian layman. In course of time, private confession to
the pastor mostly died out in the Lutheran Church. But it has
often been spontaneously resumed in times of religious revival,
of which interesting examples may be found in Ur. Biichsel's
Kriniicrunrjen. He testifies stronglj' to the benefit both to
pastor and people of the Privatheiclite, as he calls the Lutheran
method, in contradistinction to the Roman Catholic OhrbciclUe
(vol. ii. p. llSff.). And he justifies the word of absolution
spoken by the minister, 'I absolve thee,' etc., defending it from
the objection that it is falsified and of no effect if the absolved
has not truth and faith, by sajing that in that case it is still
effectu.al for judgment, as in the case of the misuse of the Lord's
Supper, or, indeed, of the preached gospel.

In regard to the Anglican Church, in its ordinary service ' the
absolution or remission of sins to be pronounced by the priest
alone, the people still kneeling,' is no more than a gospel pro-
clamation of God's pardon to the penitent, ending in a prayer
for true repentance. The exhortation before the Communion
contains this invitation, to be pronounced by the curate : 'If
there be any of you who . . . cannot quiet his own conscience,
let him come to me, or to some otiier discreet and learned
minister of God's word, and open his grief, that by the ministry
of God's holy word he may receive the benefit of absolution,
together with ghostly counsel and advice to the quieting of his
conscience, and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness.' From
this, the teaching of the Church of England appears to be simi-
lar to that of the Lutheran, making confession exceptional not
compulsory, and absolution not sacerdotal, but a part of the
ministry of the Word.

In the service for the visitation of the sick, the minister is
enjoined ' to move the sick j^erson to make a special confession
of his sins if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty
matter. After which confession the priest shall absolve him (if
he humbly and heartily desire it) after this sort : "Our Lord
Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all
sinners who truly rejient and believe in Him, of His great mercy
forgive thee thine offences : and by His authority committed to
me, I absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."'

In the Presbyt*;rian Churches the words 'absolve' and
'absolution' are used only of the restoration to Conmmnion by
the minister and elders — i.e. the Kirk-Session — of those members
of the Church who have fallen into any scandalous sin by which
Christ is publicly dishonoured. These are usually dealt with
first by the minister in pri\ate : then they appear before the
Session, or before a delegation of it, to make acknowledgment,
and profess rejientance. Thereupon they may be addressed and
'absolved,' bj- which is meant restored to Communion. This
dealing has been undoubtedly, when used with spiritual tact and
tenderness, a great means of deepening both the sense of sin and
the trust of God's forgiveness, and it has the effect of giving
many who had lost character a new spiritual start. The value,
however, of this discipline depends wholly on the measure in
which those who administer it are Christian, not legal, in their
spirit, and on the support which the discipline receives from
the spiritual level of the general body of the Church.

3. Conclusion. — Absolution, in the full meaning
of bringing men into the sense of God"s forgiveness
and keeping them in that sense, niaj' be said to be
the primary Avork of the Church and its ministry.
This work is carried out mainly by preaching,
sacraments, and individual dealing with souls.
The short history given above indicates the more
or less fitting and successful methods by which
the Christian Church has endeavoured to fuliil
especially the duty of individual dealing. In order
that a Church may be truly successful in this
work of grace, it must be largely and widely per-
vaded by the Spirit of Christ in its Avliole mem-
bership. The gift of power in this work is not
conhned to the ministry ; it is found wherever
there is a deeply spiritual mind and Christian
experience. Men in spiritual trouble do not betake
themselves to a priest or minister unless they feel
him to have the spiritual authority that belongs to
Christ-like character. A merely official spiritual
authority is not seriously believed in. What com-
forts and assures in time of soul -trouble is the
word or sign of acknowledgment from the Chris-
tian company speaking by those who truly repre-
sent it — those who are truly called of God to the
ministry, or who are shown by their goodness to
be in the fellowship of God. On the training-
ship Shaftcsburif a bad boy met with an acciilent ;
he was taken to the little hospital. Whtn he was

awake at night he talked to the nurse. One night
he said, ' Sister, I think I am dying, and it is so
hard ; but I think if you kissed me as if I was a
good boy, I could bear it.' This boy, conscious of
an evil past and struggling to escape from it, felt
as if the kiss of that good woman would give him
cheer, and hope of acceptance with God — would be,
in fact, an absolution. A Christian minister, in
converse with a dying man in whom he discerns a
true repentance, may be able to say with great
power, ' Brother, be assured thy sins are forgiven
thee,' and great blessing of comfort to the man
may follow, may indeed be looked for. Only in a
higli moment of spiritual impulse and assurance
could the minister venture to say, ' In the name of
the Lord Jesus I absolve thee from thy sins.'

Literature. — The Commentaries on the Gospels, especially
Westcott on St. John, Bruce on St. Matthew, Dods on St.
John ; Bishop Harold Browne's Exposition of the Thirty-nine
Articles ; A Catholic Dictionary by Addis and Arnold, art.
'Penance'; Canon Carter's The Doctrine of Confession in the
Church of England ; Dean Wace's Confession aiid Absolution;
Dr. Drury's Confession and Absolution; Dr. Biichsel's Erin-
nerungen aus don Leben eines Landgeistlichen ; F. W. Robert-
son, of Brighton, Sermons, 3rd series, v. ; Selby, The Imperfect
Angel, etc., xii. J. KOBERTSON.

ABYSS {t] djSvcrcros). — The word ' abyss,' Avhich we
find in several places in the RV of the NT, is not
found in the AV. There we find instead, in St.
Luke (8^^) and in Romans (10'^) 'the deep,' and in
the Apocalypse 'the bottomless pit.' In Rev 9'-^
we find (RV) 'the pit of the abyss' {to (ppeap ttj^
d^vffffov), a somewhat peculiar expre.ssion, but not
having, it would seem, a ditiierent signilication from
the simple word 'abyss.'

It is not easy to see that the word ' abyss ' has
the same signilication in Romans as it has in St.
Luke and the Apocalypse. In a general way, of
course, the word may be taken as meaning the
underworld, the world of departed spirits and of
things dim and mysterious, — a world conceived of
as deeply hidden away from that of things seen
and known, even as the interior of the earth and
the depths of the ocean are hidden. The abyss
is certainly the realm of the departed in Ro W,
where St. Paul himself interprets the word for us :
' Who shall descend into the abyss (that is, to
bring up Christ from the dead)?' But a more
specific meaning than that of simply the under-
world must be given to the word in Lk 8^^ and in
the various passages in tiie Apocalypse where it
occurs. The abyss is not even in Lk 8^\ perhaps,
the ultimate place of punishment, but it is there
assuredly a place of restraint and of terror, as it is
also so far in the Apocalypse. The abyss in the
latter is the Satanic underworld, the dark and
mysterious region out of which evil comes, but
also the prison in which during the millennial period
Satan is confined. Of course much that is given
in the Apocalypse is given under poetic imagery.
The abyss is rather a condition of spiritual beings
than a region of space. But under the imagery
there is fact, the fact that there .are spiritual
beings setting themselves in opposition to the
Kingdom of God, and yet in their very opposi-
tion conscious of His restraining power. Satan
is bound for a season in the abyss. He has no
absolute power, but must submit to such restraint
as is put upon him. Evil comes from the abyss,
but the very Spirit of evil has to submit to being
bound there.

Literature. — The Commentaries on the passages above cited ;
the art. ' Abyss' in Hastings' DB and in the Encyc. Biblica.

George C. Watt.
ACCEPTANCE.— The state or relation of being
in favour, especially with God. It is a common OT
conception that has been carried over into the NT.
In the former it has both a ceremonial significance,
involving the presence of an approved ottering or

a state of ceremonial purity, and also an ethical
significance, involving divinely approved conduct.
Tiie Hebrew expression d':s NifJ ' to lift up or accept
the face or person of one,' becomes in NT irpbawirov
Xafx^dveiv, 'to accept the person or presence,' which,
however, with its derivatives, Trpoo-coTroXTj/xTPTeii' and
irpoauiroXiifXTrT-qs, always implies the acceptance of
the outward presence, witliout regard to the in-
ward or moral qualities ; hence, in a bad sense,
partiality, as in Lk 20-' (cf. Mt 22i» and Mk 12i^).
Tn a good sense the idea is expressed by eudpecTTos,
'well-pleasing' (Mt 3''' 'This is my beloved Son,
in whom I am well pleased ' ; cf. Mt IT"*) ; cf. also
deKTos, 'acceptable' (Lk 4-^ Ph 4'*), used with
iviavToi, 'acceptable year' (Lk 4'") and with Kaipos,
' acceptable time ' (2 Co 6-), of a period or time when
God's favour is specially manifest. In numerous
passages in the Gospels and Epistles acceptance
with God comes only through and in Jesus Christ
(Jn 146, Epjj i« 'accepted in the Beloved,' Ro 14'8,
He 13-'). So also the disciple's conduct and ser-
vice are to be such as will find acceptance with
Christ (Eph 5'^ 2 Co 5» ; cf. He 12-S). See, further,
art. Access.

As applied to our Lord Himself, the idea of His
acceptance both with God and man is of fretjuent
occurrence in the Gospels. Of Jesus as a growing
boy this twofold acceptance on eartli and in heaven
is expressly affirmed (Lk 2*^). His perfect accept-
ance with the Father is testified to, not only by a
voice from heaven both at the beginning of His
ministry (Mt 3"|!) and towards its close (Mt 17* li),
but by the constant affirmations of His own self-
consciousness (Mt 11-^11, Mk 12«||, Jn 52« 8-« 10",
IS'-* etc.). The favour with which He was regarded
by the people when He first came declaring ' the
acceptable year of the Lord,' is proved not only by
such notices as, ' The common people heard him
gladly' (Mk 12-'''), but by the crowds which fol-
lowed Him constantly all through the period of
public favour. So far as acceptance with men is
concerned, there is, of course, another side to the
picture. ' No prophet,' He said, ' is accejitable in
his own country' (Lk 4'-^). His own brethren did
not believe on Him (Jn 7^"*), His own townsmen
thrust Him out of their city (Lk 4-8-"), His own
people were guilty at last of that great act of re-
jection which found utterance in the shouts, ' Not
this man, but Barabbas' (Jn 18^"), and 'Crucify
him, crucify him' (Lk 23-'), and was visibly set
forth to all coming time when He was nailed to a
cross in full .sight of Jerusalem (see Rejection).
He who hail been accepted for a time was now 'a
root out of a dry ground,' the ' despised and re-
jected of men ' (Is 53''- ^). And yet it was from this
same root of rejection and sorrow that the accept-
ance of Christ was to grow into universal forms.
Being lifted up from the earth. He drew all men
unto Him (Jn 12^-). And though as the well-
beloved Son He had never for a moment lost favour
in His Father's sight, it was through enduring the
cross and despising tlie shame that He sat down at
the right hand of the throne of God (He 12^; cf.
Ph 2**-''). E. B. Pollard.

ACCESS (irpo(ra7W7T7).— No word in the English
language expresses the double meaning of wpoj-
ayuryrj. While the AV translates it invarial)ly
'access,' the RV more accurately renders 'our
access' in Ro 5^ and Eph 2i8.

The Trpoffayuyyevs at Eastern courts acted as
official introducer in conducting strangers to a
king's presence.* Whether there were any allusion
to this or not in the minds of our New Testament
writers, the custom illustrates appropriately one use
of the word 'access.' Christ as our Introducer
obtains admission for us into the favour and
* Tholuck, Rom. I.e., and Usteri, Lehrb. il. i. 1, p. 101.

ACCESS

presence of God. irpoaa'ywyr] is 'aditus ad rem vel
personam' (Grotius). It means (1) ' introduction,'
'admission' (see references to classical Greek
authors, and to Chrysostom in Ellicott on Eph 21") ;
(2) ' liberty of approach.'

'Access' {-rrpoirayojyn) occurs in three passages in
the New Testament, Ro 5-, Eph 2'8, and 3^\ An ex-
amination of these passages -will best explain -what
'access' meant in the thought of St. Paul. Then
it will be necessary to consider 1 P 3^® ' For Christ
also hath once suttered for sins, the just for the
unjust, tliat he might bring us {irpocxaydyr]) to
God ' ; ami afterwards, the idea of the author of the
Epistle to the Hebrews regarding 'access' as the
act of drawing near to God through the great
High Priest must be stated.

1. Ro 5^ 'Through whom we have also [Kai,
'copulat et augeb' (Toletus), 'answering almost to
our "as might be expected'" {\U.)] gotyjxVKafxeu]
our [Tr>]access (introduction) by our [r^] faith, into
tliis grace wherein we stand.' The Perfect tense
is used in connexion with that justifying act re-
ferred to in V.'. Access is not here a second
privilege of the justified, but introduction to the
very grace of justilication itself. We owe to Christ
not only jieac e as the primary blessing of justifi-
cation, but admission to that state wliich is the
atmosphere of peace.

This paragraph, beginning with v.^ and descrip-
tive of the life of the justified, is founded on the
doctrinal basis just laid down. The Apostle has
examined the world of men, as it appeared in tlie
prevalent antithesis of Jew and Gentile. His
spiritual diagnosis revealed the fact of universal
sin and universal condenmation. A guilty race,
a holy God, and a broken law, with its death
jioiialty, were factors in the j roblem for solution,
riiis problem, insoluble by man, is taken in hand
by Christ. Clirist provided a solution as effectual
as the need for it is clamant. The summary of
that solution as contained in 4--'^- is the Divine
certificate of its efficacy. It was Avritten not for
the sake of Abraham alone (a typical case of its
application), but for us also, to whom it shall be
imputed, if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus
o'.ir Lord from tlie dead ; wlio was delivered for our
ofi'ences, and was raised again for our justification.
Based on this, ch. 5 begins: 'Therefore being
justific<l by faith, we have peace -with God through
our Lord Jesus Clirist.' Before getting further,
the Apostle 'harks back' in v.^ to the thought of
justifying grace, access to which is by Clirist.

Into the state of justifying grace we h.avc access
through Christ's Passion. His introduction in-
cludes, nay, is the starting-point of, liberty of ap-
proach. The need qi an introduction implies that
we were outside the state into which we are
introduced. St. Paul himself had experienced
transition from the condition of a condemned, to
that of a justified, sinner. 'Barnabas introduced
him to the apostles (Ac 9-'), and there were others
"that led him by the hand to Damascus " (v.^) ; but
I it was Christ that introduced and led him by the
! hand into this grace' (M. Henry). Christ infro-
ditces, ' Contigit nobis ut perduceremur ' (Erasmus).
He docs not drag unwilling followers. Faith is
tl e following foot. If He draws us, we run after
Him.

2. Efh 2'^ 'For through him we both have our
access in ong Spirit unto tlie Father.' 3'-^ 'In
whom Y.c have our boldness and our access with
confidci.ee by the faith of liim.' The old contro-
versy as to whether access means in these verses
introduction or lif)erty cf approach, still survives.
Among moderns, Alford find Ellicott take opposite
sides. Alford contends for the latter as ' better
representing the repctitiov, the prrsmt liberty of
approach which ^xoy'^f implies, but which 'introduc-

tion " does not give.' While pressing the point that
as ' boldness ' {napprjcria) is subjective in 3'-, ' access '
there coupled with it must also be subjective, he
gives away his case by admitting that the second
term {vpoaaywyn) is 'less purely so than the first'
{wappriffia). Ellicott argues for ' introduction ' on
grounds of lexical and classical usage, but also
makes the significant admission that the travsitive
meaning of Trpocraywyn is a little less certain in 3'-
than it is in 2'*, on account of its union with the
intransitive irapprj^ia.

Where equally competent critical authorities
thus ditter, the context of the passages may be
allowed to decide between them. In the paragraph

2'!'-^, where 'access'

(v. '8) appears, the Apostle

writes of a change in the Ephesians' relations cor-
responding to the change already described as
having taken place in their moral and spiritual
condition. At one time they were afar off, aliens,
strangers, hopeless, godless. A change was effected
by the blood of Christ. Those for whom His death
procured peace are noAv declared to be fellow-
citizens of the saints, members of the household of
God, stones in that living temple in which God
dwells through the Spirit. There is surely some-
thing more implied by 'access' in such a setting
than mere liberty of approach to God. The
Church is Christ's body, sharing the privileges of
its Head. The reconciliation efiected by His blood
is not amere potential one. Verj' definite language
is used to express change of relationship: v.'^
'were brought nigh ' (historic). To become citizens
of a kingdom, members of a household, stones in a
building, implies a definite act performed on behalf
of the persons or things thus brought into these
new relations. Access in the sense of infroditction
seems to express most fitly the alteration thus con-
textually described.

The argument for ' introduction' is not quite so
strong in 3'-. In the context preceding, St. Paul
has been speaking of his own office as Apostle of
the Gentiles. He was made a minister of the
gospel in order by its means to bring the Gentiles
into the fellowship of the saints, and instruct
men as to the eternal purpose of God in Redemp-
tion. That purpose, executed in Christ, mani-
fested to principalities and powers in heaven the
Avisdom of God. Had the 'access' been used Ijy
itself in v.^- after the above line of thought, that
would not point to i7itrodiiction rather than to
libc7-fi/ of approach. But standing as it does be-
tween 'boldness' (irapprialav) and 'with confidence'
(fV ireTTOidricrei), 'liberty of approach' scarcely ex-
presses all the author's thought. The multiplica-
tion of terms indicates an attempt to give utterance
to something besides this. And so, according to
the analogy of Ro5- and Eph 2'*, we are warranted
here also in translating vpoaaycoyr], by 'introduc-
tion.' 'While the former of the parallel terms
(lioldness) describes the liberty with which the
newliorn Church of the redeemed adilress them-
selves to God the Father and the unchecked
freedom of their petitions, the latter (admittance)
takes us back to the act of Christ by which He
introduced us to the Father's presence and gave us
the place of sons in the house' (Findlay in £xj)os.
Bible, 'Ephesians').

Confusion has been created by expositors in-
sisting that 'access' must, in the three passages
where the word occurs, ahvays mean either intro-
dncticv, or liberty of approctch exclusively. But
the larger concept, 'introduction,' includes the
lesser, ' liberty of approach.' To put it in another
way — the latter term follows from the former.
Presentation at the Court of Heaven gives one
the right to return there. It secures habitual
access to God at all times.

3. 1 P 3'* ' Because Christ also suffered for sins

ACCESS

once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that lie
miglit bring us {wpoa-aydyr]) to God.' The Apostle
does not set himself in this Epistle to expound the
theology of the Passion. His general purpose is to
comfort and sustain Christians who are suttering
persecutions. Some of them were slaves, enduring
wrongs from cruel masters because of their faith
in Christ. These were directed to the exemplary
character of Christ's sufferings. In 3'^ St. Peter
assures them that it is better to suffer for well-
doi)ig than for evil-doing. Then in v.^^ he links
them in thought with the suti'ering Saviour. But
it is not on the exemplary significance of Christ's
sufferings that he enlarges. That is left behind.
The writer is spellbound l)y the very mention of
the Cross, and for a moinent he forgets his pur-
pose of directing some wronged slaves to Christ as
the supreme example of suti'ering innocence, that
he may state again the wider and sleeper meaning
of his Lord's Passion. Christ sufl'ered in connexion
with sin once for all (aTra^). The unique signifi-
cance of His death consisted in its 1 eing the
death of a righteous jterson for the unrighteous
{diKatos inrep dSiKwv) ; and His action had this end
in view, that He might conduct us (7rpo(ra7d7T7) to
God : ' ut nos, qui abalienati fueramus, ipse abiens
ad Patrem, secum una, justihcatos adduceret in
coelum, V.--, per eosdem gradus quos ipse emensus
est, exinanitionis et exaltationis ' (Bengel). 'And
if the soul bear back still through distrust, He
takes it by the hand and draws it forward ; leads
it unto His Father ; presents it to Him, and leaves
not the matter till it [the reconciliation between a
sinner and God] be made a full and sure agree-
ment' (Leigh ton).

4. The word irpocrayuyrj is not found in the Epistle
to the Hebrews. Access is expressed there in
different language from that in the passages con-
sidered, because it is associated with somewhat
different ideas. The author of Hebrews, writing
as a pastor, not as an evangelist, aims at con-
serving rather than initiating faith. Instead
of the Pauline and Petrine idea of the Saviour
leading in a sinner, we have the sinner coming to
the Saviour. Introduction {irpo<T ay oiyr)) becomes
access, libcrti/ of crpproach, approxiiiiati.o)i. Sinners
are represented in the very act of approaching —
are exhorted to approach. The worshippers under
the law were tovs wpoixepxoij.ei'ovs, 'the comers'
(He lOM ; ' not those that come to the worshi[), but
those who by the worship come to God' (Owen).
Lender the gospel (Judaism evolved) their attitude
and character remained the same : 1'-^ 11" (singular)
or 4"* 10--, where believers are exhorted to draw
near (Trpocrepxoi/xe^a).

As a Hebrew Christian addressing Hebrew
Clnistians, the writer of Hebrews makes large use
of Old Testament conceptions and Old Testament
rites familiar to himself and his correspondents.
Urging upon them the truth ' that the faith of
Christ is the true and final religion' (Davidson),
he presents a series of contrasts between what was
elementary in Judaism and the finished product of
Christianity. Modern readers are apt to lose
themselves amid unfamiliar details here. But it
is ])ossible to set these details in the background,
and yet grasp the permanent truths, which are as
important for us as for the readers to whom such
details became the most effective illustrations.
We shall keep this in view when attempting now
to sunnnarize the great facts associated with the
idea of access in the four Epistles already referred
to.

(1) The need of access to implies separation from
God— want of fellowship like that enjoyed by
those who walk in the light. We are by nature
afar off (P'ph '2'^), aliens (v.'-). There is an en-
mitj' which must l>e slain before peace is effected.

The wrath of God is revealed against all ungodli-
ness and unrighteousness of men (l!o 1^**). The
Ephesians were by nature children of wrath (Eph
2^). That exhortation used in Hebrews to draw
near (4'" 10-^) could be addressed only to those
who are at a distance from God. ' Whereas it
is emphatically affirmed that He is able to save
unto the uttermost, it is supposed that great
oppositions and difficulties do lie in the way of
its accomplishment' (Owen).

(2) The great separating barrier is sin. All
have sinned (lio 3^'): and the correlative of uni-
versal sin is universal condemnation. Sin and
death are so associated as to lie completely one
(Ro 5'-- '^- 1^- "• -'). The Ephesians are represented
as dead in trespasses and sins (2').

(3) All three Persons of the Godhead conspired
to deal with the problem of sin, in a way corre-
sponding to its magnitude. Access is (a) to (Trpos)
the Father (Eph 2'^) — representing the God to
whom we are to be reconciled and introduced, and
into whose family we are to be adopted ; (6) t/iroitah
{Old) the Son (Uo 5-, Eph 2'"); (c) by (iv) the
Spirit (Eph 2i«).

(4) This is the special work of Christ. He bridges
the gulf which sin has created between God and
man. We have access into the grace of justifica-
tion through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus, Avhom God hath set forth to be a iJropitia-
tion through faith in His blood (llo 3--'- -5). The
double alienation from God and His Church dis-
cussed in Ephesians is removed through Christ — by
His blood (213), by His flesh (v.is), l,y His Cross

(V.>6).

The steps whereby access was effected by Christ
are clearly laid down in 1 P 3^^. His death has
a connexion with sin. He suffered once for all
(d-rra^), ' SO that to them who lay hold on Him this
liolds sure, that sin is never to be suffered for in the
way of strict justice again, as not by Him, so not by
them who are in Him' (Leighton). The unique
significance of Christ's suffering in connexion Avith
sins is expressed in the words 'the just for the
unjust' (5t/vatos virep dS'iKwv). In dying, the right-
eous One took on Himself the liability of the
unrighteous. Access to God was, in St. Peter's
estimation, thus purchased at an unspeakable
price. ' A righteous One has once for all faced,
and in de.ath taken up and exhausted, the res{>onsi-
bilities of the unrighteous, so that they no more
stand between them and God' (Denney, The Death
of Christ, p. 102).

The author of Hebrews explains and illustrates
by a method sui (jcneris, how Christ obtains access
for us. Christ is the great High Priest interceding
for men in the heavenly sanctuary, and the function
which He discharges in heaven is based on the
death which He died on earth. A pi'iest's duty is
to establish and represent fellowship between God
and man. Christ found that sin barred the way to
this fellowshiji, and accordingly dealt Avith sin.
He wjis appointed with a view to this end — to
make propitiation for the sins of the people (He
'2'^). In contrast with the Levitical priests and
their duties, Christ's Person and work are j^erfect
(reXeio?). He deals Avith sin by Avay of sacrifice.
This He did once Avhen He offered up Himself
(7-"). 'Once in the end of the Avorld hath he
aiqieared to put away sin by the sacrifice of him-
self (9'-''). 'Christ was once ofl'ered to bear the
sins oif many' (v.-^). ' For by one offering he hath
perfected for ever [' to perfect,' reXeiodv, ' is to bring
into the true condition of those in covenant']
them that are sanctified' ['to sanctifj^' dyid';nv,
' is to make to belong to God,' Davidson].

Associated with the same conception of sacrifice
are the references in the Epistle to the blood of
Christ. He entered into the Holy Place by {5id)

ACCOMMODATION

His blood (9'2). The blood of Christ, who offered
Himself to God, purges the conscience from dead
works (v."). We have boldness to enter into the
Holiest by the blood of Christ (lO^"). Access is
therefore dependent on Christ's Person and work.
In reliance on His sacrifice (10'**), along a way con-
secrated by His death (v.-"), mindful of their High
Priest (v.-^) in heaven, believers are exhorted to
drav) near to God. The exhortation in 4^*^ to come
boldly unto the throne of grace is also founded on
Jesus having passed into the heavens as our great
High Priest : and it adds the thought of Christ's
sympathy, as having experienced infirmities and
temptations Himself, in order to encourage sup-
pliants, for mercy and grace. The truth put hor-
tatively in these passages is also taught directly
in T-', where access is linked with intercession.
This intercession, of which an example is preserved
in Jn 17, is continued in heaven, and derives its
power from the sacrifice which Christ offered on
earth.

(5) Faith is the subjective condition of those
who have access (Ro 3-* 5-, Eph 3'-). ' He who
comes to God must believe that he is' (He 11*').
The eleventh chapter of Hebrews is a record of
faith in action, faith as illustriited in the lives of
saints, who iirst came to God, and then acted and
endured, because sustained by the strength of God.

Literature. — The Commentaries on the passages discussed,
especially Sanrtay-Ileadlam on liomans; Ellicott, Meyer, H. (J.
Miller, and Armitage Robinson on Epheitians ; Delitzsch,
Davidson, Westcott, and Bruce on Hebrews; also Calvin's
Jnstitutes, in. xiii. 5, xx. 12 ; Crenier's Biblico-Theol. Lex. ;
Denney, The Death of Christ ; Expositor, 4th series [1890],
ii. 131 ; 2nd series [18S2], iv. 321.

D. A. MACKINNON.

ACCOMMODATION.—

i. The Incarnation as the supreme example.
(a) The birth and childhood of .Jesus.
(^^The temjitations to which He was subjected.
((■) The mental and spiritual sufferings experienced by
Him.
ii. Incidents inferentially valuable.

(a) His education in a pious Jewish home.
(^)The deliberate acceptance and public avowal hy
Him of the limitations conditioning human
life.
(c) Revelation of these limitations involved in the
spontaneity of His attitude towards (1) His
fellow-men, (2) His Father,
iii. Jesus' activity as Teacher.

(a) Re]ieatcd assertions as to nature of the authoritj-

wielded by Him.
(6) Objective of His message defined by (1) the national
characteristics of His fellow countrymen ; (2)
their theological and traditional beliefs —
(«.) Jlessianic kingdom.
(;S) Doctrine of angel-niediation.
(■y) Current conceptions of the power of Satan
and of evil spirits.
(c) Methods employed by Jesus in His teaching : (1)
parables purposely anfl economically utilized ;
(2) use of popular figurative expressions ; (:>)
employment of aphorism, allegory, etc. ; (4) ac-
ceptance of current conceptions as to —
(«) Natural phenomena.
(,3) Anthropology.
iv. Attitude of Jesus towards the Messianic hopes of His daj .

(a) Assumption of the title ' Son of Man.'

(b) Attitude towards the Jewish Canon of Scripture

observable in His acceptance of (1) its general
historicity; (2) the traditional view of the author-
ship and interpretation of Ps 110.
V. Summary and jiractical conclusion.
Literature.

The term ' accommodation ' may be defined as
the principle or law according to Avhich God adapts
His Self-revelation to the capacities and limitations
of created intelligences. In every age, from tlie
earliest onwards, this Self-revelation of God has
been made, and has its own characteristic features.
Between the time when men conceived of God in
the rudinijutary antliropomorphism of Gn 3'* and
the time of the highest att-ninment by the human
mind of His Nature and Being (Jn 4-^^-), every
conceivable gradation occurs in the extent and
character of God's revelation of Himself to men.

i. The Incarnation as the supreme example.
— This is not the place to enter into a detailed
in([uiry as to the nature and extent of the self-
imposed limitations of Christ, or how far the
modern theories of the hcnosis (wh. .see) are justified
by revelation, directly or by implication. It will be
suificient here to indicate how far the Gospels, as
we have them, point to a real adoption by Him of
the conditions of that life which He assumed, and
involved Him ex necessitate in the limitations of a
real human life.

(a) So complete is the accommod.ation to the
capacities and requirements of infanthood, that
St. Luke scruples not to record, as part of the
angelic message, the finding by the shepherds of
. . . ' a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and
lying in a manger' (Lk 2'-), and St. Matthew
makes the safety of His childhood depend on the
vigilance and care of Joseph and His motlier, tlieir
return from enforced exile being conditioned by
the fact that ' they are dead that sought tlie young
child's life' (Mt 2-»). All this presupposes, of
course. His development along the lines of human
growtli, Avhich is boldly outlined by St. Luke in
the much debated passage, ' Jesus advanced in
\\isdom and stature, and in favour with God
and men' (Lk 2^-'). If these words are to be in-
terpreted according to tlieir obvious meaning, they
imply a moral and spiritual as well as a physical
advancement along lines as normal as, for ex-
ample, those whicli marked the growth of the
child Samuel. We may say, indeed, that there is
a marked reference to the words . . . Kal dyadbu
Kai fiera. Kvpiov Kai fiera dvdpuiiroiv of 1 S 2'-^ [LXX].
' Christ's growth was from His birth a holy growth '
(Martensen, Christian iJtgmatics, Eng. tr. p. 282);
but the words 'the child "grew and waxed strong'
(Lk 2*) point to the essentially human conditions
under which that growth was efiected.

Tiie sole incident in connexion witli His boyhood
wiiich has come down to us in our reliable authori-
ties is that of His visit to the temple (Lk 2^i"-).
Slioi-t, however, as it is, it throws a clear light on
the nature and reality of the advance ' in wisdom
and favour,' and its uninterrupted continuity is
well expressed in v.^", if we give the word irXrjpov-
ixevov its proper significance. Day by day He was
being filled witli wisdom. Even at this age. His
marvellous intellectual powers displayed them-
selves, and already He exhibited that keen insight
whicli in after life He so frequently showed. The
verb used to express the amazement of the learned
teachers (i^lffravTo) shows how much these men
wondered at the Boy's knowledge and at the depth
of His understanding (itri rrj cweaei). Notwith-
standing this feature of the narrative, the historian
is far from leading us to suppose that there was
anything supernatural in the matter. He rather
represents Jesus as a boy of a singularly inquiring
turn of mind, wlio deliberately determines to find
out for Himself the solution of many problems
which puzzled Hun during the course of His home
education, and for which He coukl find no satis-
factory explanation from His teachers in Nazareth,
He sits down (Kadii-ofievov) at the feet of these great
teachers {SioaaKd\wp) as a learner^ (cf. St. Paul's
description of his own education in the Law, Ac
22=*). Nor arc we to look upon the circumstance
in the temple as constituting an exhibition of
miraculous intellectual acquirements in the ordi-
nary sense of that word. All Jewish children
from their 'earliest infancy' (Jos. c. Apion. ii. 18)
were made to acquire a knowledge of and to prac-
tise the precepts of the Law. We have only to
compare the Lukan narrative with that given in
the Arabic Gospel of the Ivfancy to see how_ com-
pletely natural and human is the whole incident,
and how entirely the boyhood of Jesus Avas subject

ACCOMMODATION"

ACCOMMODATION

to boyhood's conditions and limitations. In the
latter He is represented as cross-examining each
of the doctors, and instructing them not only in
matters appertaining to the Law and the Prophets,
but in astronomy, physics, metaphysics, and other
branches of current erudition (see chs. xlviii.-lii.).

Without entering: into an examination of the words contained
in His answer to His mother's gentle rebuke, or what relation
they bear to His subsequent complete and developed self-
consoiousness, it may be said that they do not necessarily in-
volve all that is sometimes imported into them. Even the im-
plied antithesis i na.riip b-ov of vA^ andiv ro'i; rou aarpos fjuiv of v.'is
probably means nothing more than a reminder that the claims
of His heavenly Father take precedence of all others, and bears
testimony to a profound appreciation of the transcendent
reality of His Divine Sonship (cf. B. Weiss, Lehen Jesu, Eng. tr.
vol. i. p. 278 ff.). It is true, we have no right to assume that
the Boy Jesus had no knowledge of His unique relationship to
God (cf. Gore, Diss. p. 78, n. 1). The use of the possessive
particle fj.ou points to the probability that His powers of realiza-
tion in this respect were as wonderful as the development of His
mental faculties in another. This is, however, far from saying
that Jesus at this early age possessed the consciousness of His
Messiahship, which only came to full maturity at the next
turning-point of His life (seeSanday's art. 'Jesus Christ' in Hast-
ings' DB, vol. ii. p. 609); and the short but graphic touch with
which St. Luke portrays for us His surprise at His parents'
method of search (r! 'an iZr.rt'iTi /x£ ;), and His sustained sub-
ordination (?» C^orxiTffopLivo; kItoi! gives the idea of a continuance
of His subjection to the conditions of His home life) to the
authority of Joseph and Mary shows how completely the Son of
God ' emptied Himself,' /Mip^i.v IoCmv kajiuv, Ph 27.

One incidental reference to this period of Jesus'
life in the Synoptic nariative further deepens the
impressiveness of this self-humiliation. St. JNIark
relates that on the occasion of one of His visits to
Nazareth (Mk 6^) His teaching was met by His
fellow-townsmen with the scornful question, 'Is
not this the carpenter?' (6 reicTiov).* This single
question gives point to the more general remark of
St. Luke mentioned above, and interprets his use
of the analytical or perijihrastic tense {9jv v-rroraa-
ffo/nevos: for the use of this form of the verb the
reader is recommended to see Burton's N2^ Moods
and Tenses, p. 11 f. and p. 16 ; see also Blass, Gram,
of NT Greek, p. 203).

His wliole life, then, previous to the events which
led to His public ministry, was lived under the
simple conditions which obtained in a humble but
pious country home, and His answer to the Baptist's
remonstrance, 'it becometh us {irpiTrov earlv iifxh)
to fulfil all righteousness ' (Mt 3"*), is the result of
a training characteristic in its naivete of a house
whose inmates 'waited for the redemption of
Israel ' (Lk 2-^), and were strict observers of the
laws governing the religious life of tiie Jews. See,
further, artt. Boyhood and Childhood.

It may not be out of place to note a slight but significant
difference in the method of introducing the narrative of Jesus'
baptism between the Lukan and the other two Synoptic
versions. The latter speak of Jesus as coming from Galilee for
the special purpose of being baptized (see fragment of Gosp.
Heb. in Jerome's adv. Pclag. 3>— toS /Sx^TurBy.yai Ct' kvtoD (Mt
31^), xeci £;3s£TT,<r9>j i/'ro'luxtn>u(Mkl^), — and Seem to be conscious
of a certain amount of astonishment on account of the act.
The Lukan narrative, on the other hand, gives the story an
incidental character ; and by its uses of the participle, both in
describing the act of baptism and also His prayer which im-
mediately followed {xxi 'I'/ifTOv iSoiTTitrOivToi Kcx.) ^f'6tnuxofx,ivov,
Lk 321), the Evangelist gives a human touch to the whole scene
which harmonizes well with the style of his history in this
place.

(6) It is, however, when we come to the scene of
His temptation, and study it in connexion with tlie
revelation which He had just received from His
Father, that we begin to ajipreciate tlie full mean-
ing of the words of He 4^^ that Jesus was One who
'in all points' (/caro navra) was tempted like our-
selves. Whatever be the interpretation we are
inclined to put upon the nature and method of the
temptations (see art. TEMPTATION) to which He
was subjected, one thing must be uncompromis-

* This would seem to be the original a-nd correct form of the
expression, though the Matthaean record has i rov rix-rovot vio;
(Mt l^ss), +0 which the Western text (II) of St. Mark has con-
formed (see Wright, Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, p. 52 f.).

ingly insisted on — the struggle was a real one, it
was intense, it was necessary (iirpeirev yap avT(^ . . .
5iA naOrj/xaTui' reXeiQcrat, He 2^"). It is necessary
that we should be on our guard against falling
into the errors which mar, for example, the work
of Hilary of Poitiers in his controversy with the
Arians (see especially his Libi^i XII. de Trinitate,
Liber x.). To explain away the reality of the
sufferings of Jesus arising out of His different
temptations, whether these sufferings are mental
or physical, is of the essence of Docetism ; and a
docetic Christ has never yet appealed, and we are
confident never will appeal, to the conscious needs
of humanity. Jesus Himself must have been the
ultimate source from which the story of the Temp-
tation became known, and it is very evident that
the impression made upon His mind by the terrible
ordeal was most profound. He had just received
from His Father the revelation of His unique Son-
ship.* St. Matthew and St. Luke agree in prefix-
ing to two of the temptations the words, ' If thou
art the Son of God,' the essence of the trial con-
sisting in the danger of doubting the truth which
had been disclosed to His consciousness, and of
testing the fidelity of God by a thaumaturgical
exhibition. There is also a subtle psychological
and spiritual fitness in the character of tlie first of
the series, which speaks, perhaps, more for its real
force than any direct statement could do. The
appeal came to Jesus in the hour and on the side
of His physical exhaustion, and this is in direct ac-
cordance with the general experience of humanity.
Temptation becomes infinitely stronger and more
dangerous when physical weakness comes to the
aid of the external promptings of the Evil One.

That Jesus believed, and led those to whom He recounted
His experiences to believe, in the near presence of a personal
spirit of evil during this critical period of conflict, is very
evident (see Gore, Diss. p. 24 ff.). Moreover, this Evil One
(« Sidfioko;, Mt 45. 8. 11, Lk 4^- 6. 13 ; i 2aT«v«?, Mk 113) is a prince
standing at the head of a kingdom which is the direct anti-
thesis of the kingdom of God. According to the Lukan version
of this incident, Jesus expected to meet again in personal con-
flict this great spiritual enemy. The devil left Him only till
further opportunity for assault should arise (a.^pi xxipou, Lk
413); and towards the end of His ministry we find Him giving
expression to the consciousness that the great struggle with
His arch-foe was about to recommence — 'The prince of the
world (0 Tou xcir/^cu apyuv, Jn 14^0) jg (now) coming' (cf. 121).
AVhen His arrest, following upon His betrayal, was about to
become an accomplished fact. He recognized the return of the
spirit of evil, and that the return was with power (55 ihvir.a to'C
rxivov;, Lk 2253).

Perhaps there is no more vivid presentation of
the profound reality of His subjection to tempta-
tion than that afforded by the narrative dealing
witli the events which occurred in Cse-sarea Phi-
lippi. It is almost possible to see the startled look
of liorror on Jesus' face as He listens to Peter's
well-meant, if indiscreet, remonstrance. In the
words of His chief Apostle He hears again the
voice of Satan (cf. Mt IQ-^ and Mk 8^3)^\^nd tbe
almost fierce way in which He rebukes Peter
points to the conclusion that this is not the first
time the suggestion has whispered itself into His
ear, to forego the bitter taste which He knows He
must experience before His work is ended.

(r) Before passing from the consideration of this
aspect of the Incarnation viewed as tlie self-
adaptation of the Son of God to the conditions
of humanity, we mttst refer shortly to some of
the details of the last, greatest, and most awful
of the temptations to which Jesus was exposed.
Some have sought to explain away the reality
both of the temptations and the sufferings, through
a vain desire to exalt His Divine at the expense of

* For our present purpose it is immaterial whether we reject
the words of the Textus Receptus 2i/ tJ i vio; fjLov i iyxTviTcs, iv
ffo) r,llixr,(r(x. in fa\ our of the Western reading of Lk S^ wo? /mu
iT ffu, iyii a-xpt-ipov yiyivvvixa. in, which Resch and Blass as well as
others seem to prefer (cf. Blass, Ev. secundum Lucam, etc.,
Priefatio, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii).

ACCOMMODATION

His human nature ; but this is not tlie method of
interpreting tlie life of Christ which brings out of it
God's answer to man's deepest and most conscio>is
needs. Tliere can hardly be a doubt in the mind
of any unprejudiced reader that the Synoptists
place on record their accounts of the Passion l)e-
lieving the facts detailed to be real and objective.
The words of Jesus are the expressions of a mind
torn with tlie mental and spiritual conflict ; and
if Lk 22^^- ** be not a mere Western interpolation,
tlie element of awful fear entered into anil height-
ened His sufferings. It is only in this way that
we can interpret the words eV dywpia. See art.
Agony. The thrice-repeated prayer of Jesus, in
which He speaks of His own will as distinct from,
but completely subordinate to. His Father's, adds
to the impression, already gained, of the purely
human feelings exhibited by Him in His struggle,
and recalls to our mind the words in His own
form of prayer, ' Thy will be done ' (i\It 6^") ; thus
connecting, in the "greatest crisis of His life, His
own with our absolute dependence upon the ex-
pressed will of His Father.

The writer of the F'ourth Gospel records sayings
of Jesus which are very similar to this. After the
conversation of Jesus witli the woman of Samaria,
He explains to His disciples the all-absorbing,
satisfying character of His life's work, which is to
do the will (rd eeXrjjxa) of His Father (Jn 4**). In
other places He distinguishes between Hif5 own
e^\rifj.a and that of His Father (Jn S-'" 6^«) ; and
this is the word used by the Synoptic writers when
recording the words of Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane.
On what grounds St. Luke employs the verb ^ov-
\o/j.ai (22"'-) in this connexion we do not know. If
the choice is not accident, it is evidence that even
in His great affliction Jesus bowed Himself to the
ddibcratc determination of God (for the connexion
between (3ov\ofj.ai, and deXio see Crenier, pp. 143 ff.
and 726 f.).

A very pathetic touch is given by St. Matthew to the por-
traiture of tliis scene in the garden. Both he and St. >lark
relate how Jesus e.xpressed a wish tliat His three disciples
should be on their guard. St. Mark, however, leaves the im-
pression that He is bidding them watch against the too sudden
intrusion of their enemies uy>on His privacy. Twice He uses
the imperative ' Watch.' On the other hand, St. Matthew
twice adds to this same verb the expression ' with me,' as if
anxious to show the very human desire of Jesus to have the
companionship of faitliful friends in the hour of His need and
solitude. The same two writers have recorded a saving of
Jesus to His sleeping companions ('Sleep on now, and take your
rest') which is omitted by St. Luke. In these words it is "pos-
sible to discover a tinge of bitter sadness and disappointment,
as if the reflection were forced upon Him tlial He was bereft
even of that loyal friendship which had left all and followed
Him ; and tliat, too, at a time when it was most precious, and
when He stood in sorest need of its help and sympathy. The
truth is, He felt the full force of the temptation to leave undone
the last and hardest part of the work which He came to do, or
to find a way of fulfilling His Father's will other than by tread-
ing the path of suffering and death. It was in the very act of
submission that He found His most effective weapon of resist-
ance ; and we have here at the same time a verification of the
reality of His human nature, and an example of Himself carry-
ing out to fulfilment the princip'e which He inculcated as a
guide to others—' He that humbieth himself shall be e.xalted '
(Lk 18i-> 1411).

ii. Incidents inferentially valuable.— («)
If we scrutinize carefully the method of resistance
which Jesus adopted in His lirst great conflict, we
cannot fail to see the results of that moral and
spiritual education which was the characteristic
element of His domestic surroundings, and with
which we become incidentallj^ acquainted bj' the
tone of His remark to His mother in the temple.
The words ^v roh rod warpos /uov (Lk 2'") show how
profoundly He was impressed with the sense of
His Divine Sonship ; and, we must believe, they
were the outcome of His familiarity witli the
tiiought underlying much of the language of the
UT. In repelling the Satanic attncks of the Temp-
tation He reveals to us a n;iud steeped in the

VOL, I.— 2

literature of, and full to overflowing with spiritual
principles culled from, the Book of Deuteronomy.
Nor was it only when He felt the sore stress of
temptation that His belief in the truth of God's
revelation given in the OT, and His profound
knowledge of its contents, came to His aid. In
the hour of His intensest bodily and mental agony,
the words of Ps 22 leaped instinctively to His
mind, and gave expression to the feeling of awful
loneliness which then hung over Him like a black
cloud. If in moments of deepest feeling, when tlie
soul almost without conscious effort turns to the
sources whence it drew its early sustenance, Jesus
had recourse to the words of the UT, and was able
to extract from that wide iield of literature all
that was purest and most spiritual, it was not, we
feel sure, without long, deep study and pondering
over the meaning of the different writers from His
childhood onwards. Ilemembering, then, this
feature in the mental and spiritual equipment of
Christ, it will not be surprising if we hiid Him
displaying the same habit of mind in almost every
variety of circumstance of which He found Him-
.self the centre. St. Matthew and St. Mark tell
us that, at the time of St. Peter's confession at
Ca;sarea Philippi, He for the Hrst time spoke to
His disciples of the fatal end in store for Him.
St. JNIattliew clearlj^ points out that this was a
new departure — d7r6 tots rjp^aro, k.t.X. (16-M, — and
that He continually reverted to the subject as if
desirous of impressing the disciples with the im-
pos.sibility of His escape. AVe do not know at
what precise period Jesus was convinceil that
there could inevitably be onlj' one ending to His
work, or whether He knew from the beginning,
and merely waited for a fltting time to prepare
His disciples for the shock. We do, however,
know that at this period He was convinced not
merely by the 'signs of the times' (Mt l&), which
all pointed in this direction, but also by His know-
ledge and interpretation of the things whicii \\ere
written ' in the law of Moses, and the prophets,
and the psalms ' (Lk 24^^), concerning Him, that
the way of glory was the way of the cross. St.
Mark makes a pointed reference to the connexion,
wliicli evidently existed in Jesus' mind, between
the death of the Baptist and His own coming end
(9'-^-) ; and we know that the murder of John made
a profound impression upon Him (Mt 14^^, cf. Jn
6'). Perhaps we may be allowed to conjecture
that this circumstance marked an advance in the
mind of Christ towards a great sj-nthesis — the
identification of the Conquering with the Suffer-
ing Mes.siah,

The question tS; yiypxTrx-i, x.r.K., of Mk 912, shows what it
was that strengthened His resolve to pursue His mission to its
consummation. That He dwelt long and deliberately on this
aspect of His work is seen by the way in which He again refers
to it towards the end of His journey to Jerusalem (.Mk 10^;', to
which St. Luke adds the characteristic formula . . . TiXurOic-iroci
^avroc Tcc yiypociMtj.i^u, hta. tmv ^po^YiTmv, Lk IS-^l ; cf. alsoMt lit)-^
xa(j^; yiyfatTce.!, Lk 22'-'- xxtcc to aipuruiyov, 24-5f- ■!■•• -IG, Mt 2(j5^.

(6) One of the most widely canvassed, and, in-
deed, the most difficult passage in the Gosjiel
history is that in whicli Jesus is said to have dis-
claimed the knowledge of the time of His glorioiis
Return. St. Matthew and St. Mark recoid His
disavowal in almost identical words, e.\cei)t that
the former emphasizes it by the addition of /Li.6i'0i
to the words d /xr] 6 iraT-ftp, which are common to
both (cf. Mt 243fi and Mk IS^^). In both narrati\ es
Jesus is represented as speaking in the 3rd person
(ov5i 6 vlos, by which we are doubtless to under-
stand His usual self-designation 'Son of Man,'
occurring as this title does in the context of botli
passages, Mt 24'"-^''', Mk 13'-®). How are we to
interjjret, then, this self-revelation which emanates
from the consciousness of Jesus? Many expedients
have been tried to get over the logical conclusion

ACCOMMODATION

derivable from a literal exegesis, some even going
so far as to suggest that the passage is an Arian
interpolation.

Athanasius would almost dichotomize the Person of Christ
in his effort at explanation. Indeed, he plainly asserts that the
Son did know ' the hour of the end of all things.' But as beinjr
the Word (i? fj.h >Uyo;) He knew, though at the same time as
man (w; hi cii6f.aim>;) He is ignorant of it (ayyoii). In the same
context he maintains that Jesus acted deliberately in s])eaking
of His ignorance for the sake of ' economy ' {catspiiv fri-roivixiv
OTi Tip) TYi; civOpai^ivvi; tzuTov kfirwpyice.? iAgygv, ^ oubi o Tio?'). See
his Orations against the Arians, bk. ii. chapters xliii. and
xliv., where these passages occur (Bright's ed.). C3'ril of Alex-
andria, in his capacity of vviUeus Arianm-uin, speaks in much
the same strain, and sometimes more unguardedly, as if he
were unwilling, as indeed most of the Fathers were, to face the
theological and exegetical difficulties of this whole question.
Most of us will sympathize with the strong and vigorous language
of Theodoret with respect to the evasions so commonly current.
' If,' he says, ' He knew the day, but being desirous to conceal
it said He did not know, you see in what blasphemy the infer-
ence lands us. For the Truth lies ' {liepr. XII. capp. Cyril in
Anath.IV.).

There is also a considerable body of modern thought which
seems to reject all serious consideration of this aspect of the
Incarnation as being dangerous to a right and reverent attitude
towards the claims of Christ. We have only to read such a book
as Hall's The Kenotic Theort/, or several articles in the Ch. Q.
licview (e.g. vols, xliv., xlv., and Hi.), to see how earnestly men
contend against the frank acceptance, in their most obvious
meaning, of the words of Jesus.

However mysterious the conclusion at which we
are forced to arrive may be, and however incon-
sistent the different parts of our Christological
system may appear, it is necessary for us candidly
to accept this self-revelation of Jesus as being
strictly in accord with His personal consciou.sne.ss,
and, moreover, as being an infallible indication of
tlie comjdete and perfect manner in whicli the
Divine AVord acconnnodated Himself to the con-
ditions of the race whose nature He took.

It would, again, be impossible and absurd in
treat the incident of the barren tig-tree, related by
botii St. Matthew (21'»-") and St. Mark (11'--"), as
if it were a mere scenic display for the ]Mirpose of
solemnly inculcating a moral lesson. Yet this is
practically what we are asked to do by writers
Avho refuse to believe that the mind of Jesus was
no more exempt from human characteristics than
His body was from the sulierings incident to
earthly life. On this occasion He felt the imngs of
hunger, and He believed He saw the natural
means of satisfying His need. We could look for
no more convincing example, in His life, of the
complete adaptation of Himself to all the laws
governing mortal existence. Otlier instances there
are in abundance which point in the same direc-
tion, viz. to His complete and willing submission
to the limitations which condition the human mode
of life. He hungered, as Ave have seen (^It 4'-, INIk
lP-=Mt 21'8, Jn 431), and syjupathized with those
who suffered thus (Mt 1532 = Mk 8-, cf. Mt. 121^- and
2535. 42)_ jjg suffered the pangs of thirst (Jn 4^
and 19-®). He experienced physical weariness after
prolonged exertion (Jn 4«, cf. i^ItS"= Mk 4'-^). Not-
withstanding O. Holtzmann's interjnetation of Lk
9^8 ( = Mt 8-") it is very certain that there is a per-
sonal reference to His homeless condition in these
words, and Ave notice a quiet sadness, as if He felt
the loneliness attaching to a life of continued
Avandering (cf. O. Holtzmann's Zc6e?i Jesit, Eng. tr.
p. 169, note 3, and p. 303 f.).

(c) The element of spontaneity discoverable in
the Avords and actions of Jesus, exi^rcssive of His
attitude either toAvards His felloAv-men or toAvards
God, lends force to Avhat Ave have been saying
about limitations involved in His manhood. (1) He
experienced feelings of keen disap])ointment Avith
the people of His country for their lack of spiritu-
ality (Mk 812 66^ Jn 1133138^ cf Ml^ 919^ J„ iju j^jj.

81-ff- 6* = Lk 42^ Lk 8'25 = Mk 4« = Mt 8-^6, Mk 3^ 1^»
812 io2iff. = Lk 18i^-3» = Mt 19i«--^). On the other
hand, He expressed astonishment at the spiritual

receptivity of some Avho had no claim to be amongst
the number of the chosen people of God (Mt 8'" =
Lk V, cf. Mt 15-** = Mk r\ though He recognizes
the fact that this phenomenon Avas not confined to
His own experience (Mt 12"'- = Lk IP"-, Lk 4:'--^-).
The legitimate inference to be draAvn from the pas-
sage last mentioned is not so much that the Divine
love floAved over spontaneously toAvards those Avho
Avere outside the Abrahamic covenant, as that
faith and trust, often found amongst the heathen,
dreAv toAvards them God's gracious intervention,
just as the lack of these spiritual graces amongst
His own people tended to dry up the fountain of
God's active love (Mk 6i-6 = Mt IS^^-^^^Lk 4'«-^4 [cf.
Plummer, in loc.}).

One of the methods adopted by Jesus for pur-
poses of instruction Avas tliat Avith Avhich the name
of Socrates is usually linked. Starting from pre-
mises universally recognized as valid, He leads
His hearers onwards by question and ansAver to
the result He Avishes to establisli (Mk 8'^--i = Mt
16^-1-, Mk 12"'^-, Mt 12''«223iff- 22^i-*6 = Mk 12*5-37=
Lk 20^'-^^). With these examples Ave may also
compare the merciless Avay in Avhich Jesus em-
ployed this method to involve His enemies in an
aAvivAvard dilemma (jNIt 21-^-^*'), driving home His
argument against their moral dishonesty by the
parable of the Two Sons, and the question arising
out of it (Mt 2128-31 ; cf. 21*'-*5, 1227 ^nd 15^). Not
all the questions, however, asked by Jesus Avere of
this character. Some are of the nature of ordi-
nary inquiry — a demand for some needed informa-
tion. Such are the questions addressed to the
.sisters of Betiiany (Jn 11*^), to the Gerasene de-
moniac (Lk 83^' = Mk 5''), to the father of the epi-
leptic boy (Mk 921), to the disciples on the tAvo
occasions (if, indeed, they are not different versions
of the same occurrence) of His feeding the multi-
tude (Mk 638, 85 = Mt 15="; cf., however, Jn 6»,
Avhicli is the author's gloss).

(2) Not very far removed from this phenomenon
in Jesus' life is the habit of prayer .and qiiiet com-
munion Avitii God Avhich He halntually and sedul-
ously cultivated (Mt H2=-3« = Lk lU'-"-, Lk 3^', Mk
135, ivit u-i, Lk 5i« 6'2 928 223- 22-'--ft- = Mt 263««'- = Mk
1432ff-, Avith Avhich Ave may compare Jn 17»-i5- -'> 14^*^
1227f-). Of the three Synoptists, St. Luke seems to
be the one Avho most appreciates this feature of
Jesus' attitude to His Father. No truer comment
has ever been made on it than that of the Avriter
of the Epistle to the HebrcAvs {5'') in referring to
His supplications in Gethsemane — tiie 'obedience'
of Christ Avas slowly fashioned through prayer,
Avhicli Avas ansAvered for His reverent devotion
(Westcott, Ej). to Heb. in loc). The tAvo descrip-
tive Avords em])loyed by this Avriter (Se^ceis re Kal
iKeT-qpiat) illustrate Avell the intense nature of these
supjdications (/ierd Kpavyrjs icrxi'pfij Kal daKpvojv),
reminding us of the vivid representation of iNHi
^435 \\q have here ' the spectacle of true man,
Aveighted Avith a crushing burden, the dread of a
catastrophe aAvful and unfathoraed ' (Gore, Diss.
p. 82 f.).

iii. Jesus' activity as Teacher.— (a) When
Ave look at the position of Teacher occupied by
Jesus, Ave not merely see Him assuming tacitl}^ to
be the ultimate authoritj' ui>on tlie ethical value
of OT laws, and giving instruction from tiiat i
standpoint suitable to the receptive poAvers of His
hearers, Ave are also confronted Avith His confessed
subordination even in this .«phere. His is a dele-
gated authority conferred on Him by an unction
from God. He Avas sent Avith a tlefinite message,
the contents of Avhich He identified Avitli that given
in Deutero-Isaiah (cli. 42, cf. 61"). We are re-
minded of the Avords of the Apostle Peter at
Ciesarea (Ac lO^®), Avhere he uses the same Avord to
express this unction, and adds as the secret of the

ACCOMMODATION

ACCOMMODATIOX

marvellous power exhibited by the Anointed that
God was with Him. Tliis thought is most fre-
quently and plainly dwelt on in the Fourth Gospel,
and this is the more surprising as it appears along-
side of claims the most far-reaching as to the
significance of His life and teaching. In His con-
versation with Nicodemus, Jesus sets forth His
place in the scheme of Avorld-salvation. He is tlie
object of men's faith and belief. It is through
Him that life is brought into the world. At the
same time He is the Sent of God (. . . direa-TeiKei' 6
0ebi TOP viov eh rbv KOffnov, K.-r.\., Jn 3", cf. 3^ 4^^ o""*'

24. .TO. 36-38 g29. 38. 39. 44. 57 iJlS. 18. 28. 29. 33 gl6. 18. 26. 29. 42 g4
1Q3« 1142 1244.45.49 1424 I52I IQ5 I73 j^nd 20^1, Llv IQl^

9^^ Mt lO*, cf. ivik 9^^ and Jn 13"^).

{b) Not only has He received His commission as
a Teacher from God, but there is a limitation de-
fined for Him in the scope of the delivery of His
message (Jn V\ Mt lo^^ 2137'-). (i) This limit He
not only observed Himself, but imposed also on
His disciples. During His ministry their preach-
ing was confined to the borders oi Israel by His
direct orders (Mt lO-''-); and this limitation was
considered of binding force at the time (Ac 3-"),
though it Avas abrogated in the light of further
development (cf. Mt 28i8, Mk W^^-, Lk 24^^ Ac 1^).
It is important, then, to recognize that Jesus Him-
self consciously set national and local bounds to
His missionary activity, and was willing to adapt
His methods of work to suit the conditions which
governed the time and place of His incarnate life.
It is difficult to see how He could have approached,
witli any hope of success, a people so hide-bound
in traditionalism as were His countrymen, in any
other way than He did. Discrimination in the
choice, rather tlian originality in the creation and
presentment of fundamental ideas, characterizes
His teaching. And in this we discover His Divine
wisdom and greatness. With conscious delibera-
tion He refused, so far as His own personal work
was concerned, to break witli the best and truest
tradition as it was embodied in the teaching and
institutions of His time. (2) There is a line of
development observable in the Jewish mind from
the days of the earliest prophets right onwards to
the time of Jesus, and He did not break oft" at a
sharp angle from its continuation. He rather set
His face towards the direction in which that line
travelled, and unswervingly refused to turn aside
at the bidding of a childish literalism or of a debased
legalism. That He did not confine His recognition
of truth to what was overtly taught in the OT is
shown by the whole-hearted way m which He
accei)ted the doctrine of individual resurrection,
and pressed home the truth of tliis latter-day
Judaistic develoi)ment upon those who refused to
accept it, by a magnificent arr/umentum ad horn-
incm (Lk 2(Ff- = Mk 12-«f- = Mt 22^"- ). With this
doctrinal disputation between Jesus and the Sad-
ducees we may compare tiiat on the same subject
between Gamaliel and the ' scribes of the S.addu-
cees' (see Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the
Messiah, vol. i. p. 316 n.). This Rabbi bases his
argument also on a passage out of the Pentateuch
(Dt P, cf. IP), but misses the ojiportunity so well
utilized by Jesus of emphasizing the spiritual side
of that truth. It is significant in respect of this,
that Jesus very seldom makes a formal declara-
tion or revelation of the truth of the resurrection
doctrine (JnS-''--*); and, except on this occasion
when He was challenged to prove it, He never
attempts to give any reasons for its acceptance.
He found the belief prevalent amongst the best
spirits of His time, and He simply refers to it as a
matter of course by taking for granted that His
hearers will understand the allusion, and accept
the consequences He deduces (Lk 14'\ cf. Jn 11-^).
On the one hand, He lays stress on His own judicial

functions as finding their final scope when that
wondrous result is achieved (cf. Jn S'-^- ■■", Mt 24^^
16-; 25^iff- 19-« 13^«f-, Mk 13-3f-). Then, again, He
incidentally refers to the resurrection as a future
event of universal significance, to be brought into
objective existence by the power of God (Mt 22-")
exercised through Himself, who will employ angels
as the executors of His final decrees (^It i3^''''- ■*'*f*,
Mk 13=^).

(a) In these passages \fe are able to observe a
double object in the teaching of Jesus about two
distinct contemporaiy beliefs. As we have seen,
there was a current belief, existent amongst the
best religious thought, in the resurrection of the
dead. This was, however, intimately connected
with Jewish hopes as to the future earthly national
Messianic kingdom (cf. Is 26'-'- 1«, Ezk 37'i, Dn 12=,
where its extent is limited to those who have dis-
tinguished themselves on one side or other of the
national conflict, mainly witli Antiochus Epiphanes
[see Driver, Daniel, in loc. and Introd. xci f., and
Salmond, Christian Doctrine of Iminortalitij^, p.
213; cf. Dn ll-^-'f-]).

The imperfection and uncertainty of the hold which this
doctrine had on the Jewish mind is evidenced bv such passages
as 2 Mac 79- !■*■ 23.36, 2 Es 7('i*)-(i"0| ; Jos. Ant. .xviii. i. 3 ; Bar 217,
Sir IT'^'f- 414. In the Apocalypse of Baruch, in answer to the
question as to the changes wliich are to take place (i03), the
writer affirms his belief in the resurrection of the body, and
the subsequent transformation of the bodies of the righteous in
order to the enjoyment of unending spiritual happine.ss (chs. 50
and ,'il [ed. by Prof. Charles]). The authors of the Book of
Enoch vary ?s to the extent of the resurrection, but all are
agreed as to the restoration of the righteous Israelite to the
fulness of a glorious life in the new Messianic kingdom which
God shall establish on earth.

Now, as we have just said, Jesus, in His allusions
to the doctrine of the resurrection, while accom-
modating His language to the received Jewish
oijinions, emphasizes the truth and discards the
excrescences which had deformed the popular
belief. In His eschatological references and dis-
courses, connexions with current thought are easily
discovered, even when He is engaged in contradict-
ing the presumptuous expectations of those whom
He is addressing. Compare His use of apocalyptic
figures when speaking of His Parousia (Mt 8'^
Lk 13-»'- 22'", Mt 26-^), where the future kingdom
is likened to a banquet where the guests recline at
the table with the fathers of the Jewish nation (cf.
e.g. Mt 22'-'^ and Lk 1415--4). This is the more
remarkable that it is accompanied by a stern re-
minder tliat the real heirs of the kingdom shall
find themselves outside their heritage. The refer-
ence to the judgment of the tribes of Israel is also
to be noted in Mt lD-», Lk 22^«, and Rev 20\ remind-
ing us of the idea expressed in Dn V^, 1 Co 6-'*-,
Wis 3», Sir ■i^=.

The imagery in which Jesus clothed His description of the
events which were to precede the destruction of Jerusalem
(Mt 2-Ji-3i = Mk 13i-27 = Lk 215-.M), and His subsequent Return,
finds many parallels in Jewish literature (cf. 2 Es 511^ ei**-'-^
91-12 1329-31, 2 Mac 52f-, Apoc. Bar 70'.i-s ; Mishna, Sota, ix.
15 ; and Jos. DJ vi. v. 3). It is probable that in Mt 242S we
have the quotation of a current proverb which may or may
not have had its origin in the detestation in whicii the symbols
of Roman power and authority were held (see Plummer on
Lk IT-*" ; and Farrar, Life of Christ, vol. ii. p. 262). In any
event we know that the phrase ei outoi was known to His hearers
as symbolical of God's judgments wrought by means of heathen
enemies and oppressors (see Charles' ed. of Enoch [92] ; cf. Dt
2S49, Job 9-«, Hab 18 etc.). The same may be said of the
reference to the trumpet (o-kXt/j-I) as the instrument by which
the resurrection of the dead is immediately effected (cf. 1 Th
41'J, 1 Co 1552, >it 24:ii, and 2 Es C-'i). In this connexion, and
intimately related to the subject of the destruction of Jerusalem,
we may note the simile used by Jesus in His lamentation over
that city. The similitude of the hen and her brood (Mt 23^") ' is
not found in the OT, but is frequent in Rabbinical literature'
(Plummer on Lk 133-1). Compare, e.g., 2 Es l^u, in which context
are also to be found very similar references to the righteous
wrath of God and its terrible consequences. He will require
the blood of all His servants and prophets slain bj- the hands of
those to whom they were sent (2 Es 1^2). Their house is left
unto them desolate (v. 33). These words remind us of the
language of Jesus in Mt 23^r-38 (cf. Lk ll^S"), where Wendt

ACCOMMODATION

thinks there is^a reference to a Jewish apocalj'ptic writing
(-■i o-o}ia. rou tiiou iTTiv) on the part of Jesus {Lehre ifesii, Eng. tr.
ii. 362). See, further, Messiah, Pahousia.

(/3) The other contemporary belief referred to
above had to do witli the part played by anfiels
in the Divine economy of revelation and grace.
Amongst the Jews of the time of Jesus there was
a tendency to emphasize the importance of the
functions ascribed to these beings. This tendency
arose out of the growing habit of thought which
removed God farther and farther from that active
participation in the world's concerns which was
characteristic of early Israelitish belief (Ex S'^-,
Gn 11' 18-' [cf. G. B. Stevens, The Theoloc/i/ of the
NT, p. 11 f.]). To them angels were the necessary
media connecting a transcendental God with the
world and men. (For the external influences which
helped the growth of this development see art. [by
Whitehouse] 'Demon, Devil,' in Hastings' DB,
vol. i. p. 592). Over against God and His king-
dom, tlius conceived, stood Satan and his dominion,
ruled after the same method by means of dependent
demoniacal beings. It is important to note that,
although these dualistic conceptions held a large
place in the current thought of His day, Jesus has
let fall no hint as to His ideas on the subject of
angelologj'. By Him God is conceived as in direct
living contact with men, guiding their affairs, and
interesting Himself in tlieir welfare (Mt 5^^ Lk 6*\
Mt e^-s-is-aa 7"). Perhaps in no way does this
come out so clearly as in the stress laid by Him on
the Fatherhood of God (cf. e.g. Lk 15""'-). What
was halting, spasmodic, and inferential in the OT
becomes in the teaching of Jesus a central, illumi-
nating truth whicli He would have His hearers
emphasize during the most sacred moments of
their lives— ndrep ijfx^ii' (Mt Q^, cf. the Ildrep of
Lk U-). At the same time the Gospels furnish us
with manj' references by Jesus to angels and their
work, all of which are intimately related to con-
temporary ideas. It is unimportant for our present
purpose whether we interpret these references
literally, or, as Beyschlag and others do, meta-
phorically ; viz. as poetical and figurative ex-
pressions.

From Himself must have come the information noted by the
Synoptists as to angelic ministrations (cf. Mt 4ii = Mk lii, Lk
22^^) ; and He must have been thinking of these services when
He rebuked St. Peter with the question recorded in Mt 205" (cf.
Jn 18-*6, where oi CrTr,pi'ra.i oi iuoi may refer to them also). That
He believed in the reality of then- existence is, of course, true.
That He ascribed to them functions suilable to their state of
being is also true. They are described as ' holy,' possessed of a
knowledge ofthe ways of God in a higher degree than the sons
of men (oioi oi kyyu.oi), and interested in the spiritual condition
of mankind (cf. Mk S38, jit 1627 2531, Mk 13^2, Lk 15io, with
whicli we may compare 2 Es 16G0 and Lk 12^). Jesus in the
parable of Dives and Lazarus, utilizes the Rabbinical belief tliat
the souls of the righteous are carried to paradise by the angels,
but in a way so incidental that we are not justified in atfirming
or denying His belief in that tenet (Lk \&~, with which may be
compared the description of Elijah's translation in 2 K 2ii).
In Mt ISii there is a deliberate assertion by Jesus that God's
care over the least important of His people is exercised through
the media of angels. This is an extension or development of
the idea of national guardian angels in l)n Kjl"- '20. He makes
an incidental reference to their supersensual nature in His
discussion with the Sadducees on che subject of the Resurrec-
tion (Mk 1225 = Jit 2230 = Lk 2036), where He employs a well-
known Jewish opinion (with the Lukan la-a.yytXci compare Apoc.
Bar 5110 and Eth. Enoch 1044-6) in order to enforce a funda-
mental spiritual truth. The same didactic purpose is discover-
able in all the references of Jesus to these beings ; and we are
therefore led to the conclusion that there is, in His attitude
towards this question, evidence of that deliberate economy bv
which He set to Himself the task of accommodation to" the
limited knowledge of His fellow-men. It seems to the present
writer to be very evident that Jesus knowingly refrained from
correcting their ideas on this subject because He had an
infinitely more important work to perform. To say with
Bishop Gore that His ' language certainly reaches the level of
positive teaching' about good spirits, seems to import more
significance into that language than it can bear (cf. Diss. p.
23 f.). The work of Jesus lay on a far higher plane than this —
the correcting and revealing of details os to the nature, posi-
tion, and employment of subordinate spiritual agencies. It was
sufficient for His purpose tliat a general belief existed in the

loving activity of God, though that activity might be somewhat
too rigorously conceived of as mediated by certain personal
forces — t^nrovpyixU ^viu/icxTx. (He Ii4). A comparison of one pair
of parallel passages may throw some light on the waj- in which
Jesus' attitude towards this belief was interpreted by those who
heard Him. In Mt 1032 we read of those who accept, and are
loyal in their adherence to, His Messianic claims, that the Son
of Man will confess them before His Father in heaven ; while in
Lk 12« the words run, ' Him shall the Son of Man also confess
before the angels of God.' From this it would appear that ' the
angels of God ' is a popular synonym for the Sacred Presence,
and is employed by Jesus as such (cf, also Lk 157-10). gut
see art. Angels, p. 57b f.

(7) On coming to the consideration of the kindred
question arising out of Jesus' language respecting
Satan, demons, and demoniacal possession, we are
confronted with a more intricate and ditticult
problem. There can be no doubt, the present
writer thinks, that as He believed in the personal
existence of good, so He also believed in that of
evil angels. How far, on the other hand, Me are
bound to accept the views which a literal interpre-
tation of the passages where reference to them is
found would convey, is another question, and one
which demands some care in determining. In
the first place, there are several instances where
the language of Jesus respecting these beings is
obviously figurative, and intended to be inter-
preted as such. In relating His experiences
during the Temptation period, it would certainly
seem as if He intended to convey, in language
vividly symbolical, an idea of the tremendous
ditticulties which beset Him in His choice of two
alternatives. The popular Jewish Messianic ex-
pectations He embodied in a personified form, and
Satan appears in the narrative because of the
didactic purpose which He had in view.

A similar interpretation seems necessary in Jesus' explanation
of the parable of the Sower (Mt 131^ 'ipxtrxi cmvr.po; ; Mk 415
£3-^£T«, ^ccrxvii; ; Lk 812 'ip^irai i hia-fioi.o;), though Plummer
(note on Lk 8i2) insists that Jesus is here emphasizing His belief
in the Personality of the evil there described as working. The
whole passage, however, is highly figurative, and it seems some-
what arbitrary to pick and choose in that way. A \ery remark-
able instance of similar personification is found in the Lukan
narrative of the healing of St. Peter's mother-in-law. Just as
St. Luke seems to be the most deeply impressed of the Synop-
tists with this aspect of Jesus' power and work, so he is the
only one of the three to note this. By using the verb i^iriiJ.Y,<nv
(43i^), which he had employed immediately before (v.3o) in de-
scribing the nealing of the demoniac in the synagogue, he links
the two acts toMther by an inward connexion. 'The same verb,
indeed, is found in all three Synoptists in their narratives of the
stilling of the tempest on the Lake of Gennesaret (cf. Lk 824,
Mt 826, Mk 439), and w-e cannot resist the conclusion that the
disciples saw behind the storm the work of a living personal
agent, and that Jesus acted in the spirit of that presupposition
(cf. O. Holtzniann's Lehen Jesu, Eng. tr. p. 208). Siniilarlv in
His rebuke of St. Peter (Mk 833 = Mt io2:i), .Jesus sees behind the
language of His chief Apostle that spirit of evil wliich all
through His work strove to thwart and hinder Him. He
addresses him directly and personally as ' Satan ' (Sarani), just
as He addressed the last and fiercest temptation in the first
dangerous crisis of His life (Mt 4i0).

A striking and illustrative example of this figure is discovered
in Jesus' words to His returned missionary disciples (Lk IQi**).
These, in their report, referred specially to the power over
demons, recently conferred upon the Twelve, as being also
possessed by themselves, which elicited from Him the following
reply, ' I beheld Satan fallen (AV fall) as lightning from heaven '
(cf. Is 1412). Some see in these words a reference by Jesus to
the original Fall of the Angels, and an implied rebuke to the
disciples, warning them against the sin which caused that
catastrophe. On the other hand, the use of the aorist participle
(-rio-cyTcc) in the place of emphasis points to the conclusion that
Jesus is speaking of an event occurring during the time of the
successful missionarv tour (cf. Blass, Gram, of XT Greek, §58, 4,
p. 197 f. ; and Burton, NT Mood.s and Tenses, § 146 flr., p. 07 f.).
Be that as it may, tlie simile is a familiar one to the Jews
(cf. Is 141219, Rev 12"-y), and is used by Jesus to point to tlie
overthrow of the kingdom of evil, as it was foreshadowed by
the success which attended His disciples' first efforts (cf.
Jn 1231).

A very remarkable instance of this method is peculiar to the
Lukan narrative. Jesus, in warning St. Peter of his coming
fall, informs him in solemn language that Satan ' obtained him
by asking' (JI-^Tvio-aTo, Lk 2231) for the purpose of testing him (cf.
Job 1612 and 2 16). He puts Himself in direct personal opposi-
tion (lyi> hi ih<i,Oy,i) to the Prince of Evil b}' praying for His
Apostle. No less remarkable and instructive is the allegory,
common to St. Matthew and St. Luke, by which He teaches the
danger of and tendency towards reverting to a former state of

ACCOMMODATION"

ACCOMMODATION

sin. He speaks of the unclean spirit or demon (to axocBxcTOM
mvjf/.oi.) which, having been cast out of his victim, goes in search
of rest through dry and desert regions (5;' a.ti,hpav ro-ran).
Failing in his quest, he deliberates with himself as to his future
line of action, and finally makes up his mind to return to the
place whence he was driven. AVith himself he brings seven
other spirits, and they all take up their abode in the empty
chamber, which was all too ready to receive them (Lk IV^-^,
Mt 12^3-45). For the belief that more than one demon might
possess a human being, compare Mk 5if-, Mt 828f., Lk 8'-6f-, and
Lk 82 (I.TT-a itx.ii^i->ia). The teaching of Jesus is not only based
on the popular belief in the active connexion between evil
spirits and the children of men, but there is a reference in it
to the generally accepted idea that wild and desert regions are
the special habitat of these beings (see art. 'Demon, Devil' in
Hastings' DB, vol. i. p. 593b).

Jesus, on more than one occasion, seems to sanction the
current conception of the malignant influence of demons on
the human body, their activity in this respect being controlled
and guided by their chief, Satan (i a.f>-(_m tUm SaitMuM, Mt 1224).
St. Luke's diagnosis of the woman's case who was afflicted for
eighteen years, is simply that she was possessed of a ' spirit
of infirmity' (rnuu,x a.a-htiix;, Lk 13ii); and Jesus apparently
countenanced the belief by the words contained in His reproof
(->;► '{lr,iriv 'S.rj.rxvSis, V.16). A similar instance of His countenanc-
ing popular beliefs occurs in the healing of the deaf and dumb
epileptic (Mk 9'7-27). The boy's father believes his son to be the
victim of demoniac malignity ^.xotra tvevwk aX«/ov, v.i') ; and
Jesus addresses the spirit by an authoritative command (to
cckciXov 'Aoi'i ju^^ov rTfivuat, lyu i'Xi'ra.irtroi troi^ V.25),

Perhaps tlie surest evidence Ave have that Jesus
deliheratdy suited His language to the notions of
His day arises out of the way in which He wrought
His cures, depending as He did on tlie moral and
spiritual forces inherent in His own Person. A
word, a command, a touch of the hand suffices His
purpose (cf. Mt S'", Mk 1-', Lk 13'«). There is no
trace of His ever having employed any of the
current methods of exorcism — the use of certain
magic formula^ sucli as ' tiie ineffable Name,' etc.
(see Edersheim's Life and Times of Jesiis the
Messiah, bk. iii. ch. xiv. and Ap. XVI. Cf. the
astonishment which Jesus' method created amons^st
His countrymen [Lk 4'*« ; cf. Ac lO'^]). That He
knew of such methods is evident from the ironical
question He put to the Pharisees who accused Him
of collusion with Beelzebub (Mt 1227 = Lk ll'^).
For evidence that Jesus believed in power over
evil spirits exercised by others not directly com-
missioned by Him, cf. Mt 7", Mk 93«f- = Lk 9^9f-.

On the other hand, signs are not wanting that
Jesus recognized an essential difference between
the casting out of demons and the curing of bodily
disease — ' I cast out denions and perform cures '
(Lk 13^2, cf. Mt 108, Mk 6'^ Lk 9' 6"'-). St.
ISLatthew, moreover, records the same distinction
in his account of the early Galihean ministry
(Saiaovi'^ouivovs Kal ff(\7)via'<^ofjuivovs, 4*'*, with which
cf. Mk r-*-'"^). We may also note in passing that
instances are not wanting of references to disease
without mention of these agents (cf. e.g. Mt 9-'"'*i,
Mk V'-'l>, Lk l?"-!").

Looking then at this last a.spect of the question,
and noting the way in which He employed the
language current in His day about this mysterious
phenomenon, we perceive Jesus' knowledge to be
in advance of that pos.sessed by His countrymen.
We see the workings of that love which, wliile it
ap]ieals to man as he is, yet ever strives to draw
him upwards by gradually stripping him of the
clogging weights of superstitio7i and of false con-
cejitions. See artt. Demon, Lunatic, Possession.

('•) In harmony with this characteristic habit of
Jesus is His general method of imparting definite
instruction. It is impossible not to be struck with
the way in which He, not content with telling
His hearers directly what He wishes them to
know, apf)roaches them from another side — the
side of reason and its resultant freedom and in-
dependence of thought. The Sermon on the
Mount is not a body of precepts like the Mosaic
code, so much as a series of paradoxes which arrest
and fix the attention, calling out and developing
the powers of rational deduction. The same

feature runs through the parabolic form which
His teaching so largely took, and whicli was so
admirably suited to maintain the studied reserve
in the content of His communications. Notice
the way in which He keejis back, all through the
earliest period of His ministry, the revelation of
His claims to be the Messiah (Mk l-^Bi- 8=*", Lk4^\
cf. Mt 12i« 8^ etc.); and even to the Twelve He
does not impart the nature of those claims till
they slowly worked out for tiiemselves the con-
viction to whicli St. Peter gave such empiiatic
expression at C.-esarea Philippi (jNIk 8-''=Mt W*^ =
Lk 9-").

(1) Popularly intelligible and highly imiiressive,
the parables of Jesus have been the wonder and
admiration of every age. The OT is not -without
examples of this mode of teaching (2 8 Ti^"- 14'"-,
1 K 20^«f-, Is 5--6), and the Rabbinical writings
afford numerous examples of parables (see Eders-
heim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. i.
p. 580 f.) some of which bear a striking resem-
blance to those of Jesus (cf. Midrash on Ca 1').
Tiie object of parabolic teaching was t^'ofold, and
was thus purposely employed by Him (Mt 13'""'').
By it He meant to conceal the truth ' from the
wise and clever' (dTro crocpQv Kal ffwerQiv, Mt 11'-^ [see
Moftatt's Histor. NT\ p. 316 f.]). By it He at
the same time intended to itnfold the same truth
' to babes ' {vrjiriois). According to the Markan
narrative, there was an adaptation to the capaci-
ties of His hearers even within the zone of His
parabolic teaching. He did not, that is to say,
employ this method indiscriminately or harshly,
but in a tentative and gentle fashion, proportion-
ate to the intelligences of those who heard Him
(Mk4=«).

S>ich was the aim and intention of Jesus ; and in
connexion with this it will not be unimportant to
note how, as His experience widened, and tiie
stress of opposition increased, and the bitterness
of the enmity to which He was exposed intensilied,
the parable enters more and moi'e largely into His
public teaching, and gradually assumes a more
admonitory, controversial, and sometimes a warn-
ing judicial tone. It is impossible to draw up any
hard and fast rule exemplifying this statement,
but a comparison of the parables grouped in Mt 13
with those in Lk 14'-i' 13«-9 14'"---* IG'-'^ ^^-'^^ Pji-'--^
etc. will show the gradual development of method
in the employment of the parable by Jesus to
drive home the meaning of His message to the
heart and understanding of His hearers. See
Parable.

(2) Without entering into a discussion as to the
diti'erence between the parable, the fable, the
allegory, and other forms of instruction by figure,
it is important to note that Jesus never disdains
to use popular figurative expressions in order to
point the truth He is aiming to disclose. Just as
in its outward form and method He conformed to
the usages of His time (cf. Mt 5\ Lk 4-'', Jn 8-,
Mt 13^'- etc.), so in His choice of language He did
not disdain to employ what He found ready to His
hand, tiiough it was manifestly imperfect. He did
not, for exani))le, correct the popular notions as to
the local iiositions of Heaven and Hades. The one
was regarded as being situated at an indefinite
height above the earth (see Ac l^"-), the other 'as
a dark deep underworld in which the deceased
continued to exist' (Salmond, art. 'Hades' in
Hastings' DB ii. 275). The ethical teaching of
Jesus is not disturbed by these crudities. On
more than one occasion He uses them as illustra-
tions of His meaning. Capernaum, because it
rejected the tmparalleled opportunities afforded
by His presence and works, He addressed Avith the
question, 'Shalt thou be exalted unto heaven?'
answering it Himself at the same time, ' Thou

ACCOMMODATION

shalt go down to Hades.' The idea •was that a
complete moral and spiritual overthrow awaited
her, whereas she might have enjoyed the full and
lofty freedom characteristic of the atmosphere of
God's presence (see Mt lp3 = Lk W%

The expression ' gates of Hades ' (Mt 1618) is similarly figura-
tive, and in this place has reference to the forces of death and
spiritual decay. Here there is an incidental reference to the
general belief that Hades is an enclosed prison-like (cf. the £v
tfuXxx v) of 1 P319) abode whose inhabitants are locked and detained
inside' its gates (cf. Rev li** ' I have the keys of Hades'), while
there is added to this notion the further thought that there is
even in Hades a broad impassable line of demarcation (' between
us and you a great gulf is fi.xed,' Lk 162«) between the souls of
those who have lived piously here and those whose lives were
selfish (cf. Lk 23*'^ ^\■hero the former department of Hades is
called ' Paradise'). In connexion with this subject it is in-
structive to note such ideas as are found in Enoch 22. 51. 63io
102J etc., where, with the single exception of the locale of Sheol,
the general description is very similar to that we have been
discussing.

(3) One of the traditional forms of teaching was
by the employment of aphoristic sayings, such as
we have before us in the gnomic wisdom of the
Son of Sirach, or of the Pirke Aboth in the Mishna
(Schiirer, HJP il. iii. pp. 23-32). Jesus uses this
method Avith wonderful ett'ect, as we see especi-
ally in the list of utterances groujied in Mt 5-7,
which were collected, we may feel sure, from many
dillerent periods of His ministry. All four Gospels
all'urd examples of these proverbial expressions.
Cf. e.g. Mk 2"- 27 935. 40 1217 1488^ j^jt 22'^ 123", lj^ 12^8
16'", and the unrecorded saying in Ac 20^, Jn 3" 4-^
12-', while, in this Gospel, Jesus refers explicitly to
a proverb current in His time ( ' Herein is the saying
true,' Jn 4^'). Very striking and vivid also are such
figures as those by which the doctrine or teaching
of the Pharisees is referred to by the word ' leaven '
(Mk 8'^), His own suffering by the words 'cup'
and 'baptism' (Mk 10^^ cf. Lk 12^»'-), tbe relative
positions of Jew and (ientile in the kingdom of
grace by the words ' children ' and ' dogs ' (Mk 7"").
In the Fourth Gospel there is a striking frequency
in this mode of expression. It is in this writing
that Jesus speaks of Himself as ' the way ' (t; 656s,
Jn 14«), ' the liglitof the world' (8'-), ' the bread of
life' (635), <the vine' (lo^), 'the door' (10^). He
speaks of His work as His 'meat' (■i^), of His
body as ' this temple ' (2'^). Cf. also such passages
as those which deal with the second birth (3^), the
living water (4'"), the heavenly mansions (14-), and
so on. In .all this we observe a method which is
peculiarly adapted to the intelligence of those He
meant to instruct ; and this is still more emphati-
cally the case when, as He sometimes does. He
exjiands the.se figures and similes until they
assume the shape of allegories. We see examples
of this in His use of the hgure of 'the shepherd'
(lO'""'-), 'the vine' (IS'^-), 'the light' (1235'-), etc.
JMo one who has ever heard these can fail to
admire 'the wonderful art and power of popular
eloquence ' which He possessed. It was precisely
the power to gain the attention and arouse and
retain the interest of the jieople Avhich Jesus
wielded, and we can aj)preciate the reasons for the
willingness and eagerness with which He was
listened to by the proletariat (ISIk 1237). See art.
Wisdom.

(4) The references in the discourses of Jesus to
natural or worhl-phenomena, and to the psycho-
logical features of man's being, exhibit the same
reserve, the same restraint in correcting popvilar
notions, the same frank acceptance of current
thought. A few examples will be sufficient to
show how completely He adapted His language
to the limitations of contemi)orary knowledge,
(a) God makes His .sun to rise(Mt5^5); lightning
comes out of the east and takes its swift journey
towards the west (Mt 24"'), or it falls down
straight from heaven (Lk 10'^) ; the germ of life in
the wheat-grain is brought into active play only

by the death of the seed (Jn 12-^). Even the signs
which enabled men to forecast the weather were
laid by Him under contribution to emphasize a
contrast (Lk 12=^«'-)- The wind blows hither and
thither, but men know neither its beginning nor
its ending (Jn 3"), any more than they can point to
the origin or the destiny of the mysterious ^wt]
&v(o6iv, the reality of whose exi.stence He never-
theless insists cannot be doubted. The gradual
growth of the kingdom of God eludes men's ob-
servation, just as that of the planted seed does,
which re(;eives the vital principle of its growth
from the earth, and advances steadily though
secretly (Mk 4-7).

It seems to the present writer that in the last two cases .Jesus
is pointing to the existence of a wider field of knowledge into
which man has not as yet entered. At the same time He seems
to include Himself in the number of those who 'know not' the
how or the wherefore. Ages were yet to pass over the world
before men discovered the laws which govern the relations of
natural phenomena, and which enable them, in some cases at
least, to predict with almost infallible certainty their regular
sequence. Jesus consciously recognized that it was no part of
His work to add to the sum total of human knowledge of these
subjects.

(^) The same trait is observable in His refer-
ences to the anthropological ideas of His time ;
but for the illustration of this we must refer the
reader to artt. I'LE.'^n, Heart, Soul, Spirit.

iv. The attitude of Jesus towards the
Messianic expectations of His time. — A dis-
cussion of the question of Jesus' attitude towaixls
Messianic hojies and longings is of the utmost
importance, on account of its bearing ujjon the
subject with which we .are dealing. The attention
of the student is at once .arrested by His obvious
anxiety during the early periods of His ministry
to conceal from the general public His claims to
the Messiahship. This He did expressly by for-
bidding the open proclamation of the truth not
merely by the demoniacally possessed (Mk 1-^ 3'-,
Mt 12'", Lk 4^'), but also by those amongst His
circle of discii)les who grasped the purport of
His teaching nnd the secret of His Personality
(Mt 16-" = Mk 83" = Lk92' ; Mt I7'-' = Mk 9« = Lk y^.).
P'or the same reason He courted seci-ecy in the
performance of miraculous cures, and enjoined
silence on those who were healed (Mk l"'^^- 5^^ ysu
8-3. 2fi, Mt 930 S-"). Indeed, there is no part of the
mess.age which Jesus came to deliver where tlie
words of ]\Ik 4^3 (' He spake the word unto them
as they were able to hear it') are more ajipropriatc.
The declaration of His Messi.ahship was gradual ;
.and even those who were nearest His Person, and in
closest touch with His teaching, were left by Him
to work out the truth slowly and by degrees.

(a) Perhaps the self-chosen title 'Son of M.an,'
by which He is styletl early in His first Galihean
ministry, might at iirst sight contradict this state-
ment (cf. Mk2'» = Mt 9« = Lk5-^ Mk2^8 = Mtl28
= Lk 65 ; Mt 12-'- = Lk 12i"). On further considera-
tion, however, it will be seen that Jesus, by this
designation of Himself, had a tAvofold object in
view — the concealment of His Messi.ahship from
the many who were not ready to .accept His inter-
pretation of its meaning and purpose ; and at tlie
same time, the unfolding to the few who could
be.ar the re\elation, of the character of His Person
and His work as shadowed by the title ' Son of
Man.' See art. Son of Man.

(b) The .attitude of Jesus to the .lewish Canon of
the OT must not be left out of account when con-
sidering the methods of His public teaching.
Frankly, the belief is at once confessed th.at here
also He ' used the common langu.age of His con-
tempoi^aries in regard to the OT' (Sanday, Bamptun
Led. p. 414), and in accordance with tliis we can
explain the words which St. Luke i)uts into the
mouth of the risen Jesus, where tlie tripartite divi-

ACCOMMODATION

sion of the Hebrew Bible is recognized — the Law
of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psahns (24-'^).
With this we may compare the division given in
the Prologue of the grandson of Jesus ben Sirach.
Other divisions were also current, as ' Moses and
the Prophets' (Lk IG-"- =*i 24-'), 'the Law and the
Prophets' (Lk 16", Mt 7'-), where the idea is the
same, namely, the entire OT as then existing. In
perfect harmony with this is the acceptance by
Jesus of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch
(Lk 16-'*-«' 24•-•'•^^ Mt 19«:=Mk lO^-^, Mk 12-« = Lk
20=", Jn 5-"-^' T'"---^-), and the Davidic authorship,
if not of the whole Jewish Psalter, at least of
many of the Psalms contained therein (Mk 12^''^- =

Mt22^=*«'- = Lk20J-^«'-).

(1) Several otiier indications there are which
show that He accepted not only the general
jjopular belief in tlie authenticity of the OT books
as a whole, but .ilso the literal genuineness of the
stories with which they abound. The details of
tiie narratives of tiie Flood and Noah (Mt 24^'"^- =
Lk 17-®^')> tlie story of Jonah and his adventures
by sea as well as in Nineveh (Mt 12^"^- 16\ Lk
11-^^-); ■T'l'e utilized by Jesus on the assumption of
tiieir genuine historicity. The glory of Solomon's
reign, that heyday of Israelitish prosperity, is
incidentally mentioned by Him without any re-
serve (Mt 6'''^ = Lk 12'-"^). The question is not, as
Dr. Sanday puts it (The Oracles of God^, p. HI),
whether Jesus 'accommodated His language to
current notions, knowing them to be false,'' but
ratlier, was His 'accommodation' or 'condescen-
sion' so complete that He never entertained any
other idea as to the character of these narratives
than the one currently held ? It certainly seems
that it never entered into His mind to question
their historical truth ; and if we seek for tiie
estimation in which He held ' the Law anil the
Prophets,' we find it expressed in words which, if
genuine,* are as emphatic as any that are to be
had. Not 'one jot or one tittle' (tujra iv ?) /xla Kepaia)
was to be done away with until all was fulfilled (Mt
5'^). Into this Jewish idea of tiie abiding nature
of the Law, Jesus characteristically imported a
depth of meaning which, while it di(l not destroy,
transmuted its whole tenor, giving it the eternal
signilicance of which He speaks (e'a;s &«< napiXdr) 6
oupavbs Kai i] yq), and which it could never otherwise
have had. This habitual method, by wliich Jesus
based His teaching on the foundations of existing
knowledge, receives some illustration from the way
in which He treats the story of Moses and the
Bush (xMk 12'^« = Lk 20^^ cf. Mt. '22^i). He says
nothing whatever of the nature of this vision
beyond what the letter of the narrative expresses.
He does not tell us whether the sight was visible
to the outward eye or to the inward spiritual
understanding alone. Cf. also His references to
the brazen serpent (Jn 3^* 12^-).

(2) In the same way, it seems to the present
writer, we are to interpret the reference to the
authorship of Ps 110 (Mt '22^'-« = Mk 1235-3? = Lk
2(j4i-44j There were three distinct ideas current
about this Psalm which Jesus adopts as the
groundwork of His argument: (i.) it was Davidic,
(ii) it was written by David under the influence
of inspiration (Aa^iS ev irvevfiaTi), (iii. ) it was ex-
plicitly Messiani(!. If Jesus placed the imprimatur
of His Divine authority upon any one of these
notions, we are bound to believe that He did so on
all, and by conse<)uence on the Messianic ideas
which were popnlarly held, and which doubtless
were supposed to be favoured by Ps 110. We
know, liowever, that He haljitually discouraged
the i>oi)ular belief in a Messiah who was to be an
earthly Sovereign of all-conquering power, wiiicli
was held to be countenanced by the words of this

* See llastiiijiis' Dli, Extra Vol. p. 24 f.

Psalm (cf. Jn Q^^ IS^"- and Lk 17-"'). There is no
hint given by any of the three Synoptists that
Jesus corrected these Messianic expectations during
the course of the argument. His purpose was
other than this, 'to argue from the contents' of
the Psalm, and not at all to correct ideas as to
authorship and interpretation (cf. Driver, LOT^
p. 363 n. ; and A. F. Kirkpatrick, ' Psalms,' in the
Cambindge Bible, Introd. to Ps 110).

The whole edifice so laboriously constructed by the opponents
of a rational criticism, on the basis of Jesus' references to this
Psalm as well as to other portions of OT Scriptures, falls to the
ground when considered beneath 'the dry light of reason.'
The following words of Bishop Gore are so moderate and reason-
able in connexion with this reference of Jesus to the Davidic
authorship of Ps 110, that we may be pardoned for quoting
them in full. ' On the face of it, tlie argument suggests that
the Messiah could not be David's Son, — "if David calleth him
Lord, how is he his Son?" — but, in fact, its purpose is not to
prove or disprove anything, to affirm or deny anything, I)ut
simply to press upon the Pharisees an argument which their
habitual assumptions ought to have suggested to them : to
confront them with just that question, which they, with
their princiijles, ought to have been asking themselves ' {Bainp-
ton Led. p. 198). In a word, nothing can be truer than that
both ' the Sa\iour and the Apostles have quoted a body of
sacred Scriptures, and it does not appear that in their teaciiing
they had any wish to introduce a novel theory as to the mean-
ing and autliority of that collection. Neither the Apostolic writ-
ings nor the tradition of the Christian Church bear any trace
of an explicit decision given b3' Jesus Christ or the Apostles
with respect to the Canon of the Old Testament, and still
less of a decision which would have 'the effect of formally
correcting opinions which obtained in the Jewish world ' (Loisy,
Canon de I'Ancien Testament, p. 97).

V. Summary axd Conclusion.— In summing
up and reviewing the conditions under which the
teaching of Jesus was ushered into the world, and
the relation in which that teaching stood to the
human race, we cannot do better than quote a
passage from a little work of the last-named
writer {L'Evangile et rEglise), though he is there
dealing with a very different problem : —

' Nothing could make Jesus other than a Jew. He was only
man under condition of belonging to one branch of humanity.
In that in which He was born, the branch that may well be
said to have carried in it the religious future of the world, this
future was known in quite a precise manner, by the hope of the
reign of God, by the symbol of the Messiah. He who was to be
the Saviour of the world could enter on His office only by
assuming the position of Messiah and by presenting Himself as
the Founder of the Kingdom, come to accomplish the hope of
Israel. The Gospel, appearing in Judaia, and unable to appear
elsewhere, was bound to be conditioned by Judaism. Its
Jewish exterior is the human body, wliose Divine soul is the
Spirit of Jesus. But take away the body, and the soul will
vanish in the air like the lightest breath. Without the idea of
the Messiah, the Gospel would have been but a metaphysical
possibility, an invisible, intangible essence, even unintelligible,
for want of a definition appropriate to the means of knowledge,
not a living and conquering reality. The Gospel will always
need a body to be human. Having become the hope of Chris-
tian people, it has corrected in the interpretation certain parts
of its Israelitish symbolism. None the less it remains the
shadowy representation of the great mystery, God and the
Providential destiny of man and of humanity, because it is a
representation always striving after perfection, inadequate and
insufficient. This is the mystery that Jesus revealed, as far
as it could be revealed, and under the conditions which made
revelation possible. It may be said that Christ lived it as much
as He made it manifest.'

The present writer has no intention of entering
into the very difficult and much-debated question
of the connexion between Jesus' ideas of' ' the
kingdom of God' (or 'of heaven') during the
early and the later periods of His active ministry,
or how far the latter was a development of the
former ; nor again to inquire as to the period when
it dawned upon His consciousness that His death
was the condition upon which its inauguration
and subsequent life rested. Broadly speaking, a
line of demarcation might be drawn through the
life as it is presented to us, cutting it into two
fairly well markeil divisions at the time of the
Petrine confession and the Transfiguration. After
these events Jesus began to concentrate His
teaciiing more especially \\\n)n tiie circle of dis-
ciples gatliered closely round Him. It was then

ACCOMMODATION

ACTIVITY

that He, in solemn and almost sad foreboding,
warned His followers of the events -wliicii -were
soon to trj' His own fidelity to the cause which He
so constantly and fearlessly championed, and
which were to put their faith to a most cruel
test. We are indebted to the writer of the F(nnth
Gospel for the series of discourses in which He
endeavoured to strengthen and encourage His
disciples against the coming time of trial. From
these we gather tliat Jesus looked forward to the
establishment, on the basis of His own life, of a
kingdom amongst men which was to carry on His
teacliing, even as it received the truth at the
hands of His Spirit. The time had not as yet
arrived when they could assimilate the full self-
revelation of God (Jn 16'-), but as tlieir experience
widened and their understandings became enlarged,
they would be made the recipients of ' all tlie
truth' (v.i^ cf. also 15^8). That He looked
beyond the lives of those whom He thus addressed
will not, we think, be disputed (cf. els rbv alQjva,
H'"). Certainly His words were so interpreted ])y
His followers (see Mt 28-» ; cf. 18-», Jn 14» 17--',
Ac 2^^). We are thus emboldened to state our
belief that this plan of Divine self-accommodation
enters into the very centre of the life of Jesus
Himself, and that it is the plan by which the
world has received its education from the be-
ginning even till these latter days.

' Each of them [Baptism, Temptation, and Transfiguration of
Jesus] constitutes a moment, and a moment important, nay
supreme, in the development of the Humanity of our Lord.
That for the ultimate, I)ivine consummation accomplished in
the garden and on the cross He was preparing all His life long,
and that we can see in these three events a scheme fli\inely
prepared, by which that development was set forward ; that we
can see Him in each of the three pass from stage to well-defined
stage of that incomprehensible process which is indicated in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, when He is spoken of as "learning
obedience." . . . That this growth . . . should have gone on to
the end of His life is in itself no more marvellous or more
mysterious than that it should ever have been possible, and
have taken place' (Ch. Quart. Rev., July 1901, pp. 303-4).

The question naturally arises at this stage, How
far is this Divine method of educating humanity
to enter into the conscious active life of the teach-
ing 'Body of Christ' (Eph. 4'=)? How is the
Ciiurch to exercise her functions as the guide and
instructress of the race? Is she to draw lines of
distinction lietween those who ' are able to bear '
the fulness of the faith delivered to her keeping,
and those whose receptive faculties she considers
are not fitted to receive such revelation ? How far
is she to practise the doctrine of economy or
reserve in disclosing to men ' the faith which was
once for all delivered to the saints ' ? ( Jude ^). That
grave dangers await a policy which seems to put
such judicial authority into the hands of men, is
not to be denied ; nor can we shut our eyes to the
tendency which such a cour.se fosters, to hold up
ditterent standards of belief and practice before
different minds. At the same time, we cannot shut
our eyes to the sad phenomenon of a rent and dis-
tracted Christendom, which necessarily implies
inability somewhere to gra.sp the fundamental
verity of Christian life (cf. Jn 13^^). Imperfect
belief and faith are the causes to which must be
attributed the vital as well as the minor difierences
separating those Avho ought to belong to the same
household. The bearing with each other, the
sympathetic endeavour on each side to understand
the other's point of view, seem to be the only
worthy methods of continuing the work of love
begun by Jesus. It seems, indeed, to be the
metliod wliicli, springing from the love for men
whicli He inculcated. He bequeathed to His teach-
ing Body. We are, however, bound to admit that
those occupying the position of Doctorcs erclesice
have not always marched in the van of human
progress, and that often they have adopted the
role of obscurantists where the discoveries of

science ran counter to preconceived ideas. The
Church, at times, seemed to have been committed
almost irrevocably to a false and transient pliilo-
sophy, to a weak and untenable exegetical process,
when she was forced by the onward march of God's
self-revelation, grasped and promulgated in the
teeth of opposition and obloquy by the brightest
intellects amongst her children, to review lier
position, to reject old prejudices, and to biing her
interpretation of tlie life and teaching of Jesus
into line with the newer discoveries which are so
constantly revealing to men's minds wider and
profounder ideas of the condescending love of God.
The chief object for which the Church exists is,
while 'reproving, rebuking, exhorting' (cf. 2 Ti
4"), to interpret the Incarnation as it bears on
man's life, and on the destiny of the world and the
race, in the light of an ever-increasing knowledge.
Her business is not so much to keep back the pro-
founder mysteries of a gradually accumulating
revelation from the minds of 'the weak' (1 Co S'^),
as to build up and strengthen the entire man,
intellectual and spiritual, so that all may learn
that there is no department of human life which
has not its own intimate relationsliip to the Incar-
nate Son of God.

LiTKRATi'RE. — The following works, most of which are either
quoted or referred to in the course of this article, are specially
recommended as throwing light on a diHicult prolilem : —
Schiirer, HJP, which is a veritable mine from which we may
excavate an immense amount of information about contem-
porary beliefs, customs, modes of thought and of teaching ;
J. B. Mozley, Rulinri Ideas in Early Ages ; IMersheim, The
Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah ; B. Weiss, Leben Jesu,
Eng. tr., and Bibl. Theol. NT, Eng. tr. (T. & T. Clark); H. J.
Holtziuann, Neutest. Theol. ; O. Holtzniann, Leben Jesu, Eng. tr.
(A. & C. Black) ; Farrar, l^he Life of Christ ; Gore, The Inearna-
tion {BL, 1831), and Dissertations on Subjects connected with the
Incarnation; Plummer, St. Luke (Internat. Crit. Com.);
Gould, St. Mark (Internat. Crit. Com.); Salmond, Christian
Doctrine of Immortality* ; Jiilicher, Die Glcichnisreden Jesu,
and §§ 28-29 of his Einlcitimg in das NT, which are incidentally
rather than directly useful ; Trench, Notes on the Parables, and
Notjs on the Miracles ; V. Rose, Stiuiies on the Gospels ; Loisy,
L'Ecanfjile et I'Eglise^, and Autour d'lin petit livre, especially
two letters therein, entitled ' Sur la critique des Evangiles et
sp6cialement sur I'Evangile de Saint Jean,' and ' Sur la divinite
de Jesus-Christ ' ; T. H. Wright, The Finger of God ; Wendt,
Lehre Jesu, Eng. tr. (T. & T. Clark) ; Stevens, the Theology of
the NT ; Bruce, The Humiliation of Christ ; Sanday, Inspira-
tion(BIj, 1803), and The Oracles of God ; A. Robertson, Uegnuni
Dei {BL, 1901) ; J. Lightfoot, Uorce Hebraicce et Talmudicre
(ed. Gandell, Oxford 1859); several articles in Hastings' DB,
especially Sanday's ' Jesus Christ ' ; Driver's ' Son of Man,' which
ought to be studied in conjunction with two papers on 'The
use and meaning of the phrase The Son of Man in the Gospels,'
bj' J. Drummond in the Joum. of Theol. Studies (Apr. and
July 1901) ; Fairweather, ' Development of Doctrine ' in Extra
Vol. of DB ; R. L. Ottley, ' Incarnation ' in vol. ii. ; A. B.
Davidson, 'Angel' in vol. i. ; and Whitehouse, 'Demon, Devil'
in vol. i., and 'Satan' in vol. iv.

The reader is also recommended to refer to such articles in
the Encye. Bibl. as 'Demons,' §§ 6-10, and 'Satan,' §§ 5-8, by
J. Massie, and Jiilicher's art. ' Parables.' See al.so Charles, The
Book of Enoch and The Apocalypse of Baruch, which are useful
for a comparative study of some of the subjects treated in this
article, and in conjunction with these read his two articles on
' Eschatology ' in Hastings' DB and in the Encyc. Biblica.

J K. Willis.
ACCUSATIONS.— See Trial (of Jesus).

ACHIM ('Axe:». — An ancestor of Joseph, accord-
ing to the genealogy of our Lord in St. Matthew's
Gospel (P-*). The name may be a shortened form
of Jchoiachini, or it may be for Aldam (cf. 1 Ch
1135) or Jachin (cf. Gn 46'").

ACTIVITY.— 1. The period of our Lord's activity
is, in other words, that of His ministry, in the ful-
filment of which His activity was exhibited. Its
duration is a matter of dispute, relevant only so
far as it compresses into one year the recorded
details, or extends them to the traditional three.
In any case the records are in no sense exhaustive.
Manitokl ministries are expressed in few words
(Mt 423-24 1530^ L]^ 443 §1^ Jn 41 ^tc); a comidete

account is beyond an Evangelist's scope (Jn 20^"- ^^),

ACTIVITY

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

and would be voluminous (2P'). This is said of
tilings done 'in the presence of the disciples' (Jn
2lP), and we cannot sTip[>ose they saw or knew all
that Jesus did. See art. MINISTRY.

In fact, we possess no more than specimens of
Clirist's laVjours ; but these, no doubt, are so
selected as ro give us a general idea of the whole.
In this conne.\ion the first Sabbath at Capernaum
(of which a detailed account is given in Mk 1-^'^',
Lk 4^^-^^) has well been pointed to as a specimen
day. Some details of the Son of Man's toilsome
life— wearying journeys (Jn 4^), rising 'a great
while before day' (Mk 1^) — may be in themselves
not much more than features of Oriental life :
others — 'nowhere to lay his head' (Mt 8-") —
cannot be so explained. Day to Him meant work.
The Father's work was both a daily necessity (Jn
9*) and His very 'meat' (4-'^). Its substance was
twofold : (1) the general work of evangelizing and
healing ; (2) the special work of training others,
the Twelve (Mk 3" 6^ etc.) and the Seventy (Lk
10'), and superintending their ettbrts. Similarly
we may regard as twofold the conditions under
wliich it was carried on : (1) the normal conditions,
ever varying, of the day (Sabbath or week-day),
tlie place (synagogue, Temple or open-air) and
the hearers (multitudes or individuals) ; (2) the
abnormal conditions, created by the presence of
opponents (Mt 12'"-"- -■*-^2 etc.), or of crowds who
clung to Him sometimes for days together (Mt 15^-,
Mk 8-). Under such pressure there was often no
leisure to eat (Mk 3-" 6*'). Night did not mean
sleep, but was given largely to praj'er (Mt 14-^,
Lk 6'- 9-** 22^"-^'), till His e.xliausted nature, findino-
opportunity for repose, coukl sleep undisturbed
even by a storm (Mk 4^^^, Lk 8'-^). More than once
His disciples (accustomed by their trade to night-
watciies, Lk 5^) proved unequal to the strain of
wakefulness (Lk 9^^ Mk W^-*^ His friends,
fearing a mental breakdown, came to restrain
Him by force (Mk 3-'). It would be hazardous to
estimate degrees of spiritual activity by the pre-
carious test of numerical results (Jn 12'''*^), but it
is noticeable that at one time He made more dis-
ciples tlian John the Baptist (Jn 4').

Certain limitations of Christ's activity are clear
and significant. ( 1 ) In scope it was confined to ' tlie
house of Israel,' more especially its 'lost sheep'
(Jn 1=', Mt \5r*). A few outsiders (Gentiles and
proselytes) came within its range ; but these were
exceptional (Mt S^"'* 15", Lk 17'", Jn 4'-' 12-"--').
(2) In development it was regulated by the unfold-
ing of a Divine plan, frequently referred to by such
expressions as 'my liour' (Jn 2-* 7=*" 8-" 13' etc.),
' my time ' (Mt 26'«, Jn 7"). (3) In operation it was
morally conditioned by the exi-tence (or otiierwise)
of a certain measure of receptiveness (Mk 6').

Ill reference to tiie source of His activity, it must
be noted: (1) that it was always and essentially
associated with times of retirement and prayer
(Mk 1^5 3'3 6^«92 etc.); (2) that its manifestation
is directly ascribed to tlie power of the Spirit (Mt
1'2-'*, Lk 4'-* etc.); and (3) that, in its miraculous
exercise, there is indicated (at least once) a percep-
tion that ' power had gone out ' (Mk 5=*", Lk S-*").

2. In tlie Christian course, energy is constantly
commanded (Mt 11'-, Mk 13"^ Lk 132^). Yet it is
worthy of remark that in Christ's estimate of
liunian character the active qualities seem some-
times to be depreciated in comparison with
the passive, contemitlative, and devotional. The
latter attain to 'the good part' (Lk lO^^-""), and
find their place in the Beatitudes (Mt 5^''^). See,
further, Character (Christian).

3. Finally, the believer's view of Christ is not,
in the Gospels, ])rimarily directed to His active
labours. Such things are the record of an Apostle
(2 Cor 6^- '^ etc.) rather than a Saviour: accord-

ingly, if with the account of our Lord's active
labours we measure that of His Passion, both as
to general proportion and minutia; of detail, there
can be no doubt that in the Gospel picture the
Passion, and not the activity, occupies the fore-
ground. F. S. Eanken.

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.— The aim of this
article is to answer the question, What does the
Acts of the Apostles say of Christ ? ; otherwise ex-
pressed. How is the Book of Acts related to ' the
gospel ? ' or, AVhat is ' the gospel ' of the Acts ? We
do not know the name of the author of the book —
for St. Luke or some other disciple of St. Paul
did not compose it, but merely supplied valuable
materials for its composition — but his religious in-
dividualitj^ may be ascertained from his work with
sufficient clearness to enable us to answer the ques-
tions just stated. The problem is all the more
interesting because the author can hardly have
written before the end of the 1st cent., and thus
cannot reckon himself among the first eye-witnesses
and ministers of the word (Lk 1-). What then is
the picture of Christ that stamps itself on the
heart of a man of the second generation ? Has
this man anything new, anything unique, to tell
us of Him?

Before we go on to answer this question, we
must make it clear to ourselves that our author,
in what he writes, does not always speak in his
oicn j^erson. From the Gospel of St. Luke we
know to what an extent he is dependent on sources.
This may be observed and proved in jiarticular
instances by a close comparison with St. Mark and
(in tlie case of the discourses) Avith St. Matthew.
In the Gospel he is almost entirely a mere retailer
of older tradition, and the lineaments of his own
personality scarcely come into view. There can
be no doubt that likewise in the Acts he largely
reproduces early tradition, that he makes use of
sources, sometimes copying them in full, at other
times abbreviating or expanding them, grouping
them and editing lx)th their language and their
contents. Modern criticism, however, has reached
the conviction that in this second work more of the
author's idiosyncrasy is to be detected than in his
Gospel. Hence it will be necessary to make the
attempt to distinguish the notions which reveal to
us the educated writer of the last decade of the
1st cent, from those passages in Avhicli the role is
pla,yed by early popular tradition.

The author's personality undoubtedly shows
itself more strongly in the second than in the first
part of the book, but most clearly in the Avay in
which the work is arranged in these two parts, so
that the first is dominated by the person of Peter
and the second by that of Paul. To him the Church
rests upon the foundation of the Apostles and
prophets (cf. Eph 2'-" 3^)— not upon one Apostle, as
in Mt 16"^, but upon the two great leaders, the head
of the primitive Church who by a Divine dispensa-
tion was led to engage in a mission to the Gentiles,
and the great Apostle of the heathen world who by
Divine guidance had to turn his back on his own
people and betake himself to the Gentiles. ' Peter
and Paul ' is the watchword, the shibboleth of the
Roman Church, as we find again in the First
Epistle of Clement.

It is especially in the speeches contained in the
second part of the book that the author reveals his
conception of Christianity. When St. Paul dis-
courses (Ac 242'*) of ' the faith in Christ Jesus,' the
subjects of his address are given in v."^ as 'right-
eousness, temperance, and judgment to come.'
This future and not distant judgment is also the
point that forms the climax of St. Paul's address
at Athens (17^') : ' He hath appointed a day in the
which he will judge the world in righteousness,'

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

and immediately thereafter, ' by a man whom he
hath (thereto) ordained, having given him his
credentials before all men by having raised him
from the dead.' Tliis last is the essentially new
point in contradistinction from the Jewish preacli-
ing in the Diaspora. That there is to be a judg-
ment of the world had, indeed, been already
declared, but that the Judge 'appointed by God
over living and dead' (10^-) is already present in
heaven (3-'), has already been manifested on earth
(P 10^"*), and accredited by God tlirougli an un-
precedented miracle — this is the cardinal and sig-
nificant message of the Apostles. Now, it is
noteworthy how the author of the Acts gives
point and practical application to this generally
accepted idea. The resun'ection of Jesus is the
main content of the Apostolic preaching, so much
so that in 1— the Apostles are roundly designated
' witnesses of tlie resurrection.' In the eyes of our
author it comes to this, that in the gospel of the
resuri'ection of Jesus is implied the doctrine of the
resurrection of the dead in general. What St.
Paul (1 Co 15'^"^^) seeks to prove to his readers, is
to our author self-evident : the one special case
implies the general. This is plainly declared in
Ac 4^ ' they proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection
from the dead.' So also in 17^* 'he preached
Je.sus and the resurrection,'' and in v.^- ' the resur-
rection of the dead' is the point in St. Paul's
address on which the Athenians fix. Before the
Sanhedrin St. Paul declares : ' Touching the hope
and resurrection of the dead I am called in ques-
tion ' (23*') ; to Felix he says : ' I have the hope
that there shall be a resurrection both of the just
and of the unjust' (24'^). The latter passage is
specially important because in it the relation of
Christianity to Judaism is defined to tlie ettect
that there is really no essential difference between
them. St. Paul, like his accusers, serves, although
after the new ' Way,' the God of the fathers (v^'^) ;
'for the hope of Israel' he bears his chain (28-").
All Jews who believe in the resurrection ought
really to be Christians. 'Why is it judged in-
credible with you if God doth raise the dead ? '
(26^). Hence also the Pharisees, who believe in
the resurrection of the dead, appear as the party
favourable to Christianity ; whereas tlie Sadducees,
who say that 'there is no resurrection,' are its
enemies (23*). Resurrection, then, is the main
theme of the new message, hence the preaching of
the Apostles bears the designation ' words of this
Life ' (5-»). The Ptisen One is ' the Prince of Life '
(3'^). By His resurrection and exaltation He is
proved to be the Saviour {aurrip, the term best
answering our author's purpose, and most intel-
ligible to the Greeks of the time, 5^of- 13-3) ; the
'word' is the 'word of salvation' (13'-"); and the
whole of the Acts of the Apostles might have this
motto prefixed : ' In none other is there salvation,
and neither is there any other name under heaven,
that is given among men, wherein we must be
saved' (4^^) -phis religion is proved to be the
superior of all earlier ones, superior alike to the
darkness of heathendom (26'^) and to Judaism, in
this, that it tells of a Saviour who saves alive. The
method is described in 10^^ IS^^'- 26'^ as the forgive-
ness of sins, or, to use the designation adopted in
one of St. Paul's addresses, 'justification ' (13^^).

But who now is the Judge and Saviour accredited
by the resurrection? It is very characteristic of
our author that in those passages where for the
most part it is himself that speaks, e.g. in the
speeches put into the mouth of St. Paul before
Agrippa or Felix or Festus (chs. 22. 23), we scarcely
hear of the earthly Jesus but of the heavenly Lord.
The appearance of the Exalted One near Damascus
is the great matter whicli St. Paul has to com-
municate to his countrymen and to the Jewish

king. It is the heavenly Lord that permeates the
life of His Cliurch and His apostles, the Kvpios on
whom Christians believe. This Divine name is
very often applied in the Acts to God, but not
infrequently also to Christ. Tlius the Exalted
Christ, working miracles from heaven by His name
(9^^), accredited by the miracle of the resurrection,
and destined to come again with judgment and
salvation, occupies the central point of the faith of
our author.

But it would be a mistake to suppose that our
author had no interest in the earthly Jesus of
Nazareth. As the heavenly Christ says to Saul,
' I am Jesus of Nazareth whom thou persecutest '
(22*), so to the writer of the Acts ' the Christ' and
' Jesus ' constitute an insep.arable unity. He inter-
changes freely such expressions as ' proclaimed
unto tliem the Christ' (8^) and ' preached unto him
Jesus' (v.25) . gf 54J <^o preach Christ Jesus' (RV
'Jesus [as] the Christ'), 9-^ ' proclaimed Jesus that
lie is the Son of God,' 18-' ' testifying to the Jews
that Jesus was the Christ.' And as our author in
his Gospel narrative already calls Jesus 'Lord,' it
is always of the Exalted One that he thinks even
when communicating what he knows of the earthly
life of Jesus. INIore than once he defines the con-
tents of the Apostolic preaching as ' the things
concerning Jesus' (18-^) or ' the things concerning
the Lord Jesus Christ ' (28'''), and this concise
formula embraces far more than one might infer
from the meagre sketches of St. Paul's address in
13-^-3» or St. Peter's in lO^^-is. We must keep in
mind that the first readers of the Acts, Theophilus
in particular, when this work came into tlieir
hands, wei'e already acquainted witli the Third
Gospel, and would thus, by means of the full details
supplied in it, unconsciously clothe with meaning
the brief formula! in question. Still more varied
was the knowledge which our author possessed of
the life of Jesus, for lie was acquainted not only
with St. Mark's Gospel, but with otlier writings
which he utilized merely for extracts ; and how
manifold may have been the oral tradition current
at the same time, which he made use of in an
eclectic fashion ! The whole of this copious tradi-
tion we must think of as forming the background
of the Acts if we are to apin-eciate rightly its
picture of Christ.

A special charm of the Lukan writings arises
from the fact that the author, with all his culture
and Greek sympathies, has had the good taste to
retain in large measure the peculiar, un-Gi"eek,
popular Palestinian character of his sources,
and that both in language and contents. Some
scholars, indeed, are of opinion that he himself
deliberately produced the colouring appropriate to
place and time, as in the case of an artificial
patina. But this view is untenable. Tlie more
thoroughly the Third Gospel and the Acts are ex-
amined, the deeper becomes the conviction that the
author worked upon a very ancient tradition which
he has preserved in his own style. As in the early
narratives of his Gospel he preserves almost unim-
paired the colouring and tone of Jewisli-Christian
piety without any admixture of Grreco-Gentile-
Christian elements, so also in the Acts, especially
in the first part of the book, he has succeeded in
presenting the original picture of the religious con-
ceptions and the piety of tlie earliest Christian
community in Jerusalem. We are far from be-
lieving that everything here related is ' historical '
in the strict sense. For instance, it is in the
highest degree improbable that the actual speeches
of St. Peter have been preserved verbatim ; all we
assert is that tliese chapters are a true representa-
tion of the spirit of early Jewish Christianity.
Very specially is this the case with the Christology.
For such a doctrine of Christ as is represented by

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

ACTS OF THE AFOSTLES

the Petrine discourses was scarcely to be found in
the Church after the time of St. Paul and at the
time when the Fourth Gospel was written. After
the kcnosis doctrine of St. Paul had been pro-
pounded, and then, as its counterpart, the Johannine
picture of Clnist, in which also the earthly Jesus
Avears the 'form of God,' had taken hold of men's
minds, a Cliristology sucli as the first part of
the Acts exhibits could not have been devised.
But we are grateful to the autlior for having pre-
served to us a picture of that earliest mode of
thought. Let us examine its main features.

We may use as a collateral witness the words of
the disciples on the way to Emmaus (Lk 241^), for
it is a mere accident, so to speak, that this story
is found in the Gospel and not in the Acts : ' Jesus
of Nazareth, which Avas a prophet (dv-Jjp tt/jo^^tt/s),
mighty in deed and Avord before God and all the
people.' So also He is described by St. Peter :
' Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God unto
you by mighty Avorks and Avonders and signs,
Avhich God did by him in the midst of you' (Ac
2--). The peculiarity of tliis last statement is that
the Avonders and signs are not attributed to Jesus
Himself : God Avrought them through Him ; He
Avas sinqily God's organ or instrument. The same
thing is expressed in another passage (10^), Avhere
it is declared that in His going about and in His
deeds God Avas icith Him. In both instances the
conception comes out clearly tliat Jesus Avas a man
chosen and specially favoured of God. There is
not aAvord in all these discourses of a Divine birth,
no Avord of a coming doAvn from heaven or of a
' Son of God ' in a physical or supernatural sense.
On the contrarj', Jesus is called more tlian once
' the Servant of God ' (3'*- '" 4-'). Tins designation
suggests a prophet, and as a matter of fact Jesus is
directly characterized as a prophet Avhen in 4-^ the
Avords of l)t l8'^-i^f- are applied to Him. At the
same time He is no ordinary prophet, but the pro-
phet like unto ]\lose3 ; He is the second Moses pre-
dicted l)y Moses himself.

But it may be asked, Was Jesus then nothing
more than this to tlie earliest disciples, Avas He not
to them the Messiah ? In a certain sense — yes, and
in another sense — no. Certainly He had received
the kingly anointing (10^) ; but, as David Avas
anointed long Ijefore he received the kingdom, so
Jesus Avas from the time of His baptism a king,
indeed, lint a secret one Avitli an invisible croAvn.
The primitive Jewish-Christian Clnirch Avas far
from saying : Jesus of Nazareth, as He journeyed
through tlie land teaching and healing, was tlie
Messiah ; no, He Avas then merely the One destined
for lordship. It Avas only at a later period that
He received the croAvn, namely at His resurrection
and exaltation. Here comes into vieAV the saying
of St. Peter in Ac 2''', Avliich is a gem to the his-
torian of primitive Christianity : ' This Jesus hatli
God made bofli Lord and Christ,^ namely by exalt-
ing Him to His right hand (v.^^) and thereby ful-
filling the Avords of Ps 1 lU' ' Sit thou at my right
hand.' The exaltation of Jesus marks His ascen-
sion of the throne ; noAv He has become in reality
Avliat since His baptism He Avas in claim and
anticipation — 'the Anointed.' Noav for tlie first
time the name ' Lord' is fully appropriate to Him.
This is the principal extant proof passage for the
earliest Christology. It reveals to us the concep-
tions of the primitive Churcli, Avhich, as a matter
of fact, still underlie the teaching cacu of St. Paul.
For, in spite of his advanced speculations on the
subject ot Christ, in spite of his doctrine of pre-
existence and his cosmological Christology, the
Apostle holds fast in Ro 1^ and Ph 2" to the notion
that Jesus became ' Son of God in poAver' through
His resurrection from the dead, and Avas invested
with the title ' Lord ' at His exaltation. To the

same effect St. Paul in Ac 13^^ applies the Avords of
Ps 2'' (' Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten
thee') not to the birth nor to the baptism of
Jesus, but to the day of His resurrection and exalta-
tion. With this fundamental passage corresponds
another. When in Ac 3'^'-, speaking of the future,
it is said ' that there may come the times of refresh-
ing from the presence of the Lord, and that be may
send the Christ Avho hath been appointed for you,
even Jesus,' this assumes that Jesus has not yet
made His appearance as Messiah ; in that capacity
He belongs to the future ; there is not a Avord of
coming again or of a second sending. Such is the
earliest primitive Christian conception, and it is
this alone Avhich is in harmony with the preaching
and the self-estimate of Jesus Avlien these are
rightly understood.

But Avhat now are the contents and the signifi-
cance of the life-Avork of Jesus? Thoroughly in
harmony Avith important Avords of Jesus, Ac 10-"*
replies : ' He Avent about doing good, and healinfj all
that Avere oppressed of the devil. ' J ust as the Tlurd
Gos]iel delights to repi'esent the Avork of Jesus as a
conflict Avith the devil, the brief formula Ave have
(quoted reproduces accurately the contents of His
life Avork. Along Avith this, indeed, should be
taken also 3-*^ ' God sent him to bless you in turn-
ing aAvay every one of you from your iniquities.'
He Avas 'the Holy and Righteous One' (3"), or,
absolutely, 'the Righteous One'lT^'-). The latter
expression is chosen no doubt in order to emphasize
His innocence in His sufferings and death, but it is
certainly not contrary to the spirit of the Acts to
find in it the testimony that it Avas He that Avas
called to break the SAvay of sin in the Avorld. Less
clear is Ac 10^^, according to Avhich God caused
' peace to be preached by Jesus to the children
of Israel,' a form of expression Avhich recalls Eph
2^^, and in its abrupt conciseness no doubt reflects
the conceptions of the author more than those of
the early Church.

This brinjjs us to the question. What vicAv, judging
from the evidence of the Acts, did the early Church
take of the death of Christ? Repeatedly in the
addresses of St. Peter it is urged upon opponents
that this Jesus, the Holy and Righteous One, Avas
put to death by the Jcavs (2-» 3'^ 4io.2sff. 528ff. 752
1039 1328)^ ]yy ^j,g hands of Avicked men (2^^), although
Pilate Avas prepared to acquit Him (3'^). In all
these instances, as Avas fitting in addresses meant
to lead the hearers to conviction and repentance,
the innocence of Jesus is emphasized as a point to
aAvaken conscience, not as an element in a doctrine
of the atoning death of Christ. Such an element
is entirely lacking in these chapters, for in the
passage from Is 53 al)out the Sufi'ering Servant,
which Philip expounded to the Ethiopian eunuch,
it is precisely the exi)ressions about bearing our
sins that .are Avanting. The early theology of the
death of Christ confines itself entirely to tlie point
that this event Avas in no Avay contr.ary to (ioil's
saving purpose ; on the contrary, it had long been
foreseen (2^* 3'* 4-'* 13-''). Hence the copious Scrip-
ture proofs, Avhich, hoAvever, deal more Avith the
resurrection than Avith the sufferings and death

l^-Sft.Sii. 411. 25f. g32f. 2333ff.\

The resurrection is not in these passages, as Avith
St. Paul, regarded as a clothing of the Risen One
Avitli a glorified body, but as the revivification, or,
to put it better, the conservation of the very same
body of flesh Avhich Avas laid in the grave. The
princi|)le that governs the conception is found in
Ps W^ (quoted in Ac 2^^), ' Thou Avilt not leave my
soul to Sheol, neither Avilt thou sutler thine holy
one to see corruption.' For, if Christ did descend
to Hades, He Avas not given over to its poAver (2^').
(iod 'having loosed "the pangs of death," because
it Avas not possible that he should be liolden of it '

ADAM

(v.*^), 'nor did his flesh see corruption ' (v.^'). This
is the essential point, that the same body which
was laid in the grave was that which rose again.
For tliis reason, as in St. Luke's Gospel (24-*'''^^),
such emphasis is laid upon the eating ami drinking
of the Risen One (Ac 10^'); hence also the forty
days' intercourse with the disciples (F). Jesus, in
sliort, actually returned again to earth in complete
corporeality ; hence the necessity, at tlie end of the
forty daj's, of yet another special miracle, that of
the Ascension (P). Like Moses or Elijah, He is
carried up by a cloud, as He still Avalks on earth and
still belongs to earth. This trailition says nothing
about the necessary change whereby this fleshly
body that rose from the grave was transformed
into the glorilietl heavenly body that appe<ared to
Saul of Tarsus in kingly sjjlendour. We have here
before us the popular view of the Resurrection in
its crudest form. That an author Avhose ideas
otherwise are cast in such a Greek mould should
reproduce it, shows that the popular conceptions
cannot have been so strange to him as we should
have supposed. Conceptions which our intelligence
thinks it necess<ary to separate, and which a St.
Paul did separate, appear to have found a j^lace in
the same mind side by side.

We owe a special del)t of gratitude to the author
of the Acts for having drawn for us several pictures
illustrating tiie prominent part ])layed in the early
Church by the Spirit and the Name of the exalted
Ciirist. The Spirit sent by the latter is the proof
of His exaltation and Messiahship (2^^"^"). This is
the culminating point of St. Peter's Pentecostal
address (2'*"^''), whose order of thought forms a
very interesting study for the historian of primitive
Christianity. This proof is addressed primarily
to the house of Israel (2^"). The Jews have not,
indeed, seen the Risen One (10^^), but for that very
reason His exaltation is designed as a final means
of leading Isi'ael to repentance (5^'), for the coming
of the era of .salvation is bound up with this re-
])entance (S'"^-)- Through this Spirit the exalted
Lord is ever present with His own ; He imparts
) lower and success to the words of the Apostles (2^^
5''^ G') ; and miracles are wrought by the power of
God (6^). It is noteworthy, however, that it is only
rarely that the Spirit of God is introduced in this
connexion ; far more frequently it is the Name of
Christ that, like a present representative of the
Lord, works miracles (.Si" 4**). Specially instructive
are 9^^ where the pronotincing of the Name eflects
healing, and 19'^ where the use of the Name is
resorted to even by unbelievers.

Literature. — Johannes Weiss, Absicht u. lite.rar. Charakter
der Apijstclgeschichte ; VVeizsiicker, Apontolic Age ; Pfleiderer,
Crchrhtcntuiii ; McGiffert, Hist, of C/irintianiti/ in the Apu.stol.
A(/e ; Hort, Judaistic Christianity ; Chase, Credibiliti/ of Acts ;
ExjMSitor, IV. iv. [1891] 178 «f. J. WeISS.

ADAM. — 1. In Lk 3^^ the ancestry of Jesus is
traced up to Adam. Prom what source the
Evangelist drew his genealogy it is impossible to
say. But when compared with that in the First
Gospel, it clearly shows the purpose with which
St. Luke wrote. As a Gentile, writing for a
Gentile, he took every opportunity of insisting
upon the universal power of the gos]iel. The
effects of the life and Person of Jesus are not
confined to the Jews ; for Jesus is not, as in St.
Matthew's Gospel, a descendant of Abraham only,
but of tlie man to whom .all mankind trace their
origin. See art. GKNKAr.oGY OF Jesus Christ.
But further, St. Luke closes liis genealogy with
the signihcant words ' the son of Adam, the son of
God' (tov 'kodij., ToO Qeov). Adam, and therefore
all mankind, had a Divine origin. The same
Evangelist who relates the fact of the virgin birth,
and records that Christ was, in His own proper

Person, vlbs Qeov (1*'), claims that the first man,
and hence every human being, is vlbs Qeou. Tims
the genealogj', which might at first sight apjiear
to be a useless addition to the Gospel narrative,
possesses a lasting spiritual value.

The truth placed by St. Luke in the forefront of his Gospel is
treated in its redemptive aspect by his master St. Paul, who in
four passages brings Adam and Christ into juxtajiositioii :

(a) 1 Co 1522. The solidarity of mankind in their physical
union with Adam involves universal death as a consequence of
Adam's sin. Similarly the solidarity of mankind in their
spiritual union with Christ involves universal life as a conse-
quence of Christ's perfect work.

(b) In Ro 512-21 this solidarity and its results are treated in
fuller detail, (i.) Vv.'-i-*. There is nparallelismhetu-cen Adam
and Christ. Adam 'is a type of him who was to come' (v.i-*),
in the sense that his act affected all men. Adam committed a
Tccpx^rauci, a lapse, a false step — connnonly termed tlie Fall.
By this lapse, sin was as ' a malij^nant force let loose anion^- man-
kind' ; and through sin came physical death. (St. Paul sees no
occasion for proof of the connexion between sin and physical
death ; he unhesitatingly bases his position on the narrati\e in
Genesis ; see 217 3^- i^- 21). Were this all, the passage w ould
implicitly annul human responsibility. But St. Paul, without
attempting fully to reconcile them, places side by side the two
aspects of the truth — the hereditary transmission of guilt, and
moral responsibility : 'and thus death made its way (5/v;X0£») to
every individual man, becmtse all sinned (ij' £ Tavrs? riu,x/>rov)'.
Controversy has raged hotly round this phrase, Augustine and
many other writers having understood the relative a as mascu-
line, and as referring tp^dam ; so Vuig. in quo. But there can
be no doubt that es' Z must be taken in its usual meaning
' because.' Adam's fall involved all men in sin, and therefore
in death ; but this was because all men (in full exercise of their
free will) sinned. It would be out of place here to discuss the
attempts that have been made to combine these two factors in
the moral history of man (see Literature) : strictly speaking,
they cannot fully and logically be combined ; but many of the
most fundamental truths of the Christian religion can be
arrived at only by the balancing of complementary statements.
In vv.13- 1-4 a qualification is entered, which causes St. Paul to
ruin his construction, and omit the apodosis of which v. 12 forms
the protasis. He feels obliged to explain that, sin being an
offence against law, those who lived between Adam and Mosea
had no law, and thus did not transgress an explicit command as
Adam had done. But the fact that death reigned throughout
that period only shows that — not the guilt of individuals, but —
the transmitted effects of Adam's sin were at work. And it is
this that makes him a type of the Messiah, (ii.) Vv.i5 iv. The
contrast is far greater than the similarity. The contrast
between Adam and Christ is great ; — In quality (v. 15). The
one representative man, Adam, committed a TapaTTuux. ; but
over-against that must be placed the unde.served kindness
(X^-P'') of God, and the gift of righteousness arising from the
kindness of the other representative Man, Jesus Christ. In
quantity (v. 16). ' One act tainting the whole race with sin, and
a multitude of sins collected together in one only to be for-
given.' In character and consequences (v.i"). Adam's fall
ushered in a reif^n of death ; Christ's work ensures that all who
have received His kindness and His gift of righteousness shall
themselves reign in life, (iii.) Vv.i*< 21. Summary of the argu-
ment, in which it is further shown that Law 'came in as an
afterthought' (rrccpeio-y.xBsi), multiplying sin, but thereby only in-
creasing the abundance of God's kindness.

(c) 1 C;o 15'*-4-*7. The two foregoing passages from St. Paul's
writings deal with the practical moral results of union with
Adam and Christ respectively. These verses (i.) go back behind
that, and show that there is a complete and radical difference
between the nature of each; (ii.) look forward, and show that
this dilference has a vital bearing on the truth of man's resur-
rection.

(i.) St. Paul niaintains(vv.36.4Ja)^byaseries of illustrations from
the natural world, the reasonableness of a resurrection from
death. In Nature ' every seed has its own jiarticular body ' —
'all Hesli is not the same flesh' — the terrestrial differs from the
celestial — there is a different glory of the sun, the moon, and
the .stars. So also it may be rightly held that it is possible
for mail to exist in two different states, one far higher than the
other. Not only so, but (vv.^*''. •45) there actually exists such
an analogous distinction between man and man, as Scripture
shows. The thought in v. -15 is arrived at by an adaptation of
Gn 2'' : © zkJ ly-viTo i ccvOpcarro; iU -^vxy," Zimo-ocv. These words
relate only that after being lifeless clay, man was by God's
breath transformed into a living being. But St. Paul reads into
the statement the doctrinal significance that the body of the
first representative man became the vehicle of a ' psychical '
nature, while the body of the Second is the organ of a ' pneu-
matical ' nature. St. Paul's trichotomy of man may be repre-
sented thus :

nN6Y/V\A

y,Yy„_/NOYC

|=C&pl

Everything in man that is not ^veu/u-K may be called ' psychical '
in so far as it is considered as ' intellect,' and ' carnal ' in so far
as it is thought of as the seat of the animal passions ; botli the
adjectives •^ux.mo; and (rxpxixos thus mean ' non-spiritual.' The

ADAM

ADULTERY

second half of St. Paul's statement — ' the last Adam became a
life-g-ivinj; spirit' — finds no exact parallel in the UT, but seems
to be based on a reminiscence of Messianic passages which speak
of the work of the Divine Spirit, e.Q. Is 111- 2, Ji 223-3-2.

(ii.) But as the ■^uz'i i^ica- came first and the tvs;^** tuiToiauv
last, so it is with the development of mankind ; the spiritual
must follow the psychical (v.^ti). As the first man was formed
from the clay, and had a nature in conformity with his origin,
while the second Man has His origin ' from heaven ' (v.-i"), so
among mankind there are those whose nature remains low and
mean, tied to the clods of earth, and there are those whose
nature has become heavenly (v.**). But this implies more (v.-ii').
In his present state man is an exact counterpart, he visibly
reproduces the lineaments and character, of the first man,
because of his corporate union with him {hopia-au,=v t,,v I'lxova.
rou xo"»>'^)- Cut ti)e time is coming when we shall become the
exact counterpart or image of the second Man (cf. Gn 226f.)^
because of our spiritual union with Him (iopitrofjuv y.«.'i tv,m ilxi\,a
roi i!rovp*viov). The above follows the text of B a c g 17 aeth.

arm. [syr. ■» *~^ \ ^ is indeterminate] ; and Theodoret dis-
tinctly Saj'S TO yix-f) <^opiirt>u.lv ^poppr,riziii ei rrapxiHTix-iJ; i'lpr.xiv.
The mass of authorities read (^opis-a,u;ii, ' from a desire to turn
what is really a physical assertion into an ethical exhortation '
(Alf.) ; so Chrys., tout' iirriv, apio-TM ^px^u/mv . . . (r'ju,icii\i'j7iXM;
('urccyu rou Xiyoi. But it is difficult to conceive how St. Paul,
who has from v. 35 been leading up to the thought of the resur-
rection, could at the critical moment throw his argument to the
winds, and content himself with saying, ' according as we have
been earthly in our thoughts, let us strive to be heavenly.'

It has been suggested that St. Paul adopted the designation
of Christ as 'the last Adam' and 'the second Adam' from
Rabbinic theology. But such a comparison between Adam
and the Messiah was unknown to the earlier Jewish teachers.
Passages adduced to support it belong to the Middle Ages, and
are influenced by the ^abbala. See G. F. Moore, J BL xvi.
(1S97), 158-161; balman, The Words 0/ Jesus, Eng. tr. 248 f.,
251 f.

(d) Ph 26. St. Paul speaks of ' Christ Jesus, who being [in His
eternal and inherent nature, irrapxtkn] in the form of God,
deemed it not a thing to be snatched at (aprxyuot) to be on an
equality with God.' There is here an implied contrast with
Adam, who took fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and
evil, which God said had made him ' as one of us ' (Gn o22).

2. In Mt 19^-6 II jMk lO^'^ reference is made by
Jesus to the account of Adam and Eve in Gn 1"
' male and female created he them ' {&pa-eu Kai drjXv
iiroly}<nv ai'Toi's). Pharisees came and asked Him
whether divorce was allowable [' for any cause,'
Mt.]. Our Lord's answer is intended to show
that the provision made for divorce in the Mosaic
law (Dt 24^) Avas only a concession to the hardness
of men's hearts. The truer and deeper view of
marriage which Christians should adopt must be
based on a nobler morality, — on a morality which
takes its stand on the primeval nature of man and
woman as God made them. ' To suit (irpos) your
hardness of heart he wrote for you this command-
ment. But from the beginninjj^ of the creation
"he made them male and female."' And with
tliis quotation is coupled one from Gn 2--' (see also
Eph 5^'), ' For this cause shall a man leave his
fntlier and mother [and shall cleave to his wife
(Mt.)], and they twain shall become one flesh.' The
same result is reached in Mt., but with a trans-
position of the two parts of the aroument. See
AVritiht's Synopsis, in lor. Thus Jesus bases the
absolute indissolubility of the marria<j;e tie on the
union of man and woman from the lirst. In Mt
U)'-' ii-'- this pronouncement is jjracticallj' annulled
by the admission of the words ' except for fornica-
tion (/UTj eirl iropveiq., and wapeKTos \6yov Tropveias).
See Wright, in loc, who contends that 'the
Church (of Alexandria?) introduced these two
clauses into the Gospel in accordance with the
permission to legislate which our Lord gave to all
Churches (Mt 18i«).' See art. Marriage.

3. In Jn 8^^ dvOpwiroKTovos may refer to the intro-
duction of death into the world by the fall of
Adam. But see art. Abel.

4. The parallel drawn by St. Paul between Adam and Christ
may have been the origin of the tradition that Adam was
buried under Golgotha. Jer. (Com. in Mat. § iv. 27) rejects it,
saying that it arose from the discovery of an ancient human
skull at that spot. He also declines to see any reference to it
in Eph SI*. But in Ep. 46 he says, ' The place where our Lord
was crucified is called Calvary, because the skull of the primitive
man was buried there. So it came to pass that the second
Adam, that is the blood of Christ (a play on ClK and CI."!), as it

dropped from the Cross, washed away the sins of the buried
protoplast,* the first Adam, and thus the words of the apostle
were fulfilled,'— quoting Eph 5^\ Epiphanius (contra Ilcei:
xlvi. 5) goes farther, stating that Christ's blood dropped upon
Adam's skull, and restored him to life. The tradition is men-
tioned also by Basil, Ambrose, and others.

LiTER-tTURE.— Besides the works cited in the article, the fol-
lowing may be consulted on the relation between Adam and
Christ : Sanday-Headlara, Com. on Epistle to Roinans (pp. 130-
153): Bethune-Ba.\i.er, An Introduction to the Earlij History of
Christian Doctrine, ch. xvii. ; Tennant, The Soin-ces of' the
Doctrine of the Fall and Original iin ; Sadler, The Second
Adam and the A'ew Birth ; Thackeray, The Relation of St.
Paul to Contemporary Jemsh Thought, ch. ii.

A. H. M'Neile.
ADDL— An ancestor of Jesus Christ, Lk 3-^*.

ADULTERY (.uo^x^a).— This word is used to de-
note the sexual intercourse of a married man or
woman with any other than the person to whom
he or she is bound by the marriage tie. It has
sometimes been maintained that ixoLx^la is confined
in its use to the misdemeanours, in this respect, of
the woman. That it has, however, a wider sense
is evidenced by the reference which Jesus jnakes to
the inward lust of any man after any woman (on
was 6 l3\€Tro}v yvvaiKO. irpbs to inLdvfxri<raL avTTJs TJdr]
e/xoixevaef avr-qv, k.t.\., INIt 5'-*). The word iropvela is
also employed to describe this sin, though it has
been contended that it refers solely to pre-nuptial
immoralitj' ; and again we have a reference made by
Jesus in His teaching to this sin, which disposes
of that contention, and which establishes the fact
that the married woman who commits herself in
this way was said to be guilty of nopveia (cf. 7ra-
peKTOi \6yov tropveias, Mt O'^-, and (d) /xt] eiri Tropveia,
Mt 19"). In liotli passages just quoted Jesus nuvkes
the woman's guilt the ground of His teaching on
divorce. With these examples we may compare
the words of Am 7'" (LXX) . . . r) ywrj <tov ev rri
iroXei iTopv€V(7€L, K.T.X., where the form of the ex[)res-
sion incidentally but conclusively carries out our
argument.

A very favourite figure of speech, by Avhich the
intimate relations of Jehovah and Israel were de-
noted by OT writers, was that of marriage (see, e.g.,
Is 545 62-5, Jer 3'^ Hos 2^- 1"- -») ; and accordingly in
the prophetic books the defection of the Jewish
people from the altars of Jehovah, and their repeated
reversions to the worship and practices of their
heathen neighbours, were stigmatized as ' adultery '
(ni'iiph or ni' up/dm, Jer 13-^, Ezk 23"'^; cf. Is 57^
Jer 3^^^-, Ezk 23-'"). This transference of an idea
from the daily social life to the life spii-itual finds
its place in the teaching of Jesus, whose example
in this respect is followed by writers of a subse-
quent period (cf. Ja 4^). The generation in which
He lived was denounced by Him, for its continued
rejection of His claims, as 'wicked and adulterous'
(7ei'ed wov-qpa Kai /xoixaXis, jNIt 12^'' 16* ; cf. also ]Mk
8^). It is, of course, possible that Jesus by these
M'ords had in view the social evils of His day, as
well as the general lack of spiritual religion.
'That nation and generation might be called
adultci-ous literally; for what else, I beseech you,
was their irreligious polygamy than continual
adultery? And what else was their ordinary prac-
tice of divorcing tlieir wives, no less irreligious,
according to every man"s foolish or naughty will /'
(Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. ct Talmud, ad M't 12^").
It is not necessary, however, in the interpretation
of His teaching in this and similar places to insist
on such a view of His Avoids. The entire body of
the recorded teaching of Jesus betrays the liiost
intimate acquaintance with the literature and
ethical tendencies of the OT.

That exceedingly la.x and immoral vieAvs of this

sin were held generally by the generation in Avhich

Jesus lived, becomes evident not only from His

casual references to the subject, but also from His

* Cf. Wis. 71.

ADULTERY

positive teaching in answer to hostile questions
addressed to Him about adultery and the kindred
subject of divorce. We are also confronted with
the same plienomenon in the writings, e.g., of
Josephus (cf. Ant. IV. viii. 23; Vita, §76), !Sir 7"''
2o2« 42«, and in the Talmud. The result of the
teaching of Hillel was of the worst description,
reducing as it did the crime of adultery to the level
of an ordinary or minor fault. This Kabbi actually
went the length, in his interpretation of the
Deuterononiic law of divorce as stated in Dt 24^,
of laying down the rule that a man might put
away his wife ' if she cook her husband's food
badly by salting or roasting it too mucli' (see
Ligiitfoot, Hor. Heb. ct Talmud, ad Mt 5^'), and
K. 'Akiba, improving on this instruction, inter-
preted the words ' if she find no favour in his eyes '
as giving permission to a man to divorce his wife
'if he .sees a woman fairer than her.'

On the other hand, 11. Shammai refused to take
a view so loose and immoral, and in his exposi-
tion of the Deuterononiic permission confined the
legality of divorce to cases of jiroved unchastity
on the part of the wife. Other celebrated Kabbins
took a similarly rigid view of this question, while
all, of every school, were agreed that the crime of
adultery demanded div(jrce as its punishment.
The form of the question addressed to Jesus by
the Pharisees {/card Trd<Tav aiTiav) in j\It IQ-* shows
the nature of the controversy between the rival
Rabbinical schools, and also lets us see how far
the pernicious teaching of tiie scliool of Hillel had
permeated the social fabric. Men's ideas about
this sin were also debased by the polygamous
habits then prevalent. Of Herod the Great we read
that he had ten wives ; which, according to Jose-
phus, was not only permissible, but had actually be-
come a common occurrence amongst the Jews, ' it
being of old jjermitted to the Jews to marry many
wives" (BJ I. xxiv. 2). In another place the .same
historian renuirks, in connexion witli tiie story of
the Herodian family, that ' it is the ancient prac-
tice among us to have many wives at the same
time' {Ant. XVII. i. 2). There seems to have been
no hard and fast rule limiting the number of wives
permissible to each man, but their teachers advised
them to restrict tliemselves to four or five (cf.
Schiirer, HJP I. i. 455, note 125).

From these observations we see what an im-
portant bearing the teaching of Je.sus had on tlie
current conceptions of sexual morality obtaining
amongst His countrymen. It is quite in harmony
with His method of instruction to reduce tiie overt
commission of a sin to the element out of which it
originates and takes its shape. ' A corrupt tree
cannot bring forth good fruit' (Mt 7^^'', cf. 12^* and
Lk 6'^'-); atid the heart corrupted by evil desire
fructifies, just as surely, by an inexorable law of
nature. There exists within tiie man whose inner
life is tlius tainted not merely latent or germinal
sin, such as may or may not yet issue in deeds of
wrong. The lustful eye gazing witii sinful longing
is the.consumniation, — tlie fruit of tlie corrujit tree,
— ^and so far as the man's will is concerned, the
sinful act is completed (Mt 5"^). The note of stern-
ness wliicli cliaracterizes tiiis teaching is not alto-
gether original, as will be seen if we refer to such
commands as are found, e.g., in Ex 20", Pr 6"*, Sir
9** etc., and to sucli interpretative sayings in the
Talmud as forbade tlie gazing upon ' a woman's
heel' or even upon her 'little finger' (cf. Lightfoot,
Hur. Heb. et Talmud, ad Mt 5-«). Tiie" ethical
foundation, liowever, upon whicli Jesus based His
doctrine strikes tlie reader as being the deepest
and tiie firmest of any tliat had as yet been re-
vealed on the subject ; and tiiis must iiave seemed
to His liearers to be not the least remarkable of
those luminous addresses by which He contra-

dicted the laboriously minute guidance of their
moral and religious guides. We are not concerned
liere to inquire wliether Jesus put no ditierence
between tiie guilt of the man who, thougii lie has
lustful desires, abstains from carrying them into
practice, and that of the man wiio comjdetes them
by the sinful act. Common sense forbids us to
suppose that Je.sus put out of sight the social
aspects of the question when He discus.sed it.
What is of importance is to note the lofty tone
assumed by Him when engaged in inculcating the
absolute necessity of sexual purity. Nor is it pos-
sible to infer tiiat Jesus confined His remarks to
the case of those who Avere married. Tlie general
terms into which He casts His instruction (was 6
(SXeTTw;/) forbids us to assume that ywaiKa and
€fjLoixev(T€v are to be limited to the post-nuptial
sin with a married woman. It gives a niucii more
fitting as well as a truer meaning to Jesus' words
if Ave think of Him as giving directions for tiie
guidance of the entire social and etiiical life to ail
members of society Avhetiier married or otiierAvise.

According to the laws of the ancients, tiiose
guilty of adultery were to be put to deatii, wiietlier
by burning (Gn 38-^) or by stoning (Jn 8-', cf. Dt
22-3ff-, Lv 20^", Ezk 18"f-)- Tiiis punisiiment was
not, however, universally prescribed ; for where
the woman was a slave, and consequently not the
owner of her own person, tiie man was exonerated
by presenting a <fuilt-otfering (Lv 19-"''^). It is
doubtful, indeed, if ever capital punishment Avas
insisted on. Lightfoot, for example, says : ' I do
not remember that I have anyAvhere in the JcAvish
pandect read any example of a Avife punished Avitli
death for adultery ' (Mora; Heb. et Talmud, ad
Mt 19^). This statement is borne out by such
incidental references as Ave have in Mt P", Aviiere
Josepii receives the praise of his contemporaries
[SiKaios ibv) for his merciful intention ; and if tiie
story of Hosea's Avife is to be talvcn literallj^, Ave
have an OT example of mercy towards the guilty
being recommended, and even of divorce not being
suggested as a punishment. Jesus Himself also
leaned to the side of mercy ; and nowiiere does the
tenderness of His solicitude for tlie guilty sinner
appear so deep as in tiie traditional, yet doubtless
genuine, narrative incorporated in tlie Fourth
Gospel (Jn 7*^-8")- Eor a discussion of the ' peri-
cope adultera^ ' see Blass, Ev. sec. Lucam, Pref. p.
xlvii, and his Philology of the Gospzls, pp. 155-1G3.

A closer examination tiian Ave iiave as yet
attempted in tliis jJace, of tiie Avords and teaching
of Jesus Ciirist Avill reveal some startling results,
and furnisii obvious reasons to explain tiie diffi-
culties Aviiicii liave been aiwaj's felt on the re-
lations of adultery, divorce, .and remarriage, by
Christian tiiinivcrs and legislators. A compara-
tive examination of the passages in the Synoptic
Avriters (Mt 5^- 19^ Mk 10'"-, Lk IG'**) discloses a
peculiar addition to the Avords and teaching in the
lirst of tiiese places. According to Mt 5^-, Jesus
as.serts tiiat tiie Avife Avho is Avrongfully divorced
is involved compnlsorily in tiie guilt of her hus-
band. He is not only an adulterer himself (Lk
16"*), but ' he causes her to be an adulteress,' or
ratiier ' he makes her to commit adultery ' (-woLtl
avTTji' fji.oixeii0rjuai). The interpretation Aviiicii Avould
explain tiiese words as if tliey meant that the
divorced Avife is placed in sucli a ]>osition tliat she
probably Aviil commit adultery liy marrying another
man, is manifestlj' unsatisfactory. Tiie statement
is unqualified even if Ave are absolutely convinced
of tiie genuineness of tiie succeeding Avoids, ' ^c^ 6j
. . . fioixdrai.' [Tiiey are omitted by D i 1, see WH,
Neiv Test, in Greek]. It is as if Jesus said : 'The
Avife Avlio is divorced is, in virtue of her false posi-
tion, an adulteress though she be innocent, and
the man Avho marries her Avhile she occupies that

ADULTERY

fosition becomes a willing partner in her guilt.'
t is not too much to say that, in this place, we
have a glimpse of the profound depth which Jesus
was accustomed to sound in His ethical teaching.
]Marriage is a Divine institution, and has its roots
in the eternal order of things (cf. Mt 19^""). It
results in a mystical union so close that the married
pair are no longer two ; they have become ' one
tlesh.' With this we may compare the teaching
whicli St. Paul embodies in a few luminous words
based on his Christ ological doctrine (Eph 5-"-'^^
especially vv.^ and ^), and of whicli he says ' this
mystery'is great.'

We have thus a clue to the meaning of the diffi-
cult expression woie? avrrjv noLxevd7]vai. Any mode
of conduct or action which tends to mar or set at
nought the mysterious relationship of marriage is
of tlie essence of adultery^. Perhaps we shall not
be considered to be importing more meaning into
words than they were originally intended to con-
vey, if we press the Markan addition iirl avrrju into
our sei'vice here. Jesus, according to St. Mark,
seems to teach His hearers that the husband in
wrongfully divorcing his wife is guilty of the
aggravated sin of dragging her into the slough
wjiere he is himself already wallowing. On him
fails the woe pronounced in another connexion by
Jesus (Mt 18^-'') ; for he com])els his wife to occupy
a position which is a living contradiction of the
Divine law. A course of action tending to the
dissolution of that which in the Divine intention
is indissoluble, Jesus places in the category of
adulterous acts. He mentions nothing as to His
view of the case of the remarriage of a woman
justifi<ably divorced, but to the present writer He
appears plainly to assert that the man who marries
an innocent divorced woman is guilty of adultery.

In our critical examination of these passag^es we are confronted
with a still greater and no less remarkable variety. St. Matthew
differs from the other two Synoptists by givin<f a place in Jesus'
teaching to an implied ground for legitimate divorce. He
alone includes the exceptive clauses -rxpixro; >.iyoi> vopviixi (5^'2)
and ij.r, in iropviia. (199). jt is this variety in the records of
Jesus' words which has introduced so much difficulty, doctrinal
and legislative, into the questions of divorce and the remarriage
of divorced persons. We are not, of course, without that form
of conjectural criticism which would delete these clauses as
mere glosses or unsuitable interpolations (see Bacon, The Ser-
mon on the Mount, ad loc). In the absence, however, of
external or textual evidence we are not entitled to invent
textual emendations in the interests of a preconceived theory
(cf. Wright, SynopsU of the Goxpe/g in Greek, p. 98 f.). It is
but fair to add that the Code.x Vaticanus (B) and some less im-
portant authorities manifest a strong desire to make Mt 199
conform literally to Mt 532, and thereby create some uncertainty
as to the textual purity of these passages. The evidential value,
however, of these variations is too slight to be of any avail
against the unanimitj' of all our other witnesses; they are
transparent and later attempts at assimilation or harmony.
The arnnmentuni e silentio is in this case too strong to admit
the validitj' of conjecture. A forcible statement of the other
side of the case may be found in the art. ' Sermon on the
Mount' (Votaw) in the Extra Vol. of Hastings' DB p. 27.

At all periods of the history of Christian teach-
ing, differences of opinion have existed within the
Church as to the practical application of Jesus'
words concerning adultery, divorce, and remar-
riage. These ditt'erences have been stereotyped in
tlie Eastern and Western branches of the Catholic
Church. The former takes the more lenient view,
and permits the remarriage of the innocent
{lirorc€(c), while the latter has always maintained
the more .stringent and (shall w'e say?) the more
strictly literal conclusion from Jesus' words, that
inequality of treatment is not to be tolerated, in-
terpreting the conclusion by refusing the right of
remarriage to either during the life of the other.

On the other hand, the general consensus of
theological oninion amongst English - speaking
divines since tlie Reformation has leaned towards
the view held by the Eastern Church, and the
resolutions of the bishops in the Pan-Anglican
Conference of 1888 on this subject were but the

formal expressions of a traditional mode of inter-
l^retation. When we turn from the words of Jesus
to see what Avere the ideas of those who taught in
His name during the ages immediately subsequent,
we have St. Paul's teaching on, and references to,
the question of divorce. In one place he treats
marriage as indissoluble, and he has no hesitation
in saying that the woman who marries another
man iluring the lifetime of her husband is guilty
of adultery (Ro 7''^). On the other hand, we must
not forget that the .\postle in this place is dealing
with the Jewish law and with Jews who did not
admit the absolute indissolubility of the marriage
tie. The fact that he has made no reference to
this Jewish law of divorce forbids us drawing any
certain conclusion as to the length St. Paul was
willing to go in stating a universal principle Avhich
would guide the legislative activity of the Chris-
tian Church. In another place he speaks of separa-
tion as the possible outcome of an unhappy or
unequal marriage, and gives permission, if not
encouragement, to that contingent result (x^pt-
^eadu}). In this he goes farther than Jesus, so far
as we have His teaching recorded for us, went.
According to Jesus, adultery is the onlj^ crime of
sufficient enormitj' to warrant divorce ; according
to St. Paul, the law of marriage does not govern
the deserted wife or husband (ou dedovXorrai 6 dSe\(l>bs
y i] d5eX077 ev toIs tolovtols, 1 Co 7''^ [cf. Newman
Smyth, Christian Ethics^, j). 412 f. and note]).

The Shepherd of Hernias [Mdnrl. iv. 1. 6) lays
down the rule that adultery demands separation
or divorce (airoKvadTw avr-qu), because by continuing
to live with his wife after she has been convicted
of guilt, the husband becomes 'an accomplice in
her adultery.' On the other hand, he is equally
insistent that the man thus wronged must not
marry another, lest he cut his guilty partner ott'
from the hope of repentance, and lest he involve
himself likewise in the sin of adultery (idv 5^
CLTToXvaas ttjv yvvatKa ^ripav ya/j.r]<Tri, /cat avrbi
fioixdrai).

Amongst the number of those who are debarred
from inheriting the kingdom of God, St. Paul men-
tions fornicators and adulterers (iropvot Kal /J.oixoi,
1 Co 6^ ; cf. Eph 5^, 1 Ti P", He 18^ Rev 21« 22'^).

The universal conclusion is that this sin creates
a breach of the maniage relation so grave and far-
reaching that it makes divorce the only legitimate
sequel — divorce a mensA et thoro. The question,
however, remains whether the Christian Church
has the right to go farther and say that, as the
result of an adulterous act, the aggrieved party
has a just claim to divorce a vineulo • has a right,
that is to say, to be placed in a position as if the
marriage had never taken place. This will, no
doubt, be answered ditt'erently by difierent minds,
and the difficulty is not decreased by merely
appealing to the authority of Jesus. Difierent
answers are given to the more fundamental ques-
tions. Did Jesus intend to occupy the position of
legislator when He spoke of adultery and divorce ?
or was He simply enunciating a general principle,
leaving future generations to deal with social con-
ditions as they arose? The present writer has no
hesitation in saying that his own opinion leans
strongly to the side of those who believe that
Jesus affirmed solemnly the indissolubility of the
marriage tie, and that He meant His followers to
understand that the remarriage of either party
during the life of the other constitutes adultery.
At the same time he is not unaware of the fact
that there is a strong body of sober modern
thought which tends towards a relaxation of this
view in favour of the innocent (see Gore, The
Sermon on the Mount, p. 73).

If Jesus in Mt 5-'""- is making a categorical
statement of universal application, then the

ADVENT

ojiinion, given by the present writer as his own,
can scarcely be disputed ; but if He is interpreted
as dealing with the foundations rather than
making structural alterations in the ethical beliefs
of His countrj^men, we must conclude that He
leaves His followers to deal with the question as it
arises. In the latter case it is, of course, com-
petent for the Church in each age to treat the
question de novo. The conditions of society alter,
and what constitutes danger to the social welfare
at one time, may have comparatively little peril
for the people of another period. At the same
time it must not be forgotten that the tendency of
human legislation has been and is likely to be, for
some time to come at least, towards the loosening
of the marriage bond, and the minimizing of the
seriousness of that guilt by which men uproot the
foundations of their social and domestic life.

Literature. — N'ewman Smyth's Christian Ethics '■> contains a
very fair and cautions discussion of this whole question, and
along with that work it will be found useful to study the more
abstract volume of Bampton Lectures on the same subject
(1835) by T. B. Strong; cf. G. B. Stevens' The Theology of the
JV7'. Gore's The Sermon on the Monnt may be read along with
Bacon's volume of the same title, and Votaw's article ' Sermon
on the Mount' in the Extra Volume of Hastings' DB. In the
latter work (vols. i. and iii.) are also to be found useful refer-
ences under artt. 'Crimes,' 'Marriage.' A very suggestive art.,
'The Teaching of Christ about Divorce,' by the Rev. the Hon.
E. Lvttelton, will be found in the Journal of Theol. Studies for
July' 1904. Cf. also H. M. Luckock's History of Marriage (1894),
and O. D. Watkins' Holy Matrimony (1895).

J. R. Willis.
ADVENT. — In its primary application the term
is used to denote the first visible coming of Jesus
into the Avorld. His coming again at an after
period is distinguished as the Second, or the Final,
Coming (see CoMiNG AGAIN and Faeou.sia).

The term is also employed to designate one of the ecclesias-
tical seasons, — that immediately preceding the Festival of the
Nativity, — during which, in certain sections of the Church, the
thoughts of believers are turned to the first appearance of their
Lord in the flesh. This season includes four Sundays, com-
mencing on the one nearest St. Andrew's Day (Nov. 30) and last-
ing till Christmas Eve. With Advent the ajipointed order of
Church services is renewed, and the ecclesiastical j'ear begins.

Dealing here specially with the primary his-
torical application, the lirst coming of Jesus jjos-
sesses a unique significance as marking the
entrance into the world of a moral force altogether
unparalleled, a momentous turning-point in the
religious progress of mankind. As the Son of God
(Mt 10^^, Jn 3^"-^"), revealing and representing (Jod
in His own person (Jn 5^" i4''- '"), whose mission it
was to redeem men fi'om sin (Mt IS", Lk 4^^ 17-'),
Jesus was to prove Himself in the truest sense the
Messiah whom the Jewish people had long been
expecting, — ' a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord '
(Lk 2").

1. The foreshadowing Promise. — The expectation
entertained by tiie Jews had its roots in a 2)romise
enshrined in their earliest literature and dating
from the dawn of history, that a signal deliverance
from sin should be brought to the human race, —
the promise contained in the sentence pronounced
on the tempter, that the seed of the woman should
bruise his head (Gn 3"). This brighter outlook
for fallen humanity was confirmed by the assur-
ance given to Abraham that in the line of his
descemlants the original promise Avas destined to
be fulHlled (Gn 12--^), — an assurance which was
further strengthened when, under Moses, Israel
was formed into a nation and entered at Sinai into
covenant with Jehovah as His chosen people (Ex
20-24). It was not, however, till David's prosperous
reign, with its recognition of ruling power held in
the name of Jehovah, had passed, and when the
idea of the theocratic kingship had been deeply
implanted in the national consciousness, that the
concejition of the blessing to be looked for took
delinite shape. Then, as successive rulers failed

and the nation's fortunes became embarrassed, the
splendours of David's time, glorihed by the halo
which memory and distance cast around them,
were projected into the future, forming a picture
full of allurement anil charm. It tired the imagi-
nation of the prophets amid the troubles of the
later monarchy.

The promise, as thus transformed, was that of a
king, or line of kings, si>rung from David's house,
Avho, endowed with transcendent gifts, and acting
by s])ecial authority as the Anointed of the Lord,
should reign in righteousness, introduce an era of
Divine salvation fur Israel, and draw all other
nations round them in loyalty to Jehovah's law
(Is 2- IP-" 27\ Mic 4'--*). This was the blossoming
out of the Messianic idea.

During the period of the Exile, with the fall of
the monarchy and the collapse of the expectations
based upon it, the figure of the victorious and
righteous king was thrown into the background ;
yet the prospect of a future glorious manifestation
of Divine mercy, rescuing the people from their
iniquities and miseries, kept its hold on suscep-
tible minds (Is 55^60''^). It was in this period that
the distinctively spiritual character of the coming
deliverance emerged into prominence. As deline-
ated in Ezekiel and the Second Isaiah, it was to
consist in an inward regeneration, wrought by
penitence and the im])artation of a new spirit and
a new heart (Is Go"- ', Ezk 11'^- -" 36-5-*'). In those
prophecies of the Exile, Jehovah Himself is set
forth as the true and ever-living King of Israel ;
and collective Israel, the nation regarded poetic-
ally as an individual, is conceived as the Anoi'ited
Servant of Jehovah, who, amid manifold afflic-
tions, is to bear witness for Jehovah, and be the
medium of accomplishing His saving jiurpose for
mankind. On the return from the E.xile the hope
of salvation through a Davidic kingship revived,
as is evident from the prophetic utterances of
Haggai (2"- -^) and Zechariah (3** G'-) ; but in Mala-
chi's day it had again disajipeared.

With the Maccaba^an struggle against Antiochus
Epiphanes(B.C. 167-135) the Messianic idea entered
on a fresh course of development. In tlie Book of
Daniel, which dates presumably from that time,
we find supei'natural elements more freely intio-
duced. The writer in vision beholds an ancient
of days, seated on his throne to judge the great
Avorld- kingdoms and their rulers. Before him
ajipears, coming with the clouds of heaven, ' one
like unto a son of man,' and to him is given ever-
lasting dominion and a kingdom which shall not
be destroyed (7'"- "). This dominion is passed over
to ' the saints of the Most High,' to be theirs for
ever and ever (7'®-^''). There is thus a picture of
the Messianic future in which the triumjjh and
rule of the godly over the nations are the dis-
tinguishing features.

We look in vain in the books of the Apocrypha for any ex-
pansion of these ideas. Their allusions to the Messianic hope
are somewhat meagre, and do not expressly refer to the appear-
ance of a personal Messiah. It is in the Apocalyptic literature,
which sprang up in imitation of the Book of Daniel, that we
find the conceptions wiiich gave peculiar shape and colour to
the Messianic expectations entertained in later times. VVe see
there, amid the stress of national misfortunes, the predictions
of the prophets interpreted and expanded in such a way as to
furnish elaborately drawn out schemes of future glory. The
coming of the God-sent king is depicted {Sib. Orac. iii. 652 ff.),
the supernatural Son of Man, who was hidden with God before
the world was created, and who, clothed with Divine attributes,
will suddenly appear along with the Head of Daj s to execute
judgment on men and angels (Simiiittides of Enoch 461- - 482- S).
The dispersed of Israel will be restored, and the Gentiles drawn
into submission (Enoch 9O'*0) ; sin and wrong will be banished
(Simil. 49'-); the faithful dead will be raised to life again, and
the righteous will dwell in everlasting joy (Enoch 511 9037).
In the Psalter of Solomon, written under the pressure of the
Roman domination (B.C. 70-40), the idea of a king of the Davidic
line is once more revived. The Messiah is regarded as ' the Son
of David,' ' the Anointed of the Lord,' free from sin and
endowed with miraculous powers, who will conquer, not by

ADVENT

force of aims, but will smite the earth by the rod of His mouth
nr-^f), and bring to an end all unrig:hteousness (17^6).

in those Apocalyptic writings peculiar prominence is given to
the spiritual content of the Messianic hope. Notwithstanding
the supernatural elements they so largely introduce, they throw
into strong relief the higher religious conceptions which the
best of the prophets had insisted on as essentially bound up
with the great period of blessing expected ; while the scope of
the ancient promise is widened out beyond national and tem-
poral limitations to embrace the world and the life to come.

Mean^vhile the scribes were at work, hardening
the Messianic idea into schohistic form, and re-
ducing the poetic language and bold imagery of
the prophets to dogmatic statements and literal
details, with the result, on the whole, of a restora-
tion of tlie tlieocratic idea that God was to vindi-
cate His authority as the true Sos^ereign of the
nation, and to send His vicegerent in the line of
David to establish His law and introduce the rule
of righteousness under His anointed King.

Such was the form which the long-cherished hope
had assumed Avhen Jesus appeared. It was largely
mixed up with expectations of political deliver-
ance, yet the thoughts of many earnest spirits
were centred mainly on the prospect of a spiritual
emancipation for Israel. He came to meet the
great liope by fulfilling in their ideal and spiritual
significance the prophecies that had kindled and
kept it alive. Leaving aside the merely earthly,
time-coloured features that bulked so largely in
the popular imagination, He entered the world to
otter Himself as the true representative of God,
in and through whom all that was eternal and
most precious in the Messianic idea was destined
to be realized. See art. Messiah.

2. The state of Eeligion at the date of ChrUfs
Advent. — In many respects the way had been pre-
pared for the appearance of Jesus and the spread
of His inflilence as Messiah and Saviour. There
were national, political, social, and other con-
ditions existing in the world at the time, which
rendered His coming and work singularly oppor-
tune (see Fulness of Time) ; but here we are
specially concerned with the prevailing aspects of
religious life in the immediate scene in which He
appeared. Undoubtedly, among the Jewish j)eople
at that period religion was a dominating interest,
and was based on principles far higher than any
that obtained in other nations. Yet its quality
was vitiated by certain serious defects. There
was —

(1) Its partisanship. Scribes and Pharisees on
the one hand, and Sadducees on the other, stood
in mutual antagonism, striving for ascendency as
leaders of national religious feeling, — the scribes
and Pharisees combining to enforce the mass of
stringent precepts which tiie former had elaborated
to supplement the original written word ; tiie Sad-
ducees entirely rejecting those precepts, and con-
tending that tiie Law as written was sutticient,
and that the observance of the temple ordinances,
its worship and sacrifices, was the central element
m religion. The controversies that arose over those
points of difference, and over tiie doctrine of the
resurrection, created a fierce party spirit, bitter
and liigoted on the one side, haughty and con-
temptuous on the other, while the smaller sect of
the Essenes, with their extremist views and rigid
austerity, maintained an inflexible protest against
both these classes of religionists.

(2) Tiien there was its legalism. Ey their in-
sistence on conformity to the regulations they had
added to the Law as a condition of Divine favour,
the scribes and Pharisees, who were the most
numerous and aggressive party, converted religion
itself into a matter of slavish obedience, in Avhich
the instigating motives were the hope of reward
and the fear of punishment. The calculating temper
thus engendered rendered the religious life a task-
work of anxious scrupulosity and constraint, want-

VOL. I. — T,

ing in spontaneous action from the higher impulses
of the soul ; while in the case of those less sincere
it introduced an element of prudential self-regard
concerned only with the prospect of future benefit
and safety.

(3) Closely allied to this was the extcrnalization
of piety. The Rabbinical regulations were held to
be so binding, and tlieir multi})licity was so great,
that the ettbrt to observe them inevitably involved
a machine-like routine and formality. The Jew
in his fulfilment of the Law found himself at every
turn brought under the pressure of hard and fast
exacting rules, — in his food, his clothes, his daily
occupations, his devotions, and the smallest acts of
his life. The endeavour to yield obedience untler
such circumstances necessai'ily led to a laborious
outward punctiliousness ; a tendency to ostenta-
tion and spiritual pride was fostered ; and many
were ensnared into hypocrisy by finding they could
obtain a reputation for excejitional piety by an
obtrusive parade of their ceremonial performances.
The most precise minuteness was observed in trittes,
the tithing of mint and cummin, but in matters
of greater import the principles of morality w ere
surrendered.

These are the darker shades of the picture.
Nevertheless, it is clear that a verj^ considerable
measure of religious earnestness was preserved in
the nation. It was fed by the ancient Scriptures,
which were regularly read in the synagogues and
committed to memory in the synagogue schools.
Thus in the body of the people there was kept
alive a sense of the holy ciiaracter and mighty
doings of Jehovah ; and although, owing to the
decayed inlluence of the priesthood, the Temple
itself was not a centre of spiritual life, yet the
hallowL'd memories it recalled in the breasts of the
multitudes assembled at the religious festivals
were calculated to inspire the higher emotions.
At all events, there is evidence enough to show
that many hearts throughout the nation were
imbued with a deejj-seated reverence for God and
a true spiritual longing for the hope of Israel.
The soul of religion might be sadly crushed by
legality and formalism, but it was not utterly
dead. Devout men and women in varied ranks of
society were holding a pure faith and leading
lives of simple sincerity, vaguely dissatisfied witli
the bondage of legal observances and Rabbinical
rules, and yearning to rise into a more spiritual
atmosphere, a closer communion with the Divine
mind and will. Of these Zacharias and Elisabeth
(Lk P-**), Anna (2^"-^'), and the aged Simeon (-2-=)
may be taken as examples ; while the numbers
who responded to the living preaching of John tlie
Baptist and became his followers are an index of
the extent to which genuine piety survived in tiie
land. It was amongst such that the spiritual pre-
paration was found for the recognition and welcome
of the promised Saviour when He appeared. The
coming of Jesus brought the birth of a new sjiirit
in religion, a spirit of fresh vitality ami poN\ er ;
and the life of absolute devotion to righteousness
wiiich He began to live, ami whicii He was ulti-
mately to close in a death of sacrificing love, infused
into religion an inspiring energy destined on a scale
of vast magnitude to regenerate and redeem.

3. The national unrest of the period. — The Jewish
people, fretting under political depression, had
thing themselves with impassioned eagerness on
the hope that the long-desired Messiah and His
kingdom must be drawing nigh. It was even
thought by many that He was hidden somewhere
in obscurity, only waiting for a more penitent dis-
position in the national mind; and so infiamed was
the common imagination with these ideas, that
popular excitement was easily aroused, ami any
bold spirit, rising in revolt against the existing

— 1'

ADVERSARY

ADVOCATE

state of things, could find a group of followers
ready to believe in him as the one avIio should
deliver Israel. In the broader world outside, too,
the expectation of a powerful king, issuing from
Judaja, who was to conquer the a\ orld, appears to
have been widely spread ; and the references to
this given by Tacitus (Hist. v. 13) and by Suetonius
( Vesj). 4) may l>e taken at least as an echo of views
disseminated throughout the Iloman Empire by
the Jews of the Dispersion. When -Jesus was born
into the world, however, an event had transpired
vastly grander than Jewish expectation at the
time conceived. Tlie day at last had dawned to
which the original promise to fallen humanity
pointed forward, and for which the best minds of
the nation had for ages yearned ; the divinely-
pledged Deliverer from sin and its curse had ar-
rived, to set up the kingdom of righteousness, love,
and peace.

Literature. — For a lengthened treatment of the Messianic
hope and its transformations, see Riehm, Messianic Propheci)'^
(Eng. tr. 1900) ; Diummond, The Jewish Messiah (1877) ; Stan-
ton, 7'he Jeivish and Christian Messiah (1S8G); Briggs, Mes-
sianic Prophecji (1886); OreWi, OT Prophecy of the Consumma-
tion of God's Kingdom (Eng. tr.); and for a more condensed
survey, Schiirer, HJP u. ii., and Sohultz, OT Thcol. (Kng. tr.
1898) vol. ii. For the Apocalyptic writings, see Charles' editions
of the Book of Enoch, etc. On the religious condition of the
Jewish nation at the date of the Advent, see Stapfer, Palestine
in the Time of Christ (Eng. tr. 1886); Edersheim, Life and
Times of Jesus the Messiah, ii. v. (1883) ; Keim, Jesus of Nazara
(Eng. tr.), vol. i.; Wellhausen, Die Pharisaer und die Saddiiciier
(IS?-!); Ewald, Hist, of Israel (Eng. tr.), vol. vi. ; and Cheyne,
Jewish Religious Life after the Exile.

G. M'Hardy.

ADYERSSRY.— In the Gospels the word 'adver-
sary' stands twice (Lk 13''' 21''*) for avTiKei/nevos,
and thrice (Mt o-^, Lk 12''''8 18^) for d^r/oi/cos. The
first two ]mssages require no comment, Jis they
describe the opponents of the gospel in the simplest
terms, as adversaries. Thus Ave read that when
Jesus triumphantly vindicated His actions. His
adversaries -wsre ashamed and could not answer
Him. Similarly Jesus assured His disciples that
none of their adversaries in the approaching time
of persecution should be able to gainsay or resist
the words of wisdom which the Holy Spirit Avould
put into tiieir mouths.

In Mt S-"' (''] Lk 12^*), and again in the parable of
the Unjust Judge (Lk 18^), the question suggests
itself, 'Who is the adversary referred to?' The
pas-sage from the Sermon on the Mount occurs as
one of a series of maxims of Christian prudence,
and the key to its interpretation is suggested by
that which immediately precedes it (Mt 5-'^*-), where
Christ says that reconciliation with an offended
brother must go before the offering of a gift at
God's altar.

Alienation from the brother offended must oper-
ate as a hindrance to true worship. Therefore he
who would be accepted of God must do justly by
his brother and have all cause of difference with
him removed, for if he regards iniquity in his
heart, has uj)on his conscience the guilt of wrong-
doing or ill-will, or a grudge, the Lord will not
hear him (Ps 66'^). Thus a certain order must
be obser\ ed in connexion Avith this matter of wor-
ship. Still more, Jesus appears to suggest, does
this principle of order hold in respect of the con-
troversy between God and sinners. Reconciliation
■with God must be for every man the first business
to be attended to. TiiJit .antagonism must bo re-
moved, and he mu.st satisfy the claim which the
law of God has against him in the first ))lace, else
if he fails to avail himself of the i)resent oppor-
tunity of ending the controversy, the law must
take its course. The adversary referred to is thus
the broken law, or God Himself as the Author of
the law, Avhom the unreconciled sinner treats as an
adversary (cf. Lk 14=*'f-)-

In the parable of the Unjust Judge the widow's

petition against her opponent at laAv, and her im-
portunity in pressing it upon the attention of the
judge, are used to illustrate the prayers of God's
elect. The reference seems to be to the opposition
which, in her efforts to promote the cause and
kingdom of God, the Church is obliged to en-
counter, some adverse influence to which she has
long been exposed, and against which she fears
she is left to struggle alone. Here there is no
special reason for identifying this adversary with
Satan (cf. Alford, 171 lot: ; Trench, Parables, 488,
etc. ) or with the Jewish pei'secutors of the Early
Church (Weizsiicker, who regards the passage as a
late addition ; cf. Weiss in Meyer's Commentary,
i)i loc. ). We must not forget that the word occurs
in a parable which Avas spoken Avith a special
didactic purpose, that being, as St. Luke is careful
to exjjlain, the encouragement not of the Church
only, but especially of individual believers, to per-
severe in their efforts by faith and prayer to Avith-
stand the power of evil in the Avorld, in Avhatever
form it may assail them or tlnvart their endeav-
ours. Christ's object Av.as to assure them that
their importunity must prevail Avith God, Avho
shall soon respond to their prayers and grant them
the victory over all that Avould frustrate their
efforts for the advancement of His cause. See
also art. SATAN.

Literature. — Cremer, Bib.-Thenl. Lex. s.vi\ atTi^txo;, ivnxii-
/xevo; ; Trench, Notes on the Parables; Bruce, The Parabolic
Teaching of Christ; Comni. of Meyer, Alford, Bengel, etc.;
Schmid, Biblical Theology of the h'T, ]). 175 IT. ; Beyschlag,
NT Theology (2nd Eng. ed.), i. 90 ; H. J. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch
der neutest. Theologie, i. 179 ff. ; AVeizsiicker, Apostolic Age,
ii. 61 ; Wernle, The Beginnings of Christianity, i. 76 fit.

H. H. CURRIE.

ADVOCATE {irapa.K'KriTos). — A term applied to
Christ in 1 Jn 2' (AY and RV ; RVm 'Or Com-
forter or Helper, Gr. Paraclete'), and to the Holy
Spirit in RVm of Jn H's-"" 15-« 16', Avhere both AV
and RV have 'Comforter' in the text. For an
examination of the Greek Avord and its cognates,
see art. 'Paraclete' in Hastings' DB iii. 665-
668. The verb Trapa^aXew occurs in the papyri in
the contrasted senses of 'encourage' (Oxyr. Pap.
663. 42) and of 'entreat' [lb. 744. 6); but the
jiassive verbal form has not been found. The
term in its Latinized form came originally from
the Itfila or one of the Old Latin versions through
the Vulgate. And Wyclif introduced it into the
English versions, translating 1 Jn 2* 'Ave han
avoket' in 1382 ; so Purvey 'an ariuocat' in 1388._

Etymologically the Avord means ' called to one's
side,' especially for the purposes of help, and, in its
technical usage, for advice in the case of judicial
jirocedure, Avitli the further suggestion of en-
deavouring to enlist the sympathy of the judge
in favour of the accused. In 1 Jn 2* the last is
generally taken to be the only sense ; and the
meaning evidently is th,at, if any believer sin,
Jesus Christ in per.son intercedes in his behalf
Avith the Father, and, representing the believer,
carries on his cause in the courts of heaven. Simi-
larly, according to the passage in the Fourth
Gospel, the Holy Spirit may be regarded as God's
Advocate both Avitli and in man, i)romoting the
Divine interests in the humnn sphere, from re-
pentance (.In 16''-", cf. Job 33-2-^") to perfecting.
I>iit here the technical legal sense of the AVord
disappears, and the Spirit becomes, according to
another marginal rendering, the God-sent ' Helper'
of a man Avho is struggling against everything
Avithin or around him that makes godly living
difficult. Whilst, therefore, the provisions of
grace include the tAvofold advocacy, — Christ as
the Advocate of a believer Avith God, and the
S])irit as the Advocate of God Avith man, Avhether
believing or unregenerate, — the tAvo functions
differ both in range and in relation ; and the terra

iEXON

AFFLICTION

' Advocate ' is too specialized to characterize or
to cover the operations attributed to the Spirit.
The Spirit, as an Advocate sent from God, entreats
and helps a man (see art. COMFORTEK), but does
not rei^resent him before God as Judge or as
Father, antl does not apjjeal to anything in man of
final and supreme authority. R. W. Moss.

iENON (AiVwr, probably from Aramaic pry
'springs'). — Mentioned only in Jn .3-'^ 'And John
also ^vas baptizing in yEnon near to Salim, because
there Avere many waters tliere' (RVm). The place
cannot be identified with certainty. Four sites
have been proposed, two in Samaria and two in
Juda?a.

1. Ensebius and Jerome {Onomast? 229. 91, 99.
25) place yEnon in the Jordan Valley, 8 miles
south of Scythopolis (Beisdn), 'juxta Salem et
Jordanem.' About 7 miles soutli of Beisdn and
2 miles west of the Jordan there are seven springs,
all lying within a radius of a quarter of a mile,
and numerous rivulets. Three-quarters of a mile
to the north of these springs van de Vekle found
a tomb bearing the name of Sheikh Salim. But
the fact that a modern sheikh bore the name Safim
is far from satisfactory jjroof that the Salim of
our narrative was at this place. If we are to find
Salim in Samaria at all, does not the mention of it
as a Avell-known ))lace suggest the well-known
Salim 4 miles east of Shechem ? And would it not
be gratuitous for the Evangelist to say of a place
so near tlie Jordan that there was much water
there? But, in spite of these objections, Sanday
(Sacred Sites of the Gospels, \k 3(j) and others still
think tliis site has the best claim.

2. Tristram (Bihlc Places, p. 234) and Conder
(Te»t Work in Palestine, i. pp. 91-93) place yEnon
at 'AinuJi on a hill near the head of the great
Far'ah valley, the open highway from the Damieh
ford of the Jordan to Shechem. Four miles south-
west of the village of 'Ainun, in the Wady Far'ah,
is a succession of springs, j-jelding a copious per-
ennial stream, with flat meadows on either side,
where great crowds might gather. Three miles
south of the valley (7 miles from 'Ainun) stands
Salim. Cunder says: ' Tlie site of Wady Far'ah
is the only one where all the requisites are met —
the two names, the tine water sui)])ly, the proximity
of the desert, and the open character of the ground.'
The situation is a central one also, accessible by
roads from all quarters, and it agrees well with
the new identification of Bethabara. But {a)
'Ainun is not ' near to Salim,' the two i>laces being
7 miles apart, and separated by the great Wady
Far'ah. (/>) There is not a drop of water at 'Ainun
(Robinson, Bib. lies. iii. 305). ('•) It is not likely
that John the Baptist was labouring among the
Samaritans, witli Avhom the Jews had no dealings
(cf. Mt 35 10'). (d) It appears that both Jesus and
John were baptizing in Juda?a (Jn 3'--- '^), and their
proximity gave occasion to the remarks referred
to in Jn 3-5, and that Jesus left Judor-a for Galilee
with the intention of getting out of the neighbour-
hood of John and removing the appearance of
rivalry (.Fn 4'). But if /Enon was in Samaria,
Jesus was nearer John than liefore.

3. Ewald and Hengstenl)erg jirefer Shilhim.
(LXX 2e\eei,it) in the extreme south of Juda'a,
mentioned (Jos 15^-) in connexion with Ain. Godet
says the reason given for John's baptizing in ^Enon
would have greater force as applied to a generally
waterless region like the southern extremity of
Judah than if the reference were to a well-watered
district like Samaria. But elsewhere (Jos 19",
1 Cli 4''-, Neh 11-") Ain is connected with Rimmon
and not with Shilhim.

4. More probable as a Jud;ean site for .4inon is
Wady Fdr'ah, a secluded valley with copious

springs about 6 miles north-east of Jerusalem
(quite ditterent, of course, from the great Wady
Far'ah of Samaria). This is the view adopted by
Professor Konrad Furrer in his article on the
geographical allusions in the Gospel of St. John in
the ZNTW, 1902, Heft 4, p. 258. The suggestion
is not new. It was put forward neaidy fifty
years ago by Barclay (City of the Great King,
pp. 558-570), but has never received the atten-
tion it deserves. Barclay says that 'of all the
fountains in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, the
most copious and interesting by far are those that
burst forth Avithin a short distance of each other
in Wady Far'ah.' He quotes the following descrip-
tion from The History of the Jerusalem M ission : —

' From the brow at Wady Far'ah we descended with some
difficulty into that " Valley of Delight,"— for such is the literal
signification of its name, — and trulj' I have seen nothing so
delightful in the way of natural scenery, nor inviting in point of
resources, etc., in all Palestine. Ascending its bold stream from
this point, we passed some half-dozen expansions of the stream,
constituting the n)ost beautiful natural natatoria I have ever
seen ; the water, rivalling the atmosphere itself in transparency,
of depth varying from a few inches to a fathom or more, shaded
on one or both sides by umbrageous fig-trees, and sometimes
contained in naturally-excavated basins of red mottled marble
— an occasional \ariegation of the common limestone of the
country. These pools are supplied by some half-dozen springs
of the purest and coldest water, bursting from rocky crevices at
various intervals. Verily, thought I, we have stumbled upon
Enon ! . . . Portions of aqueducts, both of pottery and stone,
and in a tolerable state of preservation, too, in many places, are
still found remaining on each side of the valley, indicating the
extent to which the valley was atone time irrigated ; and richer
land I have never seen than is much of this charming valley.
. . . Several herds of cattle were voraciously feeding on the
rich herbage near the stream ; and thousands of sheep and
goats were seen approaching the stream, or " resting at noonday "
in the shadow of the great rock composing the overhanging clifl
here and there. . . . Rank grasses, luxuriant reeds, tall weeds,
and shruljberj' and trees of various kinds, entirely conceal the
stream from view in many places. . . . Higher up, the valley
becomes very narrow, and the rocky precipices tower to a
sublime height.'

The name ^Enon does not seem to have survived
in connexion with these springs, but within 2 miles
of them there is another valley called by the Arabs
Wady Saleim. It is at least possible that this
name was once borne by one of the towns whose
ruins still crown the neighbouring heights. A
town thus placed would have been a conspicuous
object from many parts of Judaja, and would have
been naturally referred to by the Evangelist when
describing the location of ^Enon.

LlTERATi'RE. — In addition to writers cited above, see artt.
'iEnon ' in Smith's DB-, and 'Salim ' in Encyc. Biblica.

W. \Y. Moore.

AFFLICTION.— In AV of the Gospels 'affliction'
occurs only twice (Mk 4" 13"*), corresj^onding both
times to dXl^i^ in the original. RV gives ' tribu-
lation '—its invariable rendering of OXI^ls except in
Jn 16-', where, like AV, it has 'anguish.' In Mt
24«AV translates eh dXi^ptv 'to be afflicted' (RV
' unto tribtilation '). In all remaining cases it
renders OX^ls by ' tribulation ' (Mt 13-' 24-i-'-«, Mk
13-^ Jn 16^^). The Greek eXi-^is (WH eu^pi^) signi-
fies literally ' pressing together,' ' pressure' (cf. 656s
Te0Xi/j./j,4vr] in Mt 7''' of the ' straitened way ' ; 'tVa
fxri dXijSuKnv avrbv, ' lest they should throng him,' in
Mk 3"). In classical Greek it is found infrequently,
and with its literal meaning only. In Biblical
Greek, where the metaphorical significance pre-
vails, it is of much commoner occurrence, always
possessing a passive sense, and usually suggesting
'sufferings inflicted from without' (Lightfoot).

In the sayings of Christ the word bears three
references. It denotes the persecution to which
His followers will be subjected, and by which their
loyalty will be tested (Mk 4" = Mt 13-' ; Mt 24",
Jn IG'*'). It describes the privations and suil'erings
(not, as above, necessarily induced by His service)
attendant upon a great national or universal crisis
(Mk 13'»-2^ = Mt 24='- -'■»). And, finally, it is em-
ployed in one of His illustrations to indicate a

AGE

AGONY

woman's pangs in childbirth (Jn IG'^ AV and
RV 'anguish'). See, further, artt. Teusecution,
Suffering, Tribulation. H. Bisseker.

AGE. — The word ' age' is a vague term, as may
be seen by its doing duty as a possible translation
for alilii' (Lat. cevujii, an unmeasured jjeriod of
existence), for 7e!'ed (Lat. gencratio), and even
for the more precise and exact terms xpofos (Lat.
ternpus), and Kaipds (Lat. occasio). Its strictest
Greek equivalent, however, is T/Xi/cta (Lat. (etas).
An examination into the significance of the term
shows a remarkable parallel between its employ-
ment in classical literature and in the Greek of the
New Testament. 'HXi/c/a marks a normal develop-
ment of life ; such development may be registered
in the individual by years, or by physique. In
classical Greek, the former is the usual reference of
the term, and hence the most ordinary meaning of
the word is, like the poetical ijjir], the llower or prime
of life. The signilicance, however, of ijXcKia as stat-
icrc or height, that feature of i)liysical development
Avhich mostly attracts the eye, is quite classical ;
and this sense occurs in Herodotus (iii. 16),* Plato,
and Demosthenes. Turning to the New Testament,
we lind the same oscillation of meaning in r/XiKta.
In the Fourth Gospel the parents of the blind man
for fear of excommunication evade the question of
the Jews, and siiift the responsibility of answering
upon their son : ' Therefore said his "parents. He is
of age,t ask him.' In the Sermon on the JNIount
'age 'X appears to be the true rendering of TjXt/cta.
A cubit would be a prodigious addition to a man's
height, wliile a span was already a proverbial
expression§ to signify the brevity of life. ' Stature '
is, of course, the only possible rendering in the
interesting note about Zaccha^us ; || and this is the
only place in the Gospel where, as will be seen,
r)XiKla bears this meaning with an absolute cer-
tainty.

The idea of periodicity, which is largely foreign
to the meaning of rjXiKia in classical Greek, appears
only once, and that doubtfully, in the New Testa-
ment.H The diiierent 'ages of man'** and so of
our Lord,tt are indicated by the classical formula of
time, ' years ' being in the genitive case. Hence the
word yields no suggestion as to those characteristic
periods, or epochs in the earthly life of our Lord —
the infancy, childhood, manhood of Christ. Nor
would the word deserve a place in this Dictionary
were it not for two passages in which it occurs or
is referred to when its interest is a real one, as is
evident by the attention i)aid to them by all com-
mentators on St. Luke's Gospel. JJ Both jiassages
appear as a postscript to the narrative of the Holy
Child with the doctors in the teinple. It is an
incident in the regular equable development of
His life upon earth. This development is shown
in two aspects. The Evangelist declares that
Jesus increased (or advanced) in wisdom and
stature, and in favour (or grace) with God and
man. St. Luke's phraseology was no doubt in-
fluenced by his recollection of a similar encomium
passed upon the youthful Samuel, §§ and already he
had found it not un.suitable to be quoted in refer-
ence to the Baptist. II II

The key to the meaning of ijXt/c/a in Lk 2°^ niay

be discovered by a comparison of these four pas-
sages — •

1 S 2^® Kal rb Traiddpiov Sa/xouTjX iTropeiero [+/x6-ya-
\vvbfievov\, Kol ayadov Kal /mera Kvpiov Kal /xerd,
dpdpunrwv (LXX, B, said of Samuel).

Lk P" t6 de Trai.5lov -qii^ave Kal eKparatovTo TrveOfxaTi
(said of the Baptist).

Lk 2'"* TO de waidlov rjii^avev Kal eKparaiovTo ttXtj-
poijfievop (TO(j)Lq., Kal X'^P'^ deov t}v eir' avro (said of
Christ).

Lk 2"" Kal ^1t]<tovs ■n-po^KoirTev iv rrj (To<pia Kal 7]\iKiq,
Kal xcip'Tt Trapa 6e<^ Kal dvdp<xnroLS (said of Christ).

A careful comparison of tiiese passages apjjears
determinative of the sense of i]\iKia in tlie last
as 'stature,' not 'age.' What was noticeable in
a measure in Samuel and in the Baptist, was
supremely characteristic of the Holy Child,
namely, an equal development both on the
l^hysical and spiritual side. Translate it as IlVm,
and it is little more than a truism. 'Stature' is
not only not superfluous, but an interesting and
unexpected contribution to that group of refer-
ences which lay stress on our Lord's humanity.
It helps to explain His 'favour with men' witii
which it stands in parallel. It suggests that our
Lord's personality, even His appearance, may have
had a fascination about it. Even more, it niay
j make the student of Messianic prophecy cautious
in attaching a too physical meaning to the descrip-
tion of the countenance of Jehovah's Servant (Is
521^ 53-). B. Whitefoord.

AGONY This word is used in Lk 22« to de-
scribe the sorrow, suflering, and struggle of Jesus
in Gethsemane. The Greek word agonia (dyuvia)
is derived from agon {djibv), meaning: (1) an assem-
bly of the people (cf. dyopd) ; (2) a place of as-
j sembly, especially the place in which the Greeks
assembled to celebrate solemn games ; (3) a contest
of athletes, runners or charioteers. 'Aywc is usetl in
a figurative sense in He 12' 'let us run witli
patience the r«ce that is set before us.' The word
has tlie general sense of struggle in 1 Th 2" ' in
much contlict'; Ph l^" 'having the same conflict';
1 Ti 6'2 ' the good light of faith' ; 2 Ti f ; I have
fought the good flght.' It means solicitude or
anxiety in Col 2' 'how greatly I strive for you'
(literally, ' how great an agon I have for you ').

The state of Jesus in Gethsemane is described in
the following phrases : Mt '26''*' ' he began to be
sorrowful and sore troubled ' ; Mk 14^* ' he began
to be greatly amazed and sore troubled ' ; Lk 22^"'
' And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly :
and his sweat became as it were great drops of
blood falling down upon the ground.' * Jesus con-
fesses His own feelings in the words, ' My soul is
exceeding sorrowful, even unto death' (Mt 26''^
Mk 14^*). That He regarded the exjierience as a
temptation is suggested by His warning words to
His disciples : ' Watch and pray, that ye enter not
into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but
the flesh is weak ' (Mt 26^', Uk M^s ; cf. Lk 22^"- ^%
That He was conscious of human weakness, and
desired Divine strength for the struggle, is evident
from the prayers, in reporting the words of which
the Evangelists do not verbally agree, as tlie follow-
ing comparison shows :—

Mt 2639.
' O my Father, if it be possible,
let this cup pa.ss away from me :
nevertheless not as I will, but
as thou Avilt.'

Mk 1436.
'Abba, Father, all things are
possible unto thee ; remove this
cup from me : howbeit not what
I will, but what thou wilt.'

Lk 22«.
'Father, if thou be willing,
remove this cup from me : never-
theless, not my will, but thine,
be done.'

* iyuv Tv,v av7i,v riXixir,v ' Afiaffi.
X M"t 627, Lk]225.

II Lk 193, cf. Eph 413.
** Mk 542, Lk S-ia.
n Lk2«-B2.
111! Lkl«o.

t -hXixiav ix" (Jn 9^'- ^)-

g Pc 395.
H He 11".
n Lk 323.
§§ 1 S 226.

St. Mark and St. Luke give the words of one

prayer only, although the former evidently intends

to report three distinct acts of prayer (vv.^^- 39. 4ij^

* On the genuineness of this passage see the ' Notes on Select

Readings ' in Westcott and Hort's NT in Greek.

AGONY

and the latter apparently only two (vv.-"- ^*).
But St. Matthew gives the words of the second
prayer, which he reports as repeated the third
time (vv.'*--'*-') : 'O my Father, if this cannot pass
away, except I drink it, thy will be done.' It is
not at all improbable that there was such progress
in Jesus' thoughts. At first He prayed for tlie
entire removal of the cup, if possible (Mt. ), because
possible to God (Mk.), if God were willing (Lk.);
and then, having been taught that it could not be
taken away. He prayed for strength to take the
cup. It is not necessary for us to decide which of
the reports is most nearly verbally correct, as the
substance of the first prayer is the same in all
reports. Although St. John gives no report of the
scene in Gethsemane, yet in his account of the
interview of Jesus with the Greeks there is intro-
duced what seems to be a faint reminiscence :
'Now is my soul troubled ; and what shall I say?
Father, save me from tliis hour : but for this
cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy
name ' (Jn 12-^- -*). It is substantially the same
request, expressed in the characteristically Johan-
nine langu.age. But even if this conjecture be
unwarianted, and this be an utterance on the
occasion to which the F'ourth Evangelist assigns
it, the words serve to illustrate Jesus' struggle in
view of His death. JNIuch more confident can we
be that Gethsemane is referred to in He 5"-*
' Who in the days of his fiesh, having ofi'ered up
prayers and supplications with strong crying and
tears unto him that was able to save him from
death, and having been heard for his godly fear ;
though he Avas a Son, yet learned obedience by
tlie things which he suli'ered.' Having passed in
review the material which is ottered us in dealing
with the question of the nature of the agony in
Gethsemane, we may now concentrate our atten-
tion upon it, excluding all reference to other
matters which are dealt with in their own place.
Many answers have been given to the question,
What was the cup which Jesus desired to be taken
away ?

(1) The most obvious, but not on that account
the most intelligent .and reverent, answer is that
in Gethsemane Jesus was overcome by the fear of
death, from which He longed to escape. But this
is to place Christ on a lower plane of manhood
than many men, even among the lowest races. If
the love of Christ has constrained many martyrs
for His name to face rack and block, water and
flame, and many otiier painful modes of death
without shrinking, and even with the song of
praise upon the lips, is it at all likely that He
Himself shrank back?

(2) A more ingenious view, which has an apparent
verbal justification in Mt 26^*, Mk 14^* ('even unto
death'), and He 5' ('to save him from death'), is
that Jesus felt Himself dying, and that He feared
He would die before He could otter the great
sacrifice for the sin of the world. But to this
suggestion there are three objections. Firstly,
there is no evidence of such physical exhaustion on
the part of Jesus as would justify such a fear ;
altliough the stress of His work and suttering had
undoubtedly put a severe strain upon His bodily
strength, yet we have no proof that His health
had given way so far as to make death appear at
all probable. Secondly, only a very superficial
and external view of His work as Saviour warrants
the supposition that His sacrifice could be accom-
plished only on the Cross ; that its etticacy depended
in any way on its outward mode ; that His death,
if it had coine to Him in Gethsemane, would have
had less value for God and man than His cruci-
fixion has. Thirdly, even if this supposition be
admitted, we may l)e sure of this, that Jesus was
so confident of His Father's goodness and guardian-

ship in every step of His path, that it was impos-
sible for Him to fear that the great purpose of His
life would be left unfulfilled on account of His
premature death. His rebuke of the 'little faith'
(Mt 8-") of His disciples during the storm at sea
would have been applicable to Himself had He
cherished any such fear.

(3) A much more profound view is offered to our
consideration, when not the death itself, but the
circumstances of the death, are represented as the
cause of Jesus' agony. He regarded His death not
only as a sacrifice which He was willing to otter,
not only as a tragedy which He was ready to
endure, but as a crime of man against God from
which He shrank with horror. That the truth
and grace of God in Him should meet witii this
insult and injury from the race which He had
come to save and bless — this it was that caused
His agony. He could not endure to gaze into ' the
abysmal depths' of human iniquity and impiety,
which the murder of the Holy One and the Just
opened to view. Surely this apocalypse of sin was
not necessary as a condition of the apocalypse of
grace. If we look more closely at the conduct of
tiie actors in this dnama, we shall better under-
stand how appalling a revelation of sin it must have
appeared to Jesus. The fickleness of the multi-
tude, the hypocrisy and bigotry of the Pharisees,
the worldliness and selfishness of the jjriesthooii,
the treachery of Judas, the denial by Peter, the
antagonism of the disciples generally to the Master's
sa\ ing purpose, the falsehood of His accuser's, the
hate and tiie craft of His persecutors, — all these
were present to the consciousness of Jesus as an
intolerable ott'ence to His conscience, and an un-
speakable grief to His heart. To His moral
insight and spiritual discernment these were not
single misdeeds, but signs and proofs of a wicked-
ness and godlessness sjireading far and wide in the
life of mankind, reaching deep into the soul of
man. Must this antagonism of sin to God be
forced to its ultimate issue? Could He not save
mankind by some mode of sacrifice that would
involve tiie men concerned in it in less heinous
guilt? Must He by persevering in His present
course drive His enemies to do their worst against
Him, and thus by His fidelity to His vocation
must He involve all who opposed Him in t as
greater iniquity ? That sucii questions cannot
liave been present to the mind of Jesus, wlio can
confidently attirm ? He foresaw the doom of tlie
guilty nation, and He also s.aw that it was the
crime about to be committed against Him that
would seal its doom. That He shrank from
being thus the occasion of its judgment cannot be
doubted. But if in Gethsemane Jesus anticipated
distinctly and accepted deliberately what He so
intensely experienced on the Cross, then this solici-
tude for all who were involved in the crime of His
death does not at all exhaust His agony. The
words of darkness and desolation on the Cross,
' My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?'
(Mt 27'"^), must be our clue to the mystery of this
experience.

(4) The only view that seems to the present
writer at all adequate is that what Jesus dreaded
and prayed to be delivered from in the experience
of death was the sense of God's distance and
abandonment. His sorrow unto de<ath was not
the fear of death as physical dissolution, nor of
dying before He could finisli His work on the
Cross, but the shrinking of His filial soul from
the sting of death, due to sin, the veiling in dark-
ness of His Father's face from Him. His prayer
was answered, for He was saved from death,
inasmuch as the experience of darkness and
desolation was momentary, and ere He gave up
the ghost He was able to commit Himself with

AGONY

AGRICULTURE

childlike trust unto His Father. ' Father, into
thy hands I commend my si)irit' (Lk 23^"). His
agony in Gethsemane was worthy of Him as the
Son of God, for it was tiie recoil of His filial spirit
from the interruption of His filial communion with
His Father, Avhich appeared to Him to be neces-
sarily involved in the sacrilice which He was about
to otter for the sins of the world.

It is not the function of this article to offer a
theological interpretation of Jesus' experience in
Getlisemane ; but a justilication of the above
answer to tlie question of the nature of Jesus'
agony may be briefly ofl'ered in a psychological
analysis of His experience. First of all, then,
we note Jesus' sense of solitude. He must leave
behind Him the disciples except three, and even
from these three He must withdraw Himself
(Mt 26"«-^''). He sought this outward isolation
because He felt this inner solitude. Since His
announcement of His Passion (Mt IG-') the dis-
ciples had been becoming less and less His com-
panions, as they were being more and more
estranged from His purpose. At last He knew
that they would abandon Him altogether, their
outer distance but the sign and proof of their
inward alienation. Yet the comfort of the Father's
presence would remain with Him : ' Eehold, the
hour cometh, yea, is come, that ye shall be scat-
tered every man to his own, and shall leave me
alone : and yet I am not alone, because the Father
is with me' (Jn IC"-). But now in Gethsemane
He began to realize that it might be necessary for
the accomplishment of His sacrifice that even the
Father's presence should be withdrawn from Him.
That dread drives Him to the Fatiier's v'l'esence,
but tlie assurance that there is no ground for this
fear does not come to Him. Again He turns to
His disciples. Secondly, therefore, we note His
need of sympathy. When He withdrew from the
three, He asked them to watch with Him ; when,
returning, He found them sleeping. His words
are a pathetic reiiroach : ' What, could ye not
watch with me one hour?' (Mt 2G'"'). He 'craved
sympathy, not only because He felt solitary, but
because this solitude was due to His love for man.
The sacrilice He was about to otter, in which the
sense of His Father's abandonment was the sting
of death, was on behalf of, and instead of man ;
and yet not even the men He had chosen would
sorrow with Him, although He was suHering for
all mankind. Thus man's denial of sympathy
must have made Him feel more keenly the dread
that even God's comfort and helji might be with-
held from Him. Thirdly, we note that tiiis dread
Avas not groundless, but v/as rooted deep in His
experience and vocation. We must tlien go be-
yond any of the words uttered in Gethsemane
it.self to discover all that was involved in His
agony there. As the incarnate love, mercy, and
grace of God, His experience was necessarily
vicarious. He suttered with and for man. He
so identified Himself with sinful mankind, that
He shared its struggle, bore its burden, felt its
shame. Himself sinless, knowing no sin. He was
made sin for mankind in feeling its sin as it were
His very own. The beloved of God, He became
a curse in experiencing in His own aj^ony and
desolation the consequences of sin, although as
innocent He could neither feel the guilt nor bear
the penalty of sin. So completely had He become
one with mankind in being made sin and a curse
for man, that even His consciousness of filial union
and communion with God as His Father was ob-
scured and interrupted, if even for only a moment,
by His consciousness of tiie sin of man. God did
not withdraw Himself from, or abandon His only-
begotten and Mell- beloved Son, but was with Him
to sustain Him in His sacrilice ; but the Son of

God was so overshadowed and overwhelmed by
His consciousness of the sin and the consequent
curse of the race which He so loved as to make
Himself one Avith it, that He dreaded in Geth-
semane to lose, and did on Calvary lose for a
moment, the comfort and help of His Father's
love. In this experience He exhil)ited the an-
tagonism of God and sin, the necessary connexion
between the expulsion of God and the invasion of
sin in any consciousness, since His self-identilica-
tion Avith sinful man involved His self-isolation
from the Holy Father. This, then, Avas the agony
in Gethsemane, such a sense of the sorroAv, sliame,
and curse of mankind's sin as His very own as
became a dread of the loss of God's fatherly pres-
ence. Although He at first prayed to be delivered
from this, to Him, most terrible and grievous ex-
perience, yet He afterward submitted to God's
Avill, as God's purpose in the salvation of mankind
Avas dearer to Him than even the joy of His filial
communion Avith God His Father. In this sur-
render He Avas endoAved Avith such strength from
above that He finished the Avork His Father had
given Him to do, and in His obedience even unto
death ottered the sacrifice of His life, which is a
ransom for many, and the seal of the neAV covenant
of forgiveness, rencAval, and felloAvsiiip Avith God
for all mankind. See also art. Dekeliction.

Literature.— The standard Commentaries and Lives of Christ ;
Hastings' 1>B ii. 712 f.; Jonathan Edwards, Work&, ii. 860 if.;
Expos. Times, vi. [1894-1895], 433 f., 522 ; Expositor, 3rd ser. v.
180ff.; YairhsXrn, Studies ill the Life of Christ, 'Getlisemane,'
where the explanation numbered (3) above is fully elaborated.

Alfked E. Garvie.
AGRAPHA.— See Sayings.

AGRICULTURE.— The influence of the physical
and climatic characteristics of a land uj)on the
character of its jieoi^le has been a favourite theme
Avitli many Avriters. But Ave are more concerned
here Avith' another marked feature — the profound
influence exerted by the occupations of a people
on their manner of thought and their modes of
expressing it. NoAvhere Avas this subtle influence
more manifest than in the case of the Hebrews.
Their occupations Avere largely determined hy the
characteristics of tlie land they inhabited, but
their thought and the language that Avas its vehicle
Avere equally moulded by their occupations.

1. The place of Agriculture in the life and
thought of the Hebrews. — From the ttrst the
HebreAvs Avere a pastoral, and from very early
times an agricultural people ; and these twin
employments have lent their colour and tone to
their literature, and shaped their profoundest
thoughts and utterances regarding God and man.
God is the Shepherd of Israel (Fs 80') ; Israel is
' the people of his pasture, and the slieep of his
hand ' (95^ cf. 74' 7'J'^ lUO^). God is the Husband-
man ; I.srael is His vineyard (Is 5^^-). God is tlie
Floughman ; Israel is the land of His tillage
(Is 28-5ff-, cf. 1 Co 3«).

When Ave turn to the Gospels we find the same
stream of thought in full flow. The highest
Christian virtue is enforced by appeal to Him
Avho ' maketli his sun to rise on the evil and on
the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the
unjust' (Mt S'*'^). The kingdom of God is set forth
under such emblems as the sower going forth to
soAV (13^"'-), the Avheat and the tares growing to-
gether until the harvest (v.-^"^-), the lord of the
vineyard going out early in the morning to hire
labourers (20'''-), or sending to demand its fruits
(21^"'- ). Christ compares Himself to the she])lierd
Avho seeks his lost sheep until he ttnds it (Lk 15^),
or lays doAvn his life for the sheep (Jn 10''). The
multitude are, to His comi)assionate eye, as ' sheep
not having a shepherd' (Mt y»«, Mk 6^). The

AGRICULTUEE

AGRICULTURE

world appears to Him as a great field ' white unto
harvest' (Jn 4^), and awaiting the labour of the
reapers (Mt 9'^^- )• His relation to His disciples is
expressed under the figure of the vine and its
branches (Jn 15"^-) See also art. Husbandman.

Noteworthy also is the place assigned by Biblical
writers to the cultivation of the soil. It is re-
presented as the duty of the first man. Adam,
placed in the Garden of Eden, is ' to dress it and
to keep it' (Gn 2'^) ; driven from it, he is sent ' to
till tiie ground from whence he was taken ' (3-*).
To Noaii the promise is given that ' while the
earth remaineth, .seedtime and harvest . . . shall
not cease' (8--). The land of promise is 'a land of
wheat and barley' (Dt8^). The Golden Age will
be a time when men ' shall beat their swords into
ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks,'
and ' they shall sit everj' man under his vine and
under his fig-tree' (Is 2-*, Mic 4-^- •*). The glad-
ness of the Messianic age is ' joy according to the
joy in harvest' (Is 9^).

Nor was it only in their conception of the past
and their anticipation of the future that the in-
lluence of agriculture made itself felt : it was the
very foundation of their national and religious
life. A pastoral age, it is true, i)receded the
agricultural, and the patriarchs are represented,
for the most part, as herdsmen ratiier than culti-
vators (Gn 37'- 47^) ; and even as late as the be-
ginning of the settlement in Canaan, the trans-
Jordanic tribes are said to have had a great
multitude of cattle (Nu 32'). But, on tlie other
hand, we learn that Isaac, who had gone to Gerar,
'sowed in that land, and found in the same year
an hundredfold' (Gn 26'-); while the first dream
of Joseph shows tliat if he did not actually follow,
he was at least familiar with, agricultural pur-
suits (37^"^). But it was not till after tiieir con-
quest of the Land of Promise that the Hebrews
became an agricultural people on any large scale.
Prior to that time, however, agriculture was
highly developed among the Canaanites (Dt 8*) ;
and it may have been from the conquered race
that tliey acquired it. Once learned, it became
the stajile industry of the country.

The Mosaic legislation presupposes a people
given to agricultural pursuits. That is sutti-
ciently attested by the laws anent the three
annual festivals (Ex 23'^"'"), the .septennial fallow
(23"), the gleanings of the harvest field (Lv 19''-'»),
the year of Jubilee (25'"*'- 27'^'''")j and many other.s.
Further attestation of the same fact is found in
tlie blessings that were to attend the faitiiful
observance of the Law, and tlie curses that would
follow disobedience (Lv 26^-^- '■*■-", Dt 28'-'5- '5-'**).

2. The soil of Palestine. — The fertility of the
soil of Palestine was remarkable, as is testified
by Josephus (c. Apion. i. 22 ; BJ ii. 3) and others
(Diod. xl. 3, 7 ; Tac. Hist. v. 6). The soil varies
in character. In the Jordan Valley and the
maritime |)lains it consists of a very rich alluvial
deposit ; in the regions lying at a higher elevation
it lias been formed from ilecomposing basaltic rock
and cretaceous limestone. This, however, was
greatly enriched by the system of ' terracing,' low
Malls of 'shoulder-stones' being built along the
mountain slopes, and the ledges behind them
filled with the alluvial soil of the valleys. These
walls gave protection against the heavy rains, and
prevented the .soil from being washed away. It
was to this system that districts such as Lebanon,
Carmel, and Gilboa OMed the wonderful fertility
that formerly characterized them.

All parts were not, of course, equally productive.
Thus we find the Mishna {Git tin, v. 1) enuiner-
atinj,' several classes of soil according to their
quality or tlie degree of moisture. Such a classi-
ncation is quite distinct from that of the parable

of the Sower, where the wayside, the rocky
places, etc., are all within the limits of a sintrle
field (Mt 13^ Mk 4^, Lk 8^). It may be noted
here that ground which yielded thorns was
considered specially good for wheat-growing, while
that which was overrun with weeds was assigned
to barley. The most productive fields were often
marked by the presence of large stones, some
of which were beyond a man's own strength to
remove. Their presence was regarded as a token
that the soil was fertile. Smaller stones, which
were also plentiful, were often used for making
rude walls along the side of the fields. In some
districts they were so numerous that they had to
be removed every year after ploughing had taken
place.

3. Agricultural operations, etc. — Tlie work of
preparing the land for cultivation Avas the first
concern of the farmer. Where virgin soil had
to be reclaimed, a beginning was made by clear-
ing it of timber, brushwood, or stones (Jos 17",
Is 5-). It was then ready to receive the plough
(which see).

(a) Ploughing began immediately after the
'early rain' had softened the ground, i.e. towards
the end of September or beginning of October,
and Avent on right through the winter, provided
the soil had not become too wet and, therefore,
too heavy. Usually a single ploughing sutticed,
but if the soil was very rough it was ploughed
twice.

In some cases the hoe or mattock took the place
of the plough. That is the common practice in
modern times where there is a rocky bottom and
only a sparse covering of earth. In ancient times
the same course was followed where hillsides were
brought under cultivation (Is 7-^). The same im-
plement was employed for breaking up large clods
of earth (Is 28-^ Hos lu"), but whether the refer-
ence includes the clods upturned by the plough, or
merely those occurring in ' stony ground,' is not
quite certain.

(b) Dung was employed for increasing the pro-
ductiveness of fruit trees (Lk 13*), but not, as a
rule, for grain fields. The most common forms
were house and farmyard refuse mixed with straw
(Is 25'"), withered leaves, oil - scum, and wood-
ashes. The blood of slaughtered animals was also
used for this purpose.

(c) The principal cro/w were wheat, barley, spelt,
millet, beans, and lentils (see articles on the first
two of these). Oats Avere little cultivated. From
Jos 2'"' we learn that fiax was grown. It was
sometimes sown as an exiieriment for testing the
quality of the soil, for a field which had yielded
good ilax was regarded as specially suitable for
wheat-growing.

{d) The solving season began in the early days
of October. A beginning Avas made Avith pulse
\arieties, barley came next, and Avheat followed.
Millet Avas soavu in summer, the land being pre-
pared for it by irrigation. When the Avinter set
in cold and Avet, barley Avas not sown till the
beginning of February.

The soAver carries the seed in a basket or bag,
from Avhicli he scatters it broadcast. Where a
single ploughing sufiices, the seed is soavu first and
then ploughed in. When it is sown on plouglied
ground, the usual course is also to plougli it in,
but sometimes a light harroAV (not infrecjuently a
thorn-bush) is used to cover it. Seed that falls on
the footpath or ' Avayside ' cannot be covered
OA\ing to the hardness of the ground, and is
picked up by the birds (Mt 13^ and parallels).

(c) The crops thus soavu A\'ere exposed, as they
grew, to various dangers, such as the inroads of
roaming cattle, the depredations of birds, or the
visitation of locusts ; and also to such adverse

AGRICULTURE

AKiaDAMA

natural and climatic influences as drought, east
wind, anil mildew. Some of these will be separ-
ately treated, and need not be dwelt upon now.
But it may be convenient to say a few words at
this stage regarding — •

(/) The water supply of the country. — Unlike
Egypt, which owed its fertility exclusively to the
Nile, Palestine had its time of rain (Dt Tl'"-"- ",
Jer S--* etc. ). The 'early rain' (i-iiD) of the Bible
is that of October, which precedes ploughing and
sowing : the ' latter rain ' (2'ip^a) denotes the re-
freshing showers that fall in ISIarch and April, and
give much-needed moisture to the growing crops.
The intervening period is marked by the heavy
rains of winter (d^'j), the wettest month being
January. Tlie rainfall is not uniform over the
country. In the Jordan Valley it is very slight ;
at Jerusalem it averages about 20 inches annually ;
in some other upland regions it is almost twice as
much. In the highest lying parts, as Lebanon,
there is a considerable fall of snow. There are
also many brooks and springs (Dt 8'), and irriga-
tion is emploj'ed, especially in gardening, though
naturally on a much smaller scale than in Egypt.
The summer months are hot and rainless.

(r/) Harvest. — ^Barley harvest (2 S 21^) began in
April or May, according as the district was early
or late ; wheat and spelt were ripe a few weeks
after (Ex IP'- ^'-). The grain was cut with a sickle
(Jl 3'^ Dt 1G9, Mk 4-9 ; see art. Sickle), or pulled
up by the roots (Mishna, Peah iv. 10). The
latter method was followed both in Palestine and
in Egypt, and is so still ; but the use of the sickle
goes back to very early times, as the excavations
at Tell el-^esy have shown. Ordinarily the stalks
were cut about a foot beneath the ear, but in
some instances even higher (Job 24-^). The reaper
grasped them in handfuls (Ru 2^''), reaped them
with his arm (Is 17*), and laid them behind him ;
while the binder, following him, gathered them in
his bosom (Ps 129'), tied them with straw into
sheaves (Gn 37'), and set them in heaps (D'isy *
Ru 2').

(h) Threshing. — The sheaves thus prepared were
carried to the threshing-floor on the backs of men
or of beasts of burden, such as donkeys, horses, or
camels. Am 2'^ has been taken by some as im-
plying that they were sometimes removed in carts,
but this is very doubtful. The reference is more
jirobably to the tiireshing-sledge (Is 28'-^).

The threshing-floor is simply a circle of level
ground which has been carefully cleaned and
beaten hard, and is enclosed with a row of big
stones to prevent the straw from being too widely
scattered. The spot selected always stood higher
than the surrounding ground, so that it should be
open to the air currents, and that rain, if it
occurred, though it was rare in harvest time (1 S
12''), might run off without doing injury. The
sheaves were unbound and scattered over the floor,
till a heap was formed about a foot high. Cattle
(Hos 10") were then driven over it repeatedly, or
a threshing wain drawn by cattle. The Penta-
teuchal law provided that the cattle engaged in
this operation should not be muzzled (Dt 25^). It
was also the custom to blindfold them, as other-
wise, moving continually in a circle, they became
dizzy (Talmud, Keliin xvi. 7). Cert<ain crops,
however, were tlireshed by being beaten with a
stick (Is ^S^').

Two kinds of threshing machines were employed,
the drag and the waggon. The drag (3"jio, pin)
was a heavy wooden board, f the under-surface of
which was studded with nails or sharp fragments
of stone (Is 41'*). It was further weighted with

* See Vogelstein, Landwirthschaft in Pal. 61.
t See illustration in Driver's Joel and Amos (Camb. Bible),
i>. 227.

large stones, and by the driver himself, who stood,
sat, or even laj- upon it. The waggon (nSjy Is
28-*) was provided with sharp metal discs. These
were affixed to revolving rollers set in a rude
waggon-frame.

(i) Winnoiving. — The operation of threshiin'
yielded a confused mass of grain, chafi', and broken
straw, which required to be winnowed. Two im-
plements were used for this process — the shovel
and the fan (Is 30'-^).. With these the mixed mass
was tossed into the air, against the wind. The
chaff was blown away (Ps 1^), the straw fell a little
distance off, and the grain at the feet of the Min-
nower. Where, as at large public threshing-floors,
there was an accumulation of chaff, it was burned
(Mt 312). The chopped straw ([3!? Is IF) was used
as fodder for cattle.

[j) Sifting. — The winnowed grain still contained
an admixture of small stones and particles of clay,
stubble, and imbruised ears, and also of smaller
poisonous seeds such as tares, and so stood in need
of yet further cleansing. This was effected liy
means of sifting. In modern Palestine the sieve
in common use is a wooden hoop with a mesh made
of camel - hide. This implement probably corre-
sponds to the .""33 (kebhdrc'ih) of ancient times (Am
9"). The mesh was wide enough to allow the
separated grains to pass through, but retained tlie
unthreshed ears, which were cast again on the
threshing-floor.* In Is 30^ another implement is
mentioned, nsj [ndphdh), which both AVand UV
render 'sieve.' It is not quite certain, however,
that the nCtphdh was really a sieve. If it was, it
may have resembled the modern ghirhal, which is
of smaller mesh than the kebhdrdh (Arab, kirbal),
and permits only broken grains and dust to pass
through, while retaining the unbruised kernels.

The sifted grain was collected in large heaps,
and, pending its removal to the granary, the
owner, to guard against thieving, slept by the
threshing-floor (Ru 3'). In the Gospels tliere is
one reference to sifting (Lk 22^^).

(k) Storage. — In the NT a granary is called
6.Trod7,K-n (Mt 626 1330^ Lk 12'8- 24). In the OT quite
a variety of names occurs (nuipp Ex P' ; c'PCN Dt
28* ; D'prxp Jer SO^^ ; o-iip Ps 144'^ ; n'ryx and
nn;3p Jl'l"). But thougii the nomenclature is
so rich, of the construction and character of those
granaries we know nothing. Some of them were
probably sheds, and may have resembled the flat-
roofed buildings used in Egypt for storing grain.
Others may have been dry wells, or cisterns, or
caves hewn out of the rock, such as are common in
modern times. The grain stored in these maga-
zines will remain good for years.

Literature— Ug-olinus, Thesatn-us, vol xxix. ; Benzinger,
Heb. Arch. 207 ff.; Nowack, Lehrbuch der Heb. Archciolcjie, i.
228 ff.; Vogelstein, Die Landivirthschaft in Paliistina zur Zeit
der Mischna ; Stade, Genchichtc d Volkes Israel, i vii., Wilkin-
son, Ancient Egyptians, passim ; Thomson, 7%e Land and the
Book; van Lennep, Bible Lands and Customs; ZDPV ix. ;
PEFSt, passim ; Ungewitter, Die landwirthschaftlichen Bilder
und Metaphern i. d. poet. Biich. d. Alt. Test. ; Hastings' DB,
a.nd Encyc. Bibl. s.v. 'Agriculture.'

Hugh Duncan.
AHAZ. — One of the kings of Judah ((•. 735-
720 B.C.), named in St. Matthew's genealogy of
our Lord (Mt I**).

AHIMELECH.— See Abiathar.

AKELDAMA.— The name given in Ac 1'" to the
field i^urchased with the price of Judas' treachery.

* In this case the meaning- of ' the least qrain ' in Am 1)9 must
be ' the least pebble ' (so Preuschen, ZA TW, 1S95, p. 24) Otliers
(e.g. Driver, Joel and Amos, p. 221 ; Nowack and Marti in their
Comm. ad loc.) take the word i^•\^ (zerdr, lit. ' pebble ') to stand
here for a grain of wheat, while admitting that the word is not
elsewhere so used. On this supposition the action of the
kebhdrdh would be similar to that of the modern ghirbal de-
scribed above.

AKELDAMA

ALABASTER

The true readin<,' seems to be aKe\5afxa.x (B ; cf.
axe^Sa/j-dx, i^A 61, etc. ; aKeXdaifidx, D ; aKeXdafidK,
E) rather than the TR aKeXdafid ; and the linal
aspirate is here of importance, as -will be seen.

Tlie two accounts of tlie death of Judas (Mt 2'i^'-
and Ac 1"*^-) are hard to reconcile (see JUDAS,
and art. in Expositor for -June 1904, by the present
writer) ; but it is sulficient to note here tliat they
are clearly indei)endent of eacli other. The salient
features of the Matthajan tradition are — (a) Judas
stricken with remorse returned the money paid to
him as the price of his treachery ; (b) he hanged
himself in despair, nothing being said as to the
.scene of his suicide ; {c) the priests bought with
the money a field known as ' the Potter's Field,'
which (d) thenceforth Avas called dypos aifxaros, the
allusion being to the blood of Christ, siied through
the treachery of Judas ; (e) the field was devoted
to the purpose of a cemetery for foreigners. In
Acts, on the other hand, {a) nothing is said of a
refunding of the money by Judas ; (6) his death was
not self inHicted, nor was it caused by h.anging ;
it is described as due to a fall and a consequent
rupture of the abdomen ; (c) the field was bought
by Judas hiin-self, and not by the priests ; (d) no-
thing is said of its former u.se as a ' potter's field,'
nor (e) of the pur}tose for which it was used after the
death of Judas ; ( /) the blood which gave its name
to the held was that of Judas, by which it was
deliied, for (7) the Held Akeldama is identified with
tlie place of his death, a fact of which there is no
mention in Matthew.

The ()ii!_> jxtint eommoTi to the two accounts is
tiiat the name i)y which the held was known in
the next generation after Judas' death was an
Aramaic word which was variously rendered dypd^
al/xaros and x'^P'-^" o-'^/j^cltos by Mt. and Luke. Lk.
gives a transliteration of this Aramaic name ; he
says it was dK€\5a/j.dx, that is, he understands it as
equivalent to xs-i Vpn, ' Field of Blood.' And dxeX-
dafiax is, no doubt, a possible transliteration of
these Hebrew words, for we have other instances
of linal N being represented by tlie Greek x> «*'^>
e.g., in the equation ^ipdx-^JD. But we .should
not expect a linal x> although it might be defended,
if the last part of the Aramaic title were nci ; the
pre.sence of x suggests rather that the Aramaic
title ended with the letters "|0^. Now it is remark-
able that Ti'^'^^^KoifidaOai, so that KOLfirjTrjpiov 'ceme-
tery ' would be the exact equivalent of tidt ^pn.
And Klostermann (Probleme im Aposteltexte, p. 6 fl". )
has suggested that this was really the name by
which the held was known to the native Jews,
and that we have here a corroboration of St.
Matthew's tradition 'to bury strangers in' (Mt
27"). This conjecture is conlirmed by the fact,
which has been pointed out above, that the signifi-
cance of the name ' Field of Blood ' was differently
understood by Mt. and Luke. When we have two
rival explanations offered of a place-name, it is
probable that the name it.self is a corruption of
some other, akin in sound, but not in sense.

Tlie evidence, then, points to the following con-
clusions. The field which was purchased with the
wages of Judas was originally a ' potter's field,' or

{)it, in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. It may
lave been (as Christian tradition had it afterwards)
the place in the Valley of Ilinnom where the
potter of Jeremiah's day pursued his craft (Jer 18-
19") ; but of this there is no hint in the NT, for the
reference to Jeremiah in the text of Mt 27" is an
inadvertence, the passage quoted by the Evangelist
being Zee 11'^. Ihis ' potter's field ' was used as a
burial-ground for strangers, and so Avas called S'^D
'na'i = ccemetcrium. Within half a century the name
became corrupted to nc'i hp.u ' the Field of Blood,'
the allusion being variously interpreted of the
blood of Christ and the blood of Judas.

There is no good reason to doubt the identity of
the modern Hakk ed-Dumm, on the south bank of
the Valley of Hinnom, Avith the ' Akeldamach' of
Lk. and the dypbs aiixaros of MattheAV. The early
pilgrims,_ e.g. Antoninus (570) and Arculf (685),
describe its site Avith sufficient accuracy, and so do
the later medireval travellers.

Tradition has distinguished Akeldama, the field purchased
with Judas' thirty pieces of silver, from the scene of his death
—a distinction of sites which, though inconsistent with Ac 1,
is compatible with Mt., as has been pointed out above. Thus
Antoninus places ' Akeldemac, hoc est, ager sanguinis, in quo
omnes peregrini sepeliuntur' (§ 26), near Siloam ; but the fig-
tree ' on which Judas hanged himself ' was shown him on the
N.E. of the city (§ 17). Arculf seems to place the latter upon
the Hill of Evil Counsel (§ IS), where it is shown at the present
day ; but the tradition has not been constant, the ' elder-tree '
of Judas having been pointed out to Sir J. Maundeville (in 16th
cent.) near Absalom's pillar.

The best description of Hakk ed-Dumm, and of
the buildings Avhicli remain of the old charnel
bouse, Avill be found in an article by Schick (PEFSt,
1892, p. 283 fl'. ). It is quite possible, as he says,
that this Avas once the site of a potters cave ; and
clay used to be taken, up to quite recent times, from
a place a little higher up the Hill of Evil Counsel.
This burial-place Avas much used in Crusading
times ; indeed, it came to be regarded as an honour
to be buried in Akeldama, so completely Avere the
old associations of horror forgotten or ignored.

J. H. Bernard.

ALABASTER (dXa/3otrrpos or dXdjiaarpov ; in
secular Avriters always dXd/3acrrpos [more correctly
dXd/3a<rroj], though Avith a heterog. plur. dXdjSaarpa ;
in NT only in accus. , and only once Avith art.,
Avhich is found in different MSS in all the genders
— Trjv, Tov, TO [Tisch., Treg. , WH, INIeyer, Alford
prefer ttjv]). — The Avord occurs four times in the
Gospels : Mt '26", Mk U^''^^ Lk 7^'. The Oriental
alabaster, so called from the locality in Egypt (the
toAvn of Alabastron, near Tell el-Amarna) * Avhere
it is found in greatest abundance, is a species of
marble softer and more easily Avorked than the
ordinary marble. It Avas so frequently used for
holding precious ointment that dXdjSaarpos came to
be a synonym for an unguent box (Theocr. xv. 114 ;
Herod, iii. 20). Horace (Od. iv. 1'2. 17) uses oni/x
in the .same Avay.

In all three of the Gospel narratives emphasis is
laid on the costliness of the offering made to our
Lord. The ointment Avas that Avith which monarchs
were anointed. Judas valued it at three hundred
pence. If Ave bear in mind that a denarius Avas a
day's Avage for ordinary labour, it Avould represent
about four shillings of our money, and unguent
and box Avould have a value of something like HQO.
Mary ' brake the box.' This is generally inter-
preted as merely meaning ' unfastened the seal ' ;
but is it not in accordance alike Avith a profound
instinct of human nature and Avith Oriental ideas
to interpret the Avords literally ? The box which
had been rendered sacred by holding the ointment
Avith Avhich Jesus Avas anointed Avould never be put
to a loAver use.

This incident is the gospel protest against phil-
anthropic utilitarianism. ' Man shall not live by
bread alone, but by every Avord that proceedeth out
of the mouth of God.' We have here the Avarrant
for the expenditure of money on everything that
makes for the higher life of man. Whatever tends
to uplift the imagination, to ennoble and purify
the emotions, to refine the taste, and thus to add
to the spiritual value of life, is good, and is to be
encouraged. Jesus claims our best. He inspires
us to be and do our best, and the first-fruits of all
the higher faculties of the soul are to be devoted
to Him. See, further, art. Anointing i. 2.

A. Miller,

* The reverse supposition is possible, that the town derived
its name from the material (see Encyc. ISibl. i. 108).

ALEXANDER AND RUFUS

ALMSGIVING

ALEXANDER AND RUFUS.— The Synoptists all
record tliat tlie Saviour's cross was borne by one
Simon of Cyrene. St. Mark (I5'-i) alone adds that
he was ' the father of Alexander and Rufus.' From
this Ave gather that, when the Second Gospel was
written, "the sons of him who bore the cross were
followers of the Crucified, and men of prominence
and note in the Church. Tliis information as to
the two sons of Simon being Alexander and Rufus,
is also found in the Gospel of Nicodemus (ch. 4).
The name Alexander apjiears in Ac 4*' 19^^ 1 Ti 1-",
2 Ti 4'"*, but tliere is not the slightest ground for
identifying any one of these with the Alexander of
Mk 15^'.

In the case of Rufus, however, it has generally
been considered thiit he is probably the same as
the Rufus wlio, with his mother, is saluted by St.
Paul in Ro 16'^ {'Pou(pov rov iKKeKTov iv Kvpiup). And
if tliis is so, it tells us that not only the sons of
Simon of Cyrene, but his wife also, were members
of the Church. Lightfoot supports this view, and
Swete considers that it has 'some probability.'
In St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, written
from Rome, occurs a salutation sent to the Church
at Philippi from Caesar's household (4--). Lightfoot
has compared the list of names of those to whom
St. Paul sends greeting in his letter to the Romans
(ch. 16) with the names in the lists of the house-
hold which occur in the inscriptions, and on the
name Rufus he writes (Philip2nans'', p. 176) —

' Rufus is a very ordinary name, and would not have claimed
notice here but for its occurrence in one of the Gospels. There
seems no reason to doubt the tradition that St. JIark wrote
especially for the Romans ; and if so, it is worth remarking
that he alone of the Evangelists describes Simon of Cyrene as
the " father of Alexander and Rufus" (1.5-1). A person of this
name, therefore, seems to have held a prominent place among
the Roman Christians : and thus there is at least fair ground
for identifying the Rufus of St. Paul with the Rufus of St. Mark.
The inscriptions exhibit several members of the household bear-
ing the names Rufus and Alexander, but this fact is of no value
where both names are so conmion.'

In connexion with Bishop Lightfoot's note, it is
worthy of notice that in Polj'carp's Epistle to the
Philippians (9) we find Ignatius, Zozimus, and
Rufus adduced as examples, with St. Paul and the
rest of the Apostles, of men who had obeyed the
word of righteousness and exercised all patience,
' and are gone to the place that was due to them
from the Lord with whom also tliey suti'ered ; for
they loved not this present world, but Him who
died and was raised again by God for us.'

In the Acts of Andrew and of Peter, Rufus and
Alexander appear as the companions of Peter,
Andrew, and Matthias, but no further information

J. B. Bristow.

ALLEGORY.— See Parable.

ALMSGIVING (Aeij/ioo-wr;).— [For the history of
the word, and Jewish teaching, see Hastings' DB
i. 67]. Only on three occasions does our Lord in
the NT employ the word (Mt 6^"^ Lk \\*^ and 123^).
But these texts by no means exhaust His teaching
on the subject. All the Gospels witness to His
interest in it. Mk. contains the incidents of the
Rich Young Man whom He told, ' Yet one thing
thoa lackest : go, sell all that thou hast, and give
to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in
heaven' (10-'); the Widow's Mite (12«); and the
emphatic praise of Mary of Bethany (H'^). Jn.
again exhibits all Christ's miracles as so many
cliarities (e.g. 2'"ii), 'good works' which Christ
'showed you from the Father' (10'^-); tells the
Lord's defence of Mary's act (12*^) ; and drops a hint
twice over (12'' and 13-'') of Christ's own practice of
giving something to the poor out of His scanty
wallet. But it is St. Matthew the converted tax-
gatherer who left all and followed Him, and St.
Luke the beloved physician, with his abounding

sympathy for wretchedness of every sort, who have
preserved to us the most numerous and striking of
His sayings on the subject.

The general character of our Lord's teaching
concerning Almsgiving has been described as in
close accordance with the Jewish thought of the
time, even in points where we should have least
expected it. Certainly He endorses and very much
enhances the j)raise of Almsgiving which we find in
the OT (c.f/. Ps 4P, Pr 19'^ Dn 4-"). But in deal-
ing with the teachings of the Apocrypha, which
probably reflect more closely the views He found
prevailing, He discriminates. If, on the one hand,
He combines (Mt 6'-' ^* '") Almsgiving, Prayer, and
Fasting, as in To 12**, and describes Almsgiving as
providing a treasure in the heavens which faileth
not (Lk 12"^), as in Sir 4U^' ; yet, on the other
hand, He explicitly condemns (Mt G'-) the notion
countenancecl in Sir 31'' [LXX, 34"] that alms
may be done to gain a reputation for piety ; while
in jilt S"*^ He directlj' contradicts both the jjrecept
and the doctrine of Sir 12^"^ 'Give not to the un-
godly . . . for the Most High liateth sinners, and
will repay vengeance.'

Almsgiving is, according to Christ, a duty even
towards our enemies, and those with whom we
have little to do (Mt 5^--^^ Lk 6^»-^« 10") ; it is a
means whereby we may conform ourselves to the
example of our Father which is in heaven (Mt .5^°,
Lk 6^^) ; it is the first exercise of righteousness
(Mt 6''^). As eliminating from our enjoyment of
material things the elements of unthunkfulness
and selfishness, it is the true way to purify tlieui
for our use (Lk 11^'). To obtain the means of
almsgiving, we may prolitably part with earthly
goods, because we sIliII thereby provide ourselves
with 'pur.ses which wax not old,' and raise our
hearts, with our treasures, to heaven (Lk 12"^* ^^).
In certain cases, like that of the Rich Young
Ruler, it may be needful for a man to sell all and
distribute to the poor (Mt 19"', Mk 10-', Lk 18") ;
while the poor whom we may make our friends by
using ' the mammon of unrighteousness,' for their
benefit, are able, by their grateful prayers for us,
to 'receive us, when it (our wealth) has failed
us, into the eternal tabernacles' (Lk 10'"'^ parable
of the LInjust Steward). Even trilling alms, given
in the name of a disciple, are sure to be rewarded
(Mt 10^-). And surely in those words of the Good
Samaritan to the innkeeper, ' Whatsoever thou
spendest more, when (not, if) I come again I will
repay thee' (Lk 10-'^), we must discern the voice of
our Lord Himself : since no one but He can be certain
either of returning (Ja 4'''), or of ability to reward
the ministrations of love. His rewards, when He
does come, will surprise some, who did not realize
that in ministering to 'his brethren' they minis-
tered to Him (Mt 25^^*-). On the other hand, for
the rich to indulge themselves, and neglect their
poor neighbour, is the way for thein to Gehenna
(Lk 16'^"^' parable of the Rich INIan and Lazarus) ;
and the omission of the duty will be a ground of
condemnation at the Last Day (INIt 25^^).

Other notices, though less direct, are worth con-
sidering, e.g. our Lord's injunction to the Twelve,
'Freely ye have received, freely give' (Mt 10'^);
His own compassionate feeding of the hungry
multitudes (Mt H'^ 15«^ Mk 6^' 8^ Lk 9'^) ; His
rebuke of the Rabbis' rule, that when sons had
rashly or selfishly taken the vow of Corban, they
must no longer be sutiered to do aught for their
father or their mother (Mt 15^ Mk 7") ; His ac-
ceptance of the Jews' intercession for the Gentile
who had built them Ji synagogue (Lk 7^) ; the praise
of the women who ministered unto Him of their
substance (8^) ; His advice, when we make a feast,
to invite the poor (14'^) ; and the vow of the peni-
tent Zacchteus, ' The half of my goods I give to the

ALOES

ALPHA AXD OMEGA

poor' (19^). Nor may we omit 'the words of the
Lord Jesus,' quoted by St. Paul, but preserved by
St. Luke (Ac 20^^), ' It is more blessed to give than
to receive.'

We do not find in the teaching of our Lord Him-
self any of those cautions, Avliicli are so dear to the
present day, against excessive almsgiving ; though
doubtless St. Paul 'had the mind of Cluist' (1 Co
2'") when he laid down his rule, ' If any man trill
not work, neither let him eat' (2 Th 3'"). Not
far, at any rate, from this is His parable of the
Labourers in the Vineyard (Mt 20'"' ), where Jesus
describes God under the figure of a rich and generous
householder who gives work and wages (not mere
alms) to those who are able to work, asks with
surprise of sucli, ' Why stand ye here all the day
idle?' and, on learning it was their misfortune and
not their fault, makes them work for the last hour,
yet pays them a Avhole day's wages.

We have seen how Christ condemns the doing of
alms to have glory of men. He exposes also the
ugliness of boasting of our giving before God (Lk
18" parable of the Pharisee and the Publican) ;
insists that justice, mercy, and truth are of in-
finitely greater importance than minute scrupulous-
ness in tithing, and lays down the comprehensive
principle that, however there may be opportunities
for us to do more than we have been explicitly
commanded, yet we never can do more than we
oive to God : ' When ye have done all, say. We are
unprofitable servants : we have done that wiiich it
was our duty to do ' (Lk IT'"). Again, by His own
example, in the case of the woman of Canaan (Mt
15-'''-^), He cuts ott' anotlier unworthy motive, too
often active in our so-called almsgiving, the wish
to get rid of a beggar's importunity ; wiiile, both
in the case of this woman and of her with the
issue of blood (Mt 9-'", Mk a-^, Lk 8^'^), He shows
by His own example that true kindness is not in-
discriminate, but takes the most careful account,
not so much of the immediate and material, as of
the ultimate and spiritual benefit which may be
done, by its assistance, to the afflicted or the needy.
The soul's wellbeing is higlier than the body's.
And, of course, our almsgiving, like all our works,
is to be done in subjection to the two command-
ments which are the standing law of His kingdom,
tliat we love the Lord our God with all our heart
and all our mind, and that we love our neighbour
asourself (Mt 'J2^'''-||).

LiTRRATi-RE.— Besides the Commentaries on passages referred
to, consult O. Cone, Itich ayid J'oor in the New Testament,
112 fF.; B. F. Westcott, Incarnation and Coinmon Life, 195-
208 ; A. T. LyttelLon, College and (Tnivefnitj/ Sei-mon-t, 250 ;
W. C. E. Newbolt, Counselx of Faith and Practice, 227 ; F.
Temple, liugby Sermons, 2nd ser. 7 ; Pusey, Sermons.

James Cooper.
ALOES. — We have in the NT only one refer(?hce
to aloes, Jn ly^'', where Nicodenms brings myrrh
and aloes with him, when he joins Joseph of Ari-
mathea in taking away the body of Jesus for burial.
In Englisli, 'aloe' is used to designate (1) Aloe vid-
garift, A. spirit ta, etc., of the natural order Lili-
acea^, from which the medicine known as ' bitter
aloes' is oljtained ; (2) Agave Americana, or
American aloe, of the order Aniaryllidacea?, a
plant whicli is noted for its long delay in Uowering,
and for the rapidity with which it at length
puts forth its Uowering stalk ; and (3) Aqnilaria
Agidloclia, Aq. secundaria, etc., of the order Aqui-
which is obtained the aloes-wood
of commerce. Tiie substance so
result of disease occurring in the
wood of the tree. To obtain it, the tree has to be
split, as it is found in the centre. With this eagle-
wood are ijrobablv to be identified the aloes of the
Bible.

The grounds on which this identification rests
are chiefly these : — (I) Under the name a-ydWoxov

lariaceic, from
or eagle-wood
named is the

Dioscorides (i. 21) describes an aromatic wood
which was imported from India and Arabia, and
was not only used for medicinal purposes, but also
burned instead of frankincense. Similarly Celsius
{Hierobot. i. 135 tf.) discusses references of Arab
writers to many varieties of aghtduji found in
India and Ceylon which gave oft", Avhen burned, a
sweet fragrance, and which were used as a perfume
for the veiy same purposes as those Avhich ' aloes '
served among the Jews (Ps 45®, Pr 7'", Ca 4'^).
Quite analogous is the employment of aloes for
l>erfuming the coverings of the dead (Jn ly'*" ; cf.
2 Ch 16'^).

(2) It is practically certain that aydWoxov and
affhuluji, and also the Hebrew D'^rix (ahuliin) and
mSn?? (uhdlvth), are derivatives of the Sanskrit word
agurti, of which the term 'eagle-wood' is itself a
corruption. If this etymology is correct, it indi-
cates that both the name and the commodity were
brought from the Far East (cf. '^-ij, Sanskrit naradu).
The Greek aXir) and our own ' aloe ' may be fiom
the same root.

(3) There was an active trade in spices carried
on in ancient times, not only through Phojnicia
but also through the Syrian and Arabian deserts,
so that there is no great difficulty in supposing
that ' aloes ' wei'e brought from India. These con-
siderations seem to attbrd sufficient justification
for the belief that eagle-wood was the aloes of the
Biblical writers. HUGH Duncan.

ALPHA AND OMEGA.— A solemn designation of
divinity, of Jewish origin, jjeculiar to the Book of
Kevelation. In Kev 1" it is applied to Himself by
' the Almighty,' w ith obvious relation to Ex 3'^
(cf. v.^) and Is 41^ 44" (for the LXX rendering of ni,T
n'N2^ by TravTOKpcLTijp, cf. Am 3'-* 4'-*). In llev 21''
also the epithet is applied not to the Son but to
the Father, as shown by the context (cf. verses •*
'a voice out of the throne,' * 'He spake that is
seated on the throne,' ^ ' I will be his Goil and he
shall be my son '). In 22'^ it is placed in a derived
sense (i.e. 'I, the primary object and ultimate ful-
filment of God's promise ') in the mouth of the
glorified Jesus. This transfer of a Divine title to
the Son furnishes a problem of great interest for
the early development of Christology ; for, as
It. H. Charles points out (Hastings' LB i. p. 70),
'although in Rev P* [add 21'^] this title is used of
God the Father, it seems to be confined to the Son
in Patristic and subsequent literature.'

1. Origin and Signijicance. — («) The simplest
and most primary use of this figure, derived as
it is from the lirst and last terms of the alphabet,
which with Greeks and Hebrews were also those
of numerical notation, is common to several lan-
guages. Thus in English we have the expression
'from A to Z.' Schoettgen (Hor. Heb. i. 1086)
adduced from Jalkut lliibcin, fol. 17. 4, ' Adam
trans*^ressed the Avhole law from n to n' ; aiul
48. 4, 'Abraham ke[)t the law from n to n.' As
Cremer sliows ( r/iC(y/. Wiirterbuch, p. 1), this has no
bearing on the case except linguistically. In
Jalkut Hub. 128. 3, God is said to bless Israel
from K to n (because Lv 16'''" "* begins with n and
ends with n), but to curse only from i to o (because
Lv 16'^"^^ begins with i and ends with d). K. H.
Charles (I.e.) adds examples of this (general) use
from Martial (v. 20 and ii. 57) and Theodoret
(HE iv. 8).

(b) In the later, more philosophical, period of
Hebrew literature similar expressions are applied
to God, as indicative of His omnipresence and
eternal existence. God, as the Being from whom
all things proceed and tu whom they tend, is thus
contrasted in Deutero-lsaiah with lieathen divini-
ties (41^ 43'" [cf. Ex S'-*] 44« 48'-). Here the best
example is the ],vabbalistic designation of the

ALPHA AND OMEGA

Shekinah as nx, according to Buxtorf = ' principium
et linis' (Lex. Vhald. Taiin. et Rabb.).

But a threefold designation of God as the Eter-
nal is also employed. The Jerusalem Targum on
Ex 3'^ so interprets the Divine name ('qui fuit,
est, et erit, dixit mundo '), and the Targ. Jonathan
on Dt 32" ('ego ille est, qui est, et qui fuit, et qui
erit'). So also, according to Bous.set (ad Rev \*),
Shcinoth R. iii. f. 105. 2, Midrash Tillim 117. 2,
Bereshith R. on Dn 10'-' (the 'writing of nOK —
truth = the .seal of God.' See below). Thus in
He 2'" God is both end and means of all things (8i
Sf, ol ovTo. irdvTa) ; in Ko IP'' ' Of him, through him,
and unto him are all things' ; cf. Rev I*.

Instances of expressions of like implication
ap])lied to the Deity (6 6e6s), or to individual
divinities, are naturally still more common in
Greek philosophical literature, so that, as Justin
says (ad Groicos, xxv.), 'Plato, Avhen mystically
exjiressing the attributes of God's eternity, said,
" God is, as the old tradition runs, the end and the
middle of all things" ; plainly alluding to the Law
of JSIoses.' The tradition was indeed 'old' in
Plato's day, but there are many more probable
sources than Ex 3'^ for Plato. We need refer only
to the song of the Peleiada? at Dodona : Zei)s ^v,
Z£i)s icTTLv, Zei's iacrerai (Fans. X. 12. 5) ; and the
Orphic saying, Zei's irpwros yevero, Zei>s vararos
dpxiKepavvos, Zei)s KeipaXrj, Zevs fxiaaa, k.t.\. (Lobeck,
Aglaophamiis, 521, 523, 530 f.). Similar attributes
are applied to Athene and Asclepius in examples
quoted by Wetstein. Notoriously the Jewish
apologists had been beforehand witli Justin Mar-
tyr in ascribing to Moses the larger and more
philosophical conceptions of Deity enunciated by
the philosophers ; and from these writings of the
period of Revelation and earlier it is possible to
demonstrate the existence of a Jewish kcrygma
(formula of missionary propaganda)definingthe true
nature of the Deity and of right worship, wherein
Is 44'^''^- with the expression borrowed in Rev 1*21",
or its equivalent, is the central feature. Josephus
(c. Apion. ii. 190-198 [ed. Niese]), contrasting the
law of Moses on this subject with heathenism,
calls it ' our doctrine (\6yos) concerning God and
His worship.' What he designated ' the first com-
mandment ' is easily recognizable as part of such
a kcrygma, and seems to be derived from the same
Jewish ajjologist pseudo - Hecatseus (c. 60 B.C.)
whom he quotes in c. Apion. i. § 18.3-204, and ii.
43. It is traceable already in the diatribes against
idolatry in the £/>. of Aristcas (132-141) and the
Wisdom of Solomon (chapters 13-14). The Pro-
cemium of the oldest Jewish Sibyl (Sib. Or. v.
7-8, 15) has: 'There is one God Omnipotent, im-
measurable, eternal, almighty, invisible, alone all-
seeing. Himself unseen. . . . Worship Him, the
alone existent, the Ruler of the world, who alone
is from eternity to eternity.' It appears again in
Christian adaptation in Ac 17=^-^' (cf. 14'5-i7, i Th
pj. 10^ Ro 118-^- Wis 1P3 13«-'» 14^. 1-2-37). in ^jjg
fragment of the Kerygma Petri, quoted in Clem.
Strom, vi. 5. 39-43 (Frags. 2 and 3 aji. Preuschen,
Antlleg. p. 52: ets deos iaTiv, 6j apx^v ttclvtwv
iirol-qaev Kal reXoi/s i^ovaiav e'xwi', k.t.\.): in the
Apology of Aristides; Tatian's Oration'iv.; Athena-
goras, Leg. xiii. , and the Ep. to Diogn. iii. It
begins in Joseplius : ort ^eos ^x" ■''« (Tvixiravra
iravTeKr)^ Kal /xaKapios, avTos avro) Kal iracTLv avrdpKijs,
dpxT) Kai (XEcra Kai tcKos ovtos twv TrdvTwv — 'He
is the beginning and middle and end of all things'
(c. Apion. ii. 190).

On the other hand, the apologetic and eschato-
logical literature, which Rabbinic Judaism after
the rise of Christian speculation more and more
excluded from canonical use, shows a marked ten-
dency to oUset these heathen demiurgic ascriptions
by similar ones applied not directly to God but to

a hypostatized creative Wisdom (Pr g'^^^^^. Wis 7^1
81 9-'- ", Sir 24«- ^s, Bar 3«-3"), or to an angelic Being
endowed with the same demiurgic attributes (2 Es
55«-6«).

The statement of Rabbi Kohler (Jewish Evrycl.
i. p. 438) is therefore correct regarding the phrase
in Rev 1* and 2P if not in 22'^ : ' This is not simply
a paraphrase of Is 44** " I am the first and the last, "
but the Hellenized form of a weH-known Rab-
binical dictum, "The seal of God is Emet, which
means Truth, and is derived from the letters n d n,
the first, the middle, and the last letters of the
Hebrew alphabet, the beginning, the middle, and
the end of all things.'" In other words, we nmst
realize the metaphysical development of Jewish
theology which had taken place between Deutero-
Isaiah and Revelation. The passages adduced by
Kohler from Joma 696 and Sanh. 64rt, and in par-
ticular Jems. Jcb. xii. 13a, Gen. R. Ixxxi., show
the early prevalence of this inteiiwetation of Dn
10-1 ' I shall show thee what is marked upon the
writing of truth (nnx anan), as the signum of God ;
for, says Simon ben Lakish, "x is the first, o the
middle, and n the last letter of the alphabet." '
This being the name of God according to Is 44", ex-
plained Jerus. Sanh. i. 18a, ' I am the first [having
had none from whom to receive the kingdom] ; I
am the middle, there being none wjio shares the
kingdom Avith me ; [and I am the last], there being
none to whom I shall hand tlie kingdom of the
world.' It would seem probable, however, con-
sidering the connexion with Is 44" (' first and last,'
the i^assage is a commonplace of early Ciiristian-
Jewish polemic), that the Kabbalistic form nx is
the earlier, the middle term having perhaps been
inserted in opposition to Jewish angelological and
Christian cosmological speculation. Cf. Rev 11"
and 16^ with 1^ 4^ ; and 2 Es 61"'' (where Uriel, speak-
ing in the name of the Creator, says, ' In the
beginning, when the earth was made . . . then
did I design these things, and they all were through
me alone, and through none other : as by me
also they shall be ended, and by none other ') with
He 210.

In 1 Co 8® we have a significant addition to the
two-term ascription, 'One God, the Father, of (i^)
whom are all things, and we unto (et's) him.' St.
Paul (or his Corinthian converts) adds, ' And one
Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,
and we through him.' This addition marks the
parting of the waj's for Jewish and Clnistian
theology, implying a mediating hypostasis identi-
fied with Christ, that is, a Wisdom-Logos doctrine.
That in Rev 1** and 21® the phrase is still applied
in the purely Jewish sense to God the Father alone,
is placed beyond all doubt liy the connected ascrip-
tions, especijilly 6 Cjv Kal 6 ^t> Kal 6 epxafxevos (not =
iabixevos) connecting P with \*.

Why, and in what sense, the term A-ii is applied
in Rev 22'^ by the glorified Christ to Himself, is
the problem remaining ; and this independently of
the question of composite authorship ; for to the
final redactor, whose date can scarcely be later
than A.D. 95, there was no incompatibility.

(c) Besides the metaphysical or cosmological de-
velopment, which we have traced in connexion
with the Divine title A-I2 from Deutero-Isaiah
through Wisdom and pseudo-Aristeas to its bi-
furcation in Jewish and Christian theologj'^ con-
temporary with the Book of Revelation, we have
a parallel development of cschatological character.
Jehovah is contrasted with the gods of the heatiien
Is 41-®-=^ 42« 433- !» 448- '-26 45^i 46«- 1" 48-5.12

also, and indeed j)rimarily, as 'first and last' in
the sense of director of all things to the fulfilment
of His predeclared purpose, i.e. confirmer andful-
filler of His promise of redemption (44"). And
manifestly the development of this idea of Jehovah

ALPHA AND OMEGA

ALPH^US

as ' first and last ' in the redemptive or soterio-
logical sense, would be more congenial to Hebrew
tliouglit than the metaphysical, although cosmo-
logy plays a great and increasing part in apoca-
lyptic literature. In tlie substitution of 6 ipxa/xevo^
for the anticipated 6 eaSfxevos in Rev 1^ 4* (cf. IV
16') recalling Mt IT* and He 10^', we have evidence
of the apocalyptic tendency to conceive of God by
preference soteriologically.

But tlie final redemptive intervention of Jehovah
is necessarily conceived as througli some personal,
human, or at least angelic (Mai 3^ 2 Es 5'") agency,
even when creative and cosmological functions are
still attributed to Jehovah directly, without any,
or with no more than an impersonal, intermediate
agency. Hence, while in Kev 1* as in 1* and 21''
Jehovah Himself, ' the Alpha and Omega, the be-
ginning and tlie end,' is also 6 epxi/^ivos, there is
no escape for any believer in Jesus from trans-
ferring the title in tliis soteriological sense to Him
as Messiah. This will be the case whether his
cosmology requires a Logos-doctrine for demiurgic
functions, as with St. Paul, the Epistle to the
Hebrews, and the Fourth Evangelist, or not. (The
only trace of a true Logos-doctrine is the very super-
ficial touch Kev 19'^''). Thus in Rev 1'^ 2^ the
Isaian title 'tlie first and the last' is applied to
Christ, and in S^"* He is called ' the Amen . . . the
beginning of the creation of God,' The titles are
combined in 22i'*, where we should perhaps render
(Benson, Apocal;/pse, 1900, p. 26), ' I, the Ali)lia
and the Omega (am coming), the first and the last,
the beginning and the end.' As Hengstenberg
maintained (on Rev 1^), 'In this declaration tiie
Omega is to be regarded as emphatic. It is equi-
valent to saying. As I am the Alpha, so am I also
the Omega. The beginning is surety for the end '
(cf. Pli P). Eor this reason it is perhaps also
better to connect the words Nai, 'AiJ.riv of V with
v.** ' Verily, verily, I am the Al])ha and the
Omega' (Terry, BiM. Apocalyptics, 1898, p. '281).

The true sen.se, and at the same time the origin
and explanation of this application of the Divine
title, is to be found, as before, in the Epistles of
St. Paul. In 2 Co 1-" tlie promises of God, how-
soever many they be, are said all to have their
Yea in Christ. And, because this is so, it is
further declared, 'the Amen is also through him.'
The conception that Christ is the Amen or fulfil-
ment of all the promises of God, as ' heir of all
things' and we 'joint heirs with him' (Ro 4^^ 8",
1 Co S'^^, He P, Rev 2F), is comparatively familiar
to us. It represents the significance of the term
J2 in the eschatological application. We are much
less familiar with the idea expressed in the A,
though it is equally well attested in primitive
Christian and contemporary Jewisli thought. In
Pauline language it represents that the peojile of
Messiah were ' blessed with every spiritual bless-
ing in the lieavenly ]>laces in Christ, inasmuch as
God cliose them in his person before the founda-
tion of the world . . . and foreordained them to
be an adoption of sons,' Eph I^- ' ; cf. Is 44^- ^- '',
Wis 18'^ He 25-'", Rev 21', and the doctrine of the
apocalyptic writers, Jewish and Christian, that
' the world was created for the sake of man ' —
resp. 'Israel,' 'the righteous,' ' the Church' (As-
sump. Mos. 112-1-1 ; 2 Es e'^-s'J 7'»- " O'^ ; Hennas, Vis\
ii. 41 etc. The doctrine rests on Gn l-«f-, Ps 8^-^
Ex 42- etc. ). Harnack lias shown (Historii of Dogma,
vol. i. Appendix 1, 'The Conception of Pre-exist-
ence') how pre-existence is for the Jewish mind in
some sense involved in that of ultimate persistence.
The heir ' for whom ' all things were created was
in a more or less real sense (according to the dis-
position of the thinker) conceived as present to
the mind of the Creator before all things. Thus
in Rabbinic jihrase Messiah is one of the ' seven

pre-existent things,' or His 'soul is laid up in
Paradise before the foundation of the world.'
Apocalyptic eschatology demanded a representative
'Son,' the 'Beloved,' chosen 'in the beginning' to
be head of the ' Beloved ' people of ' sons ' in the
end, Avith at least as much logical urgency as
sijeculative cosmology demanded an agent of the
creation itself. It is this which is meant when St.
Paul says that ' however many be the promises of
God, they are in Christ Yea.' This is ' the mystery
Avhich from all ages hath been hid in God who
created all things . . . according to the eternal
purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus.' In
Pauline language, Christ 'the Beloved,' the 'Son
of his love,' is the Yea and the Amen of the pro-
mises of God. Cosniologically, He is the precre.a-
tive Wisdom, ' the firstborn of all creation, in
whom all things were created ' (cf. Rev S^"", Pr 8'--).
But it is not only that ' he is before all things,
and in him all things consist' (cf. Sir '24'-', Wis 1'),
not only that ' all things have been created through
him,' but also'eschatologically ^ unto him' (Col
p5-i7; cf. He 1-3 and Wis 7=^-"-'), logically sub-
sequent to Him because m,ade for His sake. In
Revelation we have only the latter. The cosmo-
logical ' through ' Him practically disappears. It
is only in the eschatological sense that Christ be-
comes the original object and the ultimate fulfil-
ment of the Divine purpose and promises, ' the
Yea, the Amen,' 'the Alpha and the Omega, the
first and the last, the beginning and the end.'

2. The Later History. — It is doubtless from
Revelation that the use of the term in Patristic
literature and Christian epigraphy is mainly de-
rived, though its popularity may well have been
partly due to oral currency in Jewish-Christian
circles before the publication of Revelation. The
eschatological interest is still apparent in the
hymn of Prudentius {Cathem. i.x. lU-12), wherein
the first line contains a reference to Ps 45^ Vulg.
(' Eructavit cor nieuni Verbum bonum '), treated as
Messianic by the Fathers —

' Corde natus ex Parentis
Ante niundi exordium
Alpha et fl cognominatug
Ipse fons et clausula
Omnium qua? sunt, fuerunt
Quseque post futura sunt.'

But in Clem. Alex. (Strom, iv. 25 and vi. 16) and
TertuUian (dc Monog. 5) the cosmological pre-
dominates. Ambrose (Expositio in VII visiones,
i. 8) presents a ditierent interpretation. In Gnostic
circles speculative and cosmological interpretations
are unbridled. Thus Marcus {ap. Ireii;eus, Hajr.
I. xiv. 6, XV. 1) maintained that Christ designated
Himself A to set forth His own descent as the
Holy Cihost on Jesus at His baptism, because by
Geniatria A ( = 800 -t- 1 ) and irepiaTepd ( = 80 -F 5 -f lUO
-f 10 + '200 -t- 300 -f- 5 + 100 + 1 ) are equivalent.

Literature. — For the great mass of later epigraphic material
the reader is referred to N. Miiller in Herzog-Hauck's Real-
encykl. i. pp. 1-12, and the article 'Monogram' in Smith and
Cheetham's Diet. 0/ Christian Antiquities. Besides the works
already cited, articles on A and 11 may be found in the various
Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopsedias. Its use in Rev 18 216 and
221s should be studied in the critical commentaries On Divine
epithets and the doctrine of hypostases see Bousset, Religion
lies Jmienthunis, iv. chs. 2 and 5 (1903). Older monographs in
J. C. Wolfe, Curce Pkilolog. et Crit. on Rev 18.

B. W. Bacon.
ALPH.ffiUS ('AX^aros).— In the NT this name
is borne by (1) tlie father of the Levi who is
commonly identified with Matthew the Apostle
(Mk 2^^) ; (2) the father of the second James in
the lists of the Apostles (Mt lO^, Mk 3'«, Lk 6"^,
Ac P""). The desire to connect as many of the
Twelve as possible by ties of natural relationship
has led some (e.g. Weiss) to identify the two. But
in the lists Matthew and James are separated by
Thomas in St. Mark and St. Luke ; and even in
St. Matthew, where one follows the other, there is

ALTAR

no note that they were brothers, similar to that
attaciied to tlie names of the sons of Zebedee.

The identilication of (2) witli the Clopas of Jn
19'-' rests on two hypotheses : (a) The assumption
that as a Mary is given as the mother of James,
and consequently as the wife of Alplia'us, she
must be the same as Mary the wife of Clopas who
stood by the Cross. Jerome (de Perpct. Vl.rrf. v.
16) adopted this argument. But Mary is a name
of far too common occurrence in the NT to make
this theory of any value. (/3) The alleged deriva-
tion of the names Alphceus and Clopas from a
common Aramaic original. But this has not been
satisfactorily established : there is even a lack of
agreement as to the form of the original. WH
hold that its initial letter would be n, and print
'A\<pa'Los accordingly ; but Edersheim quotes the
Babylonian Talmud to show that the letter would
be N. Jerome, although ]iredisposed by his view
of the Brethren of tlie Lord in favour of finding
the same man under both names, rejects the
linguistic identilication ; and the Syriac versions
also represent them by different words. Delitzsch
held Alplia'us to be a Grecized form of an Aramaic
w'ord, but Clopas and Cleopas to be abbreviations
of a Greek name Cleopatros (against this see
Deissmann, Bible Studies, Eng. tr. p. 315 n.).

Nothing is known of either Alphipus beyond the
name ; for such details as that (2) was the brother
of Joseph, the reputed father of the Lord, stand or
fall with his identification with Clopas to whom
they really belong. See art. Clopas, below.

Literature. — Lightfoot, Essay on 'The Brethren of the
Lord ' in his Commentary on Galatians, also in Dissertations
on the Apost. Age, p. 1 ; Mayor, The Ejnstle of St. James,
Introd. !>. xxi ; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the
Afessiah, bk. v. oh. 15 ; Andrews, Life of our Lord upon
Earth, 114, 115 ; Weiss, Life of Christ, 'bk. i'v. ch. 7 [Eng. tr.].

C. T. DiMONT.

ALTAR [OvaiaffT-fipLov, a word of Hellenistic usage,
applied to Jewish altars as distinguished from
^wfxos, the ordinary word for heathen altars [cf.
Ex 34" Nu 231, Dt 7^ Ac IT'-'^*]).— Tlie raised
structure on which sacrifices and ol)lations were
presented. As used in the Jewish ritual, the word
was applied not only to the great altar of burnt-
offering before the temple, but also to the altar of
incense within the holy place, .and on one or two
occasions even to the table of shewbread (cf. ^Lal
!'• ^-, Ezk 41"). When no further specification
was added, it denoted the altar of burnt-offering,
the altar Kar e^oxv"-

The Jewish altar of Christ's day was the last
term of a long development, the history of which
remains still in many points obscui'e. In the
primitive Semitic worship it seems that no altar,
properly .speaking, was in use ; unless we choose to
give that name to tlie sacred stone or pillar beside
which the victim was slain, and on which tiie blood
or fat of the sacrifice Avas smeared (cf. 1 S 14'*-' 6'^- '■'',
1 K l'-"). In such cases the victims were slain (or
slain and burnt), not on the sacred stone, but
beside it. No doubt the significant [lart of the
offering lay in the smearing of the stone, which
was more or less identified with the Deity (Gn
28''''"'), and might thus be considered as both altar
and temple. Later the burning of the victim came
to be an integral part of the ceremony, and the
hearth of burning acquired more inii)ortance. The
hearth was originally the bare ground, or a rock
(Jg 6'-" 13i'*--»), but later it was artificially formed.
In the earliest law (Ex 20-^"-") it was prescribed
that the altar should be of earth, or of unhewn
stone, and be made without steps, evidently a rever-
sion to a sim))ler custom than prevailed in many of
the Canaanite altars, or in the altars of the high
places. That the stone was not to be hewn may
also be connected with the primitive idea that the
deity which inhabited the stone might be oliended

or injured by the dressing. These regulations
were respected in a modified degree in the buildin"
of the altars of the temple at Jerusalem. The
altar built by Ahaz, on an Assyrian model, was
I)robably designed in total disregard of the early
prescrii^tions ; but the later altars endeavoured to
conform somewhat to the original ideal. Thus
the altars of the second temple — l)otli that of
Zerubbabel and that built by Judas Maccaba^us —
were built of unhewn stone. In all probability
there were steps up to the altar of the first temple *
(cf. the altar of Ezekiel's vision [43^'], which had
steps on the eastern side) ; but the altars of the
second temple were ascended by means of a gradual
acclivity.

The altar of Herod's temple, though larger than
all former altars, preserved their main character-
istics. It stood in front of the temple, in the inner-
most court. It was built of unhewn stone ; no iron
tool was used in its construction. In this the
letter of the law in Exodus was adhered to, while
its evident intention was evaded. A new inter-
jiretation of the law^ against the use of hewn stone
was given by Jewish tradition in the Avords of
Johanan ben Zakkai : ' The altar is a means of
estaldishing peace Ijetween the people of Israel and
their Father in heaven ; therefore iron, which is
used as an instrument of murder, should not be
swung over it.' The altar was of huge dimensions.
Accoi-ding to Josephus (BJ V. v. 6) it was 15 cubits
high and 50 cubits square at the base ; according
to the more reliable tradition of the Mishna,
which enters into precise details, it was 32 cubits
square at the base and correspondingly less in
height. t Like the earlier altars, it rose up in a
series of terraces or stages, contracting at irregular
intervals. (The first landing was a cubit from the
ground, and a cubit in breadth ; Avhile 5 cubits
higher came a second landing). The hearth on the
top still measured 24 cubits in length and bi'eadth.
The altar-hearth was made accessible to the mini-
stering priests by a structure on the south side,
built in the form of a very gradual acclivity, and
making a pathway 32 cubits long by 16 broad.
Beside this main ascent were small stairs to the
several stages of the altar. Round the middle of
the entire altar ran a red line as an indication
to the priest when he sprinkled with blood the
upper and lower parts of the altar. At the south-
west corners of the hearth and of the altar's base
were openings to carry off" the wine of the drink-
offerings or the blood sprinkled on the side of tlie
altar. These openings led into a subterranean
canal which connected with the Kidron. At
the corners of the altar-hearth were projections,
called horns. The supposition that these were a
.survival of the time when the victims were slain
as well as burnt on the altar, and required to be
bound upon the hearth, has at least the recom-
mendation of simplicity ; but it scarcely explains
the peculiar sacredness attached to tlie altar-horns,
or the important part they had in the ritual ( 1 K
J51 2^«, Lv 8'^ 9" 16'" ; in certain cases they were
sprinkled with blood. Ex 29'-, Lv 4''). The ex-
planation given by Stade and others connects them
with the worship of Jahweh as sjnnbolized by a
young bull. Northward from the altar was the
place of slaughtering, with rings fastened in the
ground, to which the animals were tied ; it was

* i.e. the altar of Ahaz. For the ' brazen altar ' of Solomon
see t;he daring hypothesis of W. R. Smith {US, note L), and A. R.
S. Ketmedy's note in Hastings' Dli i. 76'\

t The dimensions given by pseudo-Hecatseus (Jos. c. Apion. i.
22) — 20 cubits square and 10 cubits high — are not adducible
here ; they refer to an altar of the second temple. The altar of
Ezekiel's vision was 18 cubits square at the base and 11 cubits
high. The altar of Solomon, according to 2 Ch 41, was 20 cubits
square at the base and 10 high ; dimensions perhaps taken, by
the author who inserted them, from the altar of the second
temple, with which he was acquainted.

a:mazemext

AMAZEMENT

provided also with pillars and tables for purposes
of hanging;-, flaj-in<i-, and washing. Tlie temple,
together -with the altar and the place of slaughter,
were separated from the rest of the inner court by
a wall of partition, a cubit high, to mark off the
jiart reserved for the priests from that free to
Israelites generally.

On this great altar the fire was kept burning
niglit and day ; it was the centre of the Jewish
ritual. On it, morning and evening, was ottered
the daily burnt-oli'ering in the name of the people,
accompanied with meal-oHerings and drink-ott'er-
ings. On the Sabbaths and during the festival
days, the public ott'erings were greatly augmented.
Still more vast was the number of private sacri-
fices which were offered day by day ; and on the
festival days, when Jerusalem was crowded with
worshippers, thousands of priests otKciated, and
tlie great altar was scarcely sutticient to Ijurn the
masses of flesh that were heaped continuously
ui>on it.

The altar of incense, or the golden altar, stood
within the Holy Place. It Mas of very modest
dimensions, and Avas used chiefly for tiie ottering
of incense, which took place twice daily, in the
morning before the burnt-oflering, and in the
evening after it.

Besides an incidental mention of the altar (Mt
2.3^', Lk 11'''), there ai'e two pregnant sayings of
Christ in the Gospels where the altar is concerned.
In the Krst (Mt 5-^--^) He opposes to the mere ex-
ternalism of the altar-worship the higher claims of
brotherhood, teaching that what God rerpiires is
mercy and not sacrifice. In the other (Mt 23'^"-'^)
He exposes the puerility of the distinction made,
in swearing, between the altar and tlie gift upon
it. It was liy such miserable casuistry that the
scribes and Piiarisees evaded the most solemnly
assumed obligations.

Literature. — Benzinger's and Nowack's Heh. Arch. (Index,
«.!•. ' Altar '); Josephus, RJ v. v. 6, and c. Apion. i. 22; Mishna,
Mitkloth iii. 1-4 ; Selienkcl, DibeUexicon, ' IJrandopferaltar ' ;
Lig:htfoot, The Temple Serrice ; Schiirer, IIJP ii. i. 24 ; Well-
hausen, Pr(il('(jotiiena (' Die Opfer '), and liestc des A rab. Ileiden-
thvms-, 101 f. ; W. R. Smith, RS (Index, s.v. 'Altar); Perrot
iiid Chipiez, Ilistoirc de I'AH (Enjr. tr., sections on Ph(jenicia
xnd Juda;a). See also Lightfoot (J. B.), 'Essay on the Chr.
Ministry' in Phil. pp. 251, 261, 2()5, and in Dissertations, pp.
217, 229, 234 ; Westcott (B. F.), Uebieivs, pp. 453-461.

J. Dick Flemixg.
AMAZEMENT.— The interest of this word to
students of the Gospels is twofold, and arises out
of its employment, on the one hand, as one of the
terms used to express the ett'ect upon the people
of our Lord's supernatural manifestation, and on
the other, in one unique instance, to describe an
emotion which tore the heart of the God-man
Himself.

The nominal fonn, ' amazement,' is of rare occurrence in EV
(only Ac 3io, i p 36 (for TT<iv-<r,,-] in AV ; Mk 5-i2, Lk 4*5 526, Ac 310 in
RV) ; the passive verb, ' to be amazeti,' occurs not infrequently
in the narrative books of NT (rarely in OT, e.g. Ex 1515). They
are especially characteristic of the Synoptic Gospels, and are
currently employed in their narratives, along with several kin-
dred terms, to describe the impression made by our Lord's
wonderful teaching and His miraculous works. Iii the AV they
translate in these narratives a number of Gr. words : 8kui3o;,
oacu,3-ouatt, laOacu^iauMi ; ixerTotcrt?. iho-Tccuxi ; s^iTXy.tra-ouMt. But
the RV, studying greater uniformity of rendering, omits lxTXy;(r-
(rauxi from this list, and makes ' amazement,' ' to be amazed,' the
stated representatives of the other two groups [exceptions are :
Mk 16** where s-'urrcea-i; is rendered 'astonishment'; Ac 3W-
where Bxu-So?, 'ix6x,uSo; are represented bv 'wonder ' : passages
like Mk 321, 2 Co 513, and again Ac IQio iil3 2217 are, of course,
not in question]. To 'ixTky.(r(reuxi it uniformly assigns 'aston-
ish,' 'astonishment'; and to the accompanying terms of kin-
dred implications similarly appropriate renderings: to 8ccvci.dZu
{■xBa.u/j.aZo'. Mk 121") generally 'to marvel' (but 'to wonder,'
Mb 15M, Lk 2i» 422 2412-n, also Ac 7^1), and to o»iio«.«; (m^os Mt

1435, Mk 4-11, Lk 526 71« 837; cf. Ta/)«5-<r« Mt 14-6, Mk 650, ^pi,ua;

Mk 16'*, rp:'</.4, Mk 533, LkS^) 'to be afraid,' varied to ' to fear.'
The constant recurrence in the Synoptic narrative of one or
another of these terms as a comment upon the effect of our
Lord's teaching or works, imparts to the reader a vivid sense
of the supernaturalness of His manifestation and of the deep
impression which it made as such on the people.

Sometimes it appears to have been the demeanour
or bearing of our Lord which awoke wonder or
struck with awe (Mt 27'^ I Mk 15', Mk 9'* 10^-';
cf. Lk 2^«). Sometimes the emotion was arouseil
rather by the tone of His teaching, as, with His
great ' I say unto you' He 'taught them as hav-
ing authority, and not as the scribes' (Mk 1-- 1 Lk
4^2, Mt 7-^ ; cf. Mk \V\ Mt 22^3). At other times it
was more distinctly what He said, the matter of
His discourse, that excited the emotions in question
— its unanticipated literalness, or its unanticipat-
able judiciousness, wisdom, graciousness, or the
radical paradox of its announcements (Lk 2^^-^*
422 ; Mt 1.35^ II Mk 6^ ; Jn 7I" ; Mt IG-^ || Mk 10-« ;
Mt 22^;^ II Mk 12'-, Lk 20-6). ^i^^^, commonly, how-
ever, it was one of His wonderful works which
brought to the spectators the dread sense of the
presence of the supernatural (Lk 5'-*; Mk 1-7 [ Lk
4^ ; :Mk 21- II Lk 5-«, Mt 98 ; Lk 7'« \\^* II Mt 12'" ;
Mt 8-7||Mk 4«, Lk 825; .Mk S^^ || Lk S^^-^^; Mk
5ao. sy. 42 y li- §:« . j^jt 9-« ; Mk 6'' ; Jn 6'« || Mt 14-6 .
Mk V ; Lk 9^» ; Mt 2P»), and ttlled the country
with wonder (Mt 15^').

The circle attected, naturally, varies from a
single individual (Mk 5P), or the few who hapjjened
to be concerned (Lk 2^^^ S^), or the bod 3- of His
immediate followers (Mt 17^, Mk 10-^- -6, Mt VS^
21-"), up to a smaller or larger assemblage of spec-
tators (Lk 2*' 4-'- ; Mk 1-- 1! Lk 4-« ; Mk 1-^ || Lk 4=*«;
Mk 2'-, Lk 716 8-- S', Mk 5^^ Mt 13^^ Mk G'l ; Jn
6'^ I Mt 14-6, ]vik 6'" ; Mk 7-^ Lk 9^^, ]Mk 16« ; Mt
22-3 ji ;^ji. 1.217^ Li^ 20-6). These spectators are often
expressly declared to have been numerous : tliey
are described as ' the multitudes ' or ' all the multi-
tudes,' 'all the people of the country,' or quite
generally, when not a single occasion but a sum-
mary of manj' is in question, 'great multitudes'
(Mt 9« II Lk 5-6 ; Mt 7-^ 12-^ Lk IP^ ; 8^ || Mk o^^ ;
Mk 820; J^^t 933 15^1^ ]\jk 915, Jn 7'5, Mk 1I'«, Mt

2233)^

The several terms employed by the Evangelists to
describe the impression on the people of these super-
natural manifestations, express the feelings natural
to man in the presence of the supernatural. In
their sum they leave on the reader's mind a very
complete sense of the reality and depth of the
impression made. Their detailed synonjiny is not
always, however, perfectly clear. The student will
find discriminating discussions of the two groups
of terms which centre respectively around tlie
notions of ' wonder ' and ' fear ' in J. H. Heinrich
Schmidt's well-known Synonymik der cjriechischen
Sprache, at Nos. 168 and 139. It will probably sutiice
here to indicate very briefly the fundamental impli-
cation of each term in its present application.

Sai/udZu is a broad term, primarily expressing the complete
engagement of the mind with an object which seizes so power-
fully upon the attention as to compel exclusive occupation with
it. It is ordinarily used in a good sense, and readily takes on
the implication of 'admiration'; but it often occurs also when
the object contemplated arouses internal opposition and dis-
pleasure. What it always implies is that its object is remark-
able, extraordinary, beyond not so much expectation as ready
comprehension, and therefore irresistibly engages attention and
awakens ' wonder.' It does not import ' surprise,' but rather, if
you will, 'curiosity,' or better, 'interestedness.' In this it
separates itself from 6xpi.lSUu,ai, in which the notion of ' un-
expectedness ' is, at least originally, inherent.

'This latter term gives expression to the sense of mental
helplessness which oppresses us on the occurrence of an un-
anticipated and astonishing phenomenon. The affection of the
mind it suggests is one of mingled admiration and fear ; and in
the usage of the word this passes both downward into ' conster-
nation,' strengthened to ' fright' and 'terror,' and upward into
'awe' and 'veneration.' In the LXX the lower senses are pre-
dominant (c.f/. Sir 125, Ca 3"* &H-1] 910, Ezk 7i« ; 1 K 14i5, 2 S 715,
Wis 173, Dn 817- 18 ; 1 Mac 68, Dn 77, Sir 30»). In the Evangelical
passages now before us, on the other hand, the higher senses
come forward, and the idea expressed lies near to ' awe,' and
the term comes thus into close synonymy with eo^sou.*!.

The notion of ' surprise ' which underlies Bxu^iowxi seems to be
much more prominent in £|/<rTau,«(. This term, broad enough
to be applied to any 'derangement,' bodily or mental, was par-
ticularly employed, with or without a defining adjunct, to de-

AMAZEMENT

AMBASSAGE

scribe that aberration of the mind, the subjects of which in
English too we speak of simply as 'demented' (2 Co 5'^). In
its more ordinari" usage the implication is no more than that
the subject is thrown out of his normal state into a condition
of ' ecstasy,' or extreme emotion, — the emotion in question
being of varied kind, but more commonly an 'amazement'
which carries with it at least a suggestion of perplexity, if not
of bewilderment.

When this ' surprise ' rises to its height, however, especially if it
is informed with alarm, the appropriate term to express it would
seem to be ixTXy,(!-o-ou.u.i, although this term is used so frequently
for purely intellectual effects arising from intellectual causes,
that it falls readily into the sense of pure 'astonishment.'
Nevertheless, the element of 'alarm' inherent in it places it
among the synonyms of ipc^UfMii, from which it differs as a
sudden access of fright differs from an abiding state of fear, or
as, in connexions like those at present engaging our attention,
to be ' awestruck ' differs from the continuous sense of ' awful
reverence ' which prompts to withdrawal from the dread pres-
ence.

The same fundamental emotion of fear which finds its most
natural expression in <fofiiou^x.i is more rarely given expression
also in such terms as Tapdiriru, the basal implication of which is
'agitation,' 'perturbation,' passing on into the 'disquietude,' on
the one side, of that 'troubled worry' the extreme of which is
expressed by a.lr,u,t>\iu, and on the other into that terrified
'consternation' which finds its extreme expression in ■jto-ou.o.i
(Lk 243") : or as -rpiuM, which in its application to the trembling
of the mind — to mental 'shivering' — draws near to the notions
of ' anxiety ' and ' horror.'

The emotions signalized as called out by the
manifestation of Jesus in His word and work, it
will be seen, run through the whole gamut of the
appropriate responses of the human spirit in the
presence of the supernatural. Men, seeing and
hearing Him, wondered, were awestruck, amazed,
astonished, made afraid, with a fear which dis-
quieted their minds and exhibited itself in bodily
trembling. The confusion by RV under the com-
mon rendering 'amaze,' 'amazement' of two of
these groups of terms (dd/x^os, dafj.j3eofxai, HOajx^o^,
cKOafj-lSiiofiac, and ^Karaais, e^i<TTafiai), seems scarcely
to do justice to the distinctive imjjlications of
either, and especially fails to mark the clear note of
the higher implication of ' awe' tliat sounds in the
former. The interest of noting how completely the
notion of ' surprise, 'originally present in 6dfij3os, has
in usage retired into the background in favour
of deeper conceptions, is greatly increased by the
employment of the strengthened form of the verb
€Kdafx^eo/j.aL by St. Mark (14^^) to describe an ele-
ment in our Lord's agony in Gethsemane.

When St. Matthew (26=''') tells us that Jesus ' be-
gan to be sorrowful (Xv-rreiffdai) and sore troubled '
(dd-rj/jLove'iv), St. Mark, varying the phraseology,
says (in the RV) that He ' began to be greatly
amazed {eKda/ji.lie'ia-dai) .and sore troubled (14^^).'
Surely the rendering ' amazed,' however, misses
the mark here : the note of the word, as a parallel
to dd-rjfiovelv and XvireicrdaL, is certainly that of
anguish not of unexpectedness, and the commen-
tators appear, therefore, to err when they lay
stress on the latter idea. The usage in the LXX,
both of the word itself (Sir 30'*, where also, oddly
enough, it is paralleled with Xvir^u) and of its
cognates, seems decisively to suggest a sense for
it whicli will emphasize not the unexpectedness
of our Lords experience, but its di'eadfulness,
and will attrilmte to our Saviour on this awful
occasion, therefore, not 'surprise,' but 'anguish
and dread,' 'depression and alarm' (J. A. Alex-
ander), or even 'inconceivable awe' (Swete).

The difficulty of the passage, let it be remarked, is not a dog-
matic, but an exegetical one. There is no reason why we
should not attribute to the human soul of the Lord all the
emotions which are capable of working in the depths of a sin-
less human spirit (cf. J. A. Alexander's excellent note on Mk
8"* and Swete's on Mk 66). But certainly the employment of
the verb ixUxu^'.o/^xi here by St. Mark affords no warrant for
thinking of the agony of Gethsemane as if it exceeded the ex-
pectation of our Lord, and as if it consisted in large part of the
surprise and perplexity incident upon discovering it to be worse
than He had anticipated (cf. the otherwise admirable note of
Dr. Swete, rn loc. — ' long as He had foreseen the Passion, when
it came clearly into view its terrors exceeded His anticipations ' ;
A. J. Mason, The Conditions of our Lord's Life on Earth, pp.
135-138 — ' when the hour came, it exceeded all His expecta-

tions '). On the contrary, the usage of the word combines with
the context here to suggest that its whole force is absorbed in
indicating the depths of soul-agony through which our Lord
was called upon to pass in this mysterious experience. On the
terms employed, the note of Pearson, On the Creed, ed. 1S35
p. 281 ; ed. New York, 1847, pp. 288-289, is stUl worth consult-
ing.

In studying the emotional life of our Lord's human spirit
during His life on earth, as it is exhibited to us in the Gospel
narratives, nothing in point of fact is more striking than the
richness of the vocabulary by means of which He is pictured to
us as the ' man of sorrows and acquainted with grief,' and the
slenderness of the suggestion that He may have been sutjject
to the surprises which constitute so large an element in the
lives of mere men. So far as the explicit assertions of the
Evangelic narratives go, it would seem that the unexpected
never happened to Jesus. Neither surprise, nor astonishment,
nor amazement, nor suspense, nor embarrassment, nor per-
plexity, nor distraction, is ever, in so many words, attributed
to Him. Those who would discover in the narratives, never-
theless, some ground for supposing that He may have experi-
enced these emotions (e.g. A. J. Mason, The Conditions of
our Lord's Life on Earth, pp. 135-138 ; T. Adamson, Studies
of the Mind in Christ, pp. 11, 12, 167 : and in its extremity,
E. A. Abbott, Philomythus, on which see Southern Presbyterian
Meview, Oct. 1884, ' Some Recent Apocryphal Gospels,' p. 733 ff.),
must needs depend on an inferential method, the inconclusive-
ness of which has been repeatedly pointed out of old, as, for
example, by Augustine (e.g. c. Faust. Mani.ch. xxii. 13), who
remarks upon its equal applicability to the anthropomorphisms
of the OT.

' Wonder ' (AV ; RV ' marvelling '), to be sure, is attributed
to Jesus on two occasions (Mt 8io || Lk 79, Mk 68). But the
term used (dxuf^iii^iu) is on both occasions precisely that one
which least of all implies ' surprise,' which declares its object
rather extraordinary than unexpected. ' ©ai/AtaJa,' remarks
Schmidt (o/<. cit. p. 184), 'is perfectly generally "to wonder"
or " to admire," and is distinguished from Oxui^iiv precisely as
the German sich wundern or bewundern is from staunen ; that
is, what has specially seized on us is in the case of 6xiif/.dl£iv
the extraordinary nature of the thing, while in the case of
Bau-^iit it is the unexpectedness and suddenness of the occur-
rence." All that needs be imported by these passages is that the
circumstances adverted to were in themselves remarkable ; and
that Jesus recognized, felt, and remarked upon their remark-
ableness, — in the one instance with the implication of admira-
tion, in the other with that of reprobation. That the circum-
stances which called out His sense of the incongruity in the
situations He remarks upon were unanticipated by our Lord,
and therefore when observed struck Him with a shock of sur-
prise, we are not told. BENJAMIN B. WARFIELD.

AMBASSAGE.— Thi§ term is used in Lk W- (AV
and RV) and in RV of Lk 19^"* (more accurately
instead of AV 'message'). The Greek is Trpeajdeia.
Both in the original and the translation the
abstract is used for the concrete ; a term meaning
the office or message of an ambassador or body of
ambassadors for the ambassadors themselves.

The formation of the word is not fully explained. The earlier
form both in English and French was ambassade. The French
suflix -age ( = ldSit. -aticum) is usually found in words transferred
from France, but ^sometimes it was added to English words.
Anibassage seems to be an exception to both. It may be either
a formation from a French root or a softening of a)nbassade by
the influence of analogy. The word was accented by some on
the first syllable, by others on the second. An alternative
spelling was embassage. Both forms are obsolete, being sup-
planted by embassy, the direct equivalent of ambassade.

In Lk 14-^"^^ Jesus is speaking of discipleship
and the necessary condition of entire surrender to
spiritual .authority. And He gives in illustration
the parable which teaches the folly of entering on
an enterprise without counting the cost. A prince
who has provoked to w.ar a superior power will
do well to send an anibassage to sue for ])eace —
peace without honour. The man whose force of
cliaracter is not able to withstand and overcome
the worldly obstacles, must in some form or other
make conii)romise with tlie worldly poN\'ers. He is
not tit for the kingdom of God. (For other inter-
pretations see Trench and the Commentators).

The .second occurrence (Lk lO^-*) is in the parable
of the Pounds ; not in tlie m.ain part, which bears
resemblance to the par.able of the Talents, but in
one of two ver.ses (vv."-^) directed to a subsidiary
aspect of the situation. While the servants of the
distant dignitary are, in his absence, carrying out
instructions and using oppoi'tunities, a section of
his subjects resolve to cast oft" his authority. To
this effect they send an embassy. W'hen he returns

AMBITION

AMEX

he rewards the faithful and executes punishment
on the disloyal. The application is to the Second
Coming of the Lord.

The term wpea^ela (from irp^a-^vs, 'old') belongs
to classical Greek, and it contains an expression of
the rule that responsible duties of statecraft are
naturally entrusted to approv^ed elders and heads
of families. St. Paul uses the corresponding verb
in 2 Co 5'^", where lie describes the Christian
preachers as 'ambassadors for Christ,' and in
Ei>h 6-** the idea is repeated. Perhaps we may
connect the occ>irrence of irpec^da. in the Third
Gospel with St. Luke's apparent preference of
' presbyter ' to ' bishop ' (Ac 20'"), and his repeated
use of prcsbyterion for the body of Jewish elders
(Lk 22^'^, Ac 4'' 22''). For the terms are expressive
of dignity, and in St. Luke's literary style a sense
of dignity is clearly shown.

It is further notable that commentators are able
to refer the suggestion of both these parables to
contemporary history. The former corresponds
with the struggle between Antipas and his father-
in-law, Haretli, king of Arabia ; the latter is
illustrated by Herod, by Archelaus, and by Anti-
pas, each of whom went to liome to obtain an
enhancement of power. But details apply to the
case of Archelaus, who put his friends in command
of cities, and against whom the Jews sent to the
emperor an embassy of lifty men (Jos. Ant. xvii.
xi. 1). R. Scott.

AMBITION The word ' ambition ' is not found

in tlie AV or RV, but the propensity signified is,
of course, represented in the New Testanient. Its
derivation is Latin [ambi, ' about,' and ire, itum,
' to go ' ], meaning a going about in all directions,
especially with a view to collecting votes. It thus
means to have such a desire as to make one go
out of Okie's loay to satisfy it, and, in a secondary
sense, denotes the object which arouses such desire
and effort. Asa psychological fact. Ambition may
be defined as a natural spring of action which
makes for the increment of life. Ethically speak-
ing, it takes its colour from the object towards
which it is directed. In ordinary use it implies
blame ; but in true Christianity, where the utmost
is given for the highest, it is otherwise.

In the Epistles the verbs Siuikoo, <r7roi'5dfcj, fTjr^w
are used figuratively for this jiropensity (Pli 3'"^,
2 P 3'^, Ro 10^) ; but perhaps a nearer synonym is
fijXow with its corresponding substantive ^rjkos (as
in 1 Co 141- !-• 39, cf. Weymouth's NT in Modern
Speech), though f^Xos in a good sense is generally
translated 'zeal,' and in a bad sense 'jealousy,'
both words being of rather broader significance
than 'ambition.'

It is in accordance with the literary character-
istics of the Gospel narratives that such an abstract
idea as ambition can be found only under some
picturesque phrase, e.g. 'lamp of the body' (Mt
6--- -=*), ' food ^ Jn 43^). ' To cut ott' the right hand '
or ' to pluck out the right eye ' is the expression
used by our Lord for destroying one's dearest
ambition, whether it is controlling one's energies
or directing one's imagination (Mk'O'^^f-, cf., as
Trench points out, the use of dcbdoKixhs irov-nphs [Mt
6^Mk7'^]for'envy').

But although there is no explicit reference to
Ambition in the NT, it is so characteristic a fact
of human nature that a large part of the teaching
of Christ might be exhibited in relation to it.
And because it is capable of being bent towards
lofty as well as sinister, or at least selfish ends.
Christian ethics seems from one point of view to
be the exaltation of Ambition, from another its
deposition.

1. For Ambition. — Christ's method was to use
the faci; of Ambition and purify it by exercising
VOL. I. — 4

it on the highest objective. The call to the first
disciples was an appeal to their ambition for a
higher life : ' Follow me, and I will make you
fishers of men ' (Mt 4'^). He gave primacy to an
ambition for the ends of the Kingdom over all
Morldly ambitions in the words : ' Seek ye first the
kingdom of God and His righteousness' (I\It &^).
He compared the earnestness of true followers
with the ambition of a pearl-merchant (xMt 13'^),
and encouraged the religious ambition of the
young ruler by trying to turn it into a new and
deeper channel (Mt 19-') : ' If thou wouldest be
perfect, sell . . . give . . . and thou slialt have
treasure in heaven.' It was part of His teaching
to set before His disciples a prize to aim at (Lk
22^9-30, Mt 513- ", Jn 12^6); and He expected them
to go out of their w^ay in devotion, and to all
lengths in fidelity (Lk 9"- 14-6f- ig's-'^, Mt 25'^-'-^3)_ j^
order to win the truest praise and most lasting
success. 'The Christian moral reformation may
indeed be summed up in this — humanity changed
from a restraint to a motive ' {Ecce Homo).

2. Against Ambition.— But it may with equal
truth be said that the aim of the life and teaching
of Christ was to depose Ambition from its ruling
place. He was always rebuking (1) inordinate
desires for any kind of selfish satisfaction, whether
they were associated Avith greed (Jn 6-'' ' food
that perisheth'; Lk 6"^ and esp, 12'-^-") or with
pride (Mt 6'-* 'glory of men,' 20-5-2S ' lord it,' 23«-'2
' seen of men and called Rabbi ') ; or (2) even a
high-placed desire if it was held thoughtlessly and
without counting the cost (Lk 14-^"3J t,he builder
and the king who failed in their ambition ; Mk
jQ.i5-40 ^ijg gQjjg Qf Zebedee who ' knew not what
they asked '). Moreover, Christ cut away the
very tap-root of Ambition by turning self out of
its place at the seat of the motives of life, in
favour of a living trust in the Father and an
undivided allegiance to Himself. The virtues
which are most prominent in tlie Christian ideal
leave no room at all for Ambition in the gener-
ally accepted use of the word. For Christianity
demands humilitij (Mt 53 etc., Lk 14'-'' etc., Jn
13'--i5), generosity (Mk 12^3.44^ n- gso.^ji jqss etc.),
and self renouncement (Mt 103«- 3s», Mk lO-''- 3",
Jn 12-''-26).

On the Avhole, the influence of Christ's teaching
and inspiration on Ambition has been not to ex-
tirpate it, but to control and chasten it by the
discovery and establishment of otlier standpoints,
such as the outlook of other-worldliness, the sense
of brotherhood, iind personal allegiance to Himself.

LlTERATiRE. — Lightfoot (J. B.), Cambridge Sermons, 217 ;
Moore (A. L.), Advent to Advent, 239 ; Shedd (VV. G. T.), Sermons
to the Spiritual Man, 371 ; Mozley (W. B.), Universiti/ Scfrnons,

262. A. Norman Rowland.

AMEN. — Like the Greek dfirju, this is practically
a transliteration of the Heb. [Dn, which itself is a
verbal adjective connected with a root signifying
to make firm, establish. In the last instance, and
as we are concerned with it, it is an indeclinable
particle. Barth treats it as originally a substan-
tive ( = ' firmness,' 'certainty'). For the deriva-
tion, cf. our Eng. 'yes,' 'yea,' which is also
connected with an old verbal root of similar sig-
nificance.

As a formula of solemn confirmation, assever-
ation and assent, it was estaldished in old and
familiar usage amongst the Jews in the time of
our Lord. Its function is specially associated with
worship, prayer, the expression of will and desire,
the enunciation of weighty judgments and truths.
Four modes in which Amen is used may be dis-
tinguished — (1) Initial, when it lends weight to
the utterance following. (2) Final, when used by
the speaker himself in solemn confirmation of what

AMEN

precedes. (3) Besponsive, when used to express
assent to the utterance of another, as in prayers,
benedictions, oatlis, etc. (4) Suhscriptional, when
used to mark the close of a writing, but hardly
amounting to much more than a peculiar variant
of ' Finis.'

The suhscriptional Amen requires but a brief
notice. No instance of it is found in the OT ;
and as regards the closing Amen in the several
Scriptures of the NT tliere is for tlie most part a
lack of textual autliority. The AV, following the
TR, in most instances lias it ; the KV in most
instances omits it. Where it is found, in the
Epistles and tlie Apocalypse, it is rather due to
the fact that these writings close with a doxology,
prayer, or benediction. The variations of authority
in such cases seem to a large extent capricious :
else Avhy, e.g.. Amen at the end of 1 Corinthians
and not at the end of 2 Corinthians ? The closing
Amen in each of the Gospels, though witliout
authority, is a genuine instance of the subscrip-
tional use of later times. Tliis iise has a further
curious illustration in the practice of copyists of
MSS who wrote 99 at the end of their work, this
being the total numerical value of the characters
in aij.r}v. For the purposes of the present article it
will be necessary to examine the whole Biblical
usage of 'Amen.'

1. Amen in the OT. — The formula is found in {a)
the Pentateuch (Nu 5"^, Dt 27 passim) as a ritual
injunction (LXX yevoiro througiiout). (6) In 1 K
P^ 1 Ch I6'^fi, Neh 5'^ Jer IP 28" it is mentioned
as being actually used (LXX in 1 K P" yivoiTo
0VTU3S, Jer 28'' dX-qduts, elsewhere dfii^v). (c) In the
Psalms (4P3 72i» 89^3 106^«) we meet with its
liturgical use (LXX yifoiro). The most common
equivalent for Amen in the LXX is yevoiro ; and
with this may be compared St. Paul's familiar /j.rj
yevoLTo, the negative formula of dissent and depre-
cation.

No clear instance of the use of an initial Amen
occurs. Hogg tliinks we have such in 1 K P^, Jer
IP and 28'^; but in each of these cases it will be
found tliat the Amen is a responsive assent to
something tliat precedes. It is true that the LXX
rendering in Jer 28" {d\rj9ws) shows that the trans-
lators were inclined to regard this as an instance
of an initial Amen ; but even here the term is
really an ironical response to the false prophecy of
Hananiah in vv.-"^. Almost all the instances,
indeed, in which Amen is met with in the OT are
examples of the responsive use ; tlie only consider-
able instances of tlie Jiiutl use being found at the
end of each of the first three divisions of the
Psalter. In the Apocrypha we have further in-
stances of the responsive Amen in To 8* and in
Jth 1.3-0 and IS^" (EV in the latter book renders
'So be it'). The doubled formula (' Amen, Amen,'
cf. Jth 13"") thus used is naturally explained as an
expression of earnestness. It may here be added
that among the Jews at fi much later period Amen
has a responsive and desiderative use in connexion
with every kind of expression of desire and feli-
citation ; e.g. ' May he live to see good days :
Amen !'

2. Amen in the Gospels. — We must set aside
the instances of snbscriptional Amen (see above)
as without authority. In Mt 6'^ some ancient
autliorities support the conclusion of the Lord's
Prayer with doxology and Amen ; but it can
hardly be doubted that Amen here, along with
the doxology which it closes, is not original, but
due to liturgical use (see ' Notes on Select Read-
ings ' in Westcott-Hort's AT in Greek, ad loc).
In all the other instances in the Gosjiels it is the
initial Amen that is found > given always and
only as a nsus loqucndi of Christ in the formula,
duriv \iy(i3 v/j.cf (ffoi), according to tiie Synoptists,

.and dpi.T]v dfj-i^v Xeyw v/xlv (o-oi), according to St.
John.

Now, whilst final Amen as a formula of con-
clusion or response remains unaltered tlirou"hout
in NT in the various versions, it is of interest to
notice the difterent ways in which this initial
Amen is treated. The Vulgate, e.g., invariably
keeps the untranslated form, and reads Amen (or
A'mc7i, Amen) dico vobis. The modern Greek
equivalent is dXrjdQs {dXTjdCis dXrjOQs) ; and with
this accords our EV 'Verily,' and also Luther's
Wahrlich. And, indeed, among the Synoptists
themselves there are indications that an initial
Amen has sometimes been replaced by another
term. This is specially so in the case of St. Luke,
who has only 6 instances of aiiT)v as against 30 in
St. Matthew, and 13 in St. Mark. We have,
e.g., val in Lk IP' for dfxr^v in the parallel Mt SS"** ;
di-neCis in Lk 9^' (cf. Mt 10-^ Mk 9'). All this goes
to show that this use of Amen on the part of Jesus
was quite a peculiarity.

The very Xe^w vfuv alone would have been notice-
able as a mode of assertion : the addition of dij.-r)v
does but intensify this characteristic, as an enforce-
ment and corroboration of the utterances that are
thus prefaced. Tlie Heb. [px, which in our Lord's
time was usual only in responses, thus appears to
have been taken by Him as an expedient for con-
firming His own statement ' in the same way as if
it were an oath or a blessing.' F'ormulai of pro-
testation and aifirmation involving an oath were in
use among Rabbinical teachers to enforce teachings
and sayings, and with these the mode of Jesus
invites comparison and contrast.

The attempt of Delitzsch to explain this Amen (particularly
in the double form) through the Aramaic ^f^^?^ii 'I saj,' cannot
be sustained. Jannaris, again (Expos. Tunes, Sept. 19U2,
p. 564), has ventured the suggestion that a/x,v, t thus used is a
corruption of 5) ,«.-/,► (ei fiy.v); but interesting and ingenious as
this may be, it lacks confirmation, and amongst the instances
of the use of 5i f^viv which he adduces from the LXX, the
papyri, etc., not one suits the case here by showing any such
construction as f, /*->,» Xtj^or u/j.iv in use.

A parallel between Amen and our ' Yes ' has been
already suggested : and in the NT we similarly
find dfiriv and val closely associated (2 Co P", Rev
1"), whilst we have before noticed how in St.
Luke pat is found as a substitute for dfirji'. It may
not therefore be out of place here to suggest that
we have an illustration and analogy as regards the
use cf an initial Amen in the use of an intro-
ductory 'Yes' sometimes found in English (see,
e.g., Shakspeare, 3 Hen. IV. I. iii. 36 ; Pope, Moral
Essays, i. 1).

The double Amen, which occurs 25 times in St.
John, and is peculiar to that Gosjiel, has provoked
much curiosity as to how it is to be explained. If
Jesus used as a formula in teaching now dix7}v X^yco
vfiiv and again d/xTjv d/j.r)v Xeyuj vfuv, it is very
strange that the Synoptics should invariably re-
present Him as using the former, and the Fourth
Gospel invariably as using the latter. Why not
instances of both promiscuously through all the
Gospels if the two were thus alike used?

The statement that the Johannine form 'intro-
duces a truth of special solemnity and importance '
(as Plummer in (Jamb. Gr. Test, fur Schools, etc.,
'St. John,' note on ch. P') is quite gratuitous, as a
comparison of the sayings and discourses of our
Lord will show. It is too obviously a dictum for
the purpose of explanation. The truth is, if we
have regard to the exclamatory character of d/x^v
as a particle in this special use, there is noth-
ing surprising in its being thus repeated ; and we
have the analogy of the repeated Amen in re-
sponses, as noticed above. Why St. John alone
sfiould give the formula in this particular way is a
further question. If a consideration of the pheno-
mena connected with the composition of the Fourth

AMEN

A]MEN

Gospel leads to the conclusion that in the form in
■\vhicli the utterances of Jesus are there presented
Ave have not His ipsissiina verba, we may most
naturally regard the repetition of afi-qv as a peculi-
arity due to the Evangelist, and (taking the
evidence of the Synoptists into account) not neces-
sarily a form actually used by Jesus.

3. Amen in the rest of tlie2\l\ — In the numerous
instances in ■which Amen occurs in the NT out-
side the Gospels, it is almost entirely found in con-
nexion with prayers, doxologies, or benedictions, as
a solemn corroborative conclusion (final use). In
addition, we have the responsive use of Amen illus-
trated in 1 Co 14^® (see below, s. 'Liturgical use')
and Rev 5^^ : and d/nrii' in Rev 22-'^ is responsive
to the epxo/J-ai raxiJ preceding. Extra -canonical
writings furnish plentiful examples of the same
use. Two instances, again, of an introductory
Amen in the Apocalypse (7'" l^), as a form of
exultant acclamation, are interesting, but are
quite distinct from the initial Amen in the utter-
ances of Jesus in the Gospels.

Amen as a substantive appears in two forms :
(1) TO d/n-fju, (2) 6 dfirii'. We meet with the former
in 1 Co 14"* and 2 Co 1^". In both cases there
appears to be a reference to a liturgical Amen. In
the latter passage, indeed, it miglit be contended
that dfxrjv is merely in correspondence with vai,
both simply conveying the idea of confirmation
and assurance ; but if we follow the better sup-
ported reading (as in RY) the presence of such a
reference can hardly be denied.

The use of 6 dfirju as a name for our Lord in Rev
3^* is striking and peculiar. The attempt, how-
ever, to explain it by reference to 2 Co 1-^ is not
satisfactorj'. The curious expression ' the God of
Amen' (EV 'the God of trutli') in Is 65'6 is not
I sufficiently a parallel to afi'ord an explanation, for
'the Amen in this case is not a personal name, but
the EV furnishes a s.atisfactoiy equivalent in the
irendering 'truth.' Surely, however, there need be
little difficulty about the use of such a term as a
designation of Jesus. Considering the wealth of
descriptive epithets applied to Him in the NT and
other early Christian writings, and also the termin-
ology favoured by the author of the Apocalypse,
we must feel that this use of Amen, if bold, is not
unnatural or unapt, so suggestive as the term is
of truth and firmness. Another but very diti'erent
use of Amen as a proper name may be mentioned.
Among certain of the Gnostics dfj.r]v figured as the
name of an angel (Hippolj'tus, Fhilosophumena,
ccxviii. 79, ccciv. 45).

4. Amen in liturgical use. — (a) Jcirish. — In the
Persian period Amen was in use as ' the responsory
of the people to the doxology of the Priests antl
the Levites' (see Neh 8*, 1 Ch 16^^, Ps 106-»8). In
the time of Christ it had become an established
and familiar formula of the synagogue worship in
particular, the response used in the Temple being
a longer form : ' Blessed be the Name of the glory
of His kingdom for ever and ever ! ' In still later
times a formula of response was used which was
apparently a combination of the synagogue Amen
with the Temple responsory: 'Amen: praised be
the great Name for ever and ever !' In the syna-
gogue service the Amen was said by the people in
response to the reader's doxology. (In the great
synagogue of Alexandria the attendant used to
signal the congregation with a Hag when to give
the response). Amen was also the responsory to
the priestly blessing.

Responsive Amen at the end of prayers was
evidently an old custom among the Jews. In
later times they are said to have discouraged this,
because Amen at the end of every prayer had
become the habit of Christians. The use of Amen
in this connexion was thus considerably restricted ;

but certain synagogue prayers were still specified
as to be followed by the Amen.

The Rabbis in their liturgical exactness rigor-
ously determined the sense of Amen, and, among
other things, enjoined that every doxology, on
whatever occasion, must be followed by this re-
sponse. Curious sajings were current among
them, emphasizing tiie significance and value of
Amen. Should, e.cf., the inhabitants of hell ex-
claim 'Amen!' wlien the holy Name of God is
praised, it will secure their release (Yalk. ii. 296
to Is 26-).

(h) Christian. — This iise of Amen was un-
doubtedly borrowed by the Christians from the
Jewish synagogue, as, indeed, other liturgical fea-
tures were. St. Paul's words in 1 Co I41'' are of
special interest here. The reader is so to recite
his prayers that the ignorant should have the
boon of answering the Amen to the doxology.
Tlie iSiojTTjs (ci'-in) for whom lie pleads is similarly
considered by the Rabbis, and they give the
same instruction. It cannot be maintained that
the term ei'xaptorta used here by St. Paul has that
special and, so to speak, technical sense Avhich
it afterwards acquires as applied to the Lord's
Supper, and that so ' the Amen ' (to dyi-qv) intended
is specifically the response connected with the
observance of that institution. At the same time,
the whole reference clearly indicates that Amen
as a responsory in Christian worship was already
a regular and familiar usage.

It is, however, in connexion with the Eucharist,
in the special sense of the term, that the Fathers
particularly mention the responsive Amen, and
refer to it as said after the doxology witli which
the long Prayer of Consecration closed. Justin
Martyr (Apol. 2), Tertullian (de Spectacul. 25),
Dionysius of Alexandria (ap. Euseb. RE), and
Chrysostom (Horn. 35 in 1 Cor.) make such refer-
ence. This prayer, of course, was at first said
aloud, so as to be heard by all ; but in the course
of time (after the 8th cent.) the custom grew for
the officiating minister to say it sotto voce. Even
then, such importance was attached to the re-
sponse of the jjeople that the priest was required
to say the closing words ('world without end')
aloud, so that then the 'Amen' niiglit be said.
This in the West: in the Greek Church it was
similarly required that the words of the institution
should be said aloud, though the first part of the
prajer was said inaudibly, so that the people
might hear them and make their response. A
writer of the 9th cent. (Florus Magister), referring
to this usage, saj's : 'Amen, which is responded
by the whole church, means It is true. This,
therefore, the faithful respond at the consecration
of so great a mysterj% as also in every prayer duly
said, and by responding declare assent.' A similar
use of Amen at the end of the Exhortation (which
is not a prayer), commencing the second part of
the eucharistic service (see Book of Common
Prayer), and at the end of the corresponding
' Preface ' in the old Galilean Liturgy, may also
be pointed out.

Jerome has an interesting reference to the loud
congregational Amen, which he describes as re-
sounding like thunder ('ad similitiulinem ccelestis
tonitrui' — Com. ad Gcdat.). This corresponds
to a synagogue custom of uttering the ' Amen
with the full power' of the voice (Shab. 1196).

The modern practice of singing Amen at the
close of hymns in public worship is partly due to
a musical demand for a suitable cadence to con-
clude the tune : but it is also in harmony with
the most ancient practice of closing hymns with
doxologies, which naturally carried an Amen with
them. The discrimination observable in some
hymnals, whereby hymns containing a prayer or

AM HA'AREZ

ANDREW

a cloxoloj,'y are closed with Amen and others not,
arises from misapprehension. Amen not only
means ' So be it,' but equally ' So it is,' and should
thus be suitable as a conclusion to all hymns that
are appropriate for Christian worship.

(c) Mohammedan. — Among the Mohammedans
Amen is used liturgically, but only to a slight
extent. It is universally used by them after every
recital of the t\rst Sinrioi the Koran — the so-called
Surat al-Fatihat ( = Preface or Introduction). This
brief, prayer-like form is held in great veneration,
and has among them a place corresponding to that
of the Paternoster amongst Cliristians.

Literature.— The Bible Dictionaries, s.w. ; Jewish Encyclo-
pedia, S.V.; Berakhoth i. 11-19; H. W. Hogg:, Jewixh Quart.
Review, Oct. 1896; articles in Expository Times, by Nestle
(.Jan. 1S97), and Jannaris (Sept. 1902); Dalman, Die Worte Jesu
(Eng. tr. 1902, p. 226 ff.); Scudamore, Notitia Eucharistica.

J. S. Clemens.

AM HA'AREZ {]"ii}ri oy) means literally 'the
people of the land.' Sometimes — particularly in
later books of OT — it is found in the plural'awi/^e
hcCdrcz or 'nmme hoCdrdzfith. Its use in the time
of Christ indicates the following devclo})ment : —
From being (1) applied to the ordinary inhabitants
of the land (Gn 23"- '-• ^■^) or to the people at large as
a body (2 K H". is. 19.20 155 jgis 21 -^^ etc.), the term
came (2) to be used to designate the common people
as distinguished from the king, princes, priests,
etc. (Jer 44-^\ Hag 2^ Zee T), and (3) like ' pagan '
from pngns, was applied to those remote from or
untouched by the culture (particularly religious
culture) of the time, till it became (4) finally,
an expression of contempt meaning 'nncul cured,'
'rude,' 'barbarous,' 'irreligious,' applied to a
certain class or even to a member of tiiat class.
To the 'am ha'drez the Pharisees directly refer in
Jn 7'*'' ' This multitude which knoweth not the
Law are accursed.'

The origin of this cleavage is found in the OT.
At the E.xile we are told ' none were left save the
very poor of the people of the land' (i'lNii cy n^-i
2 K 241-'). These mingled with the neighbouring
non-Israelites and perhaps also with the settlers
from Assyria, intermarrying with them, and prob-
ably adopting tiieir customs. Hence at the Return
both Ezra and Nehemiah demanded a complete
separation (Ezr 9^- ^-, Neli 10-**"^') between the re-
turned exiles who observed the Law strictly, and
those settlers Avho constituted ' the people of the
land.'

This idea developed and led to the formation
of a party called ' Separatists,' Hdsidiui or Pe-
riisMm (Aram. Perishaijyd^ ; see art. ' Pharisees ' in
Hastings' DB iii. p. 826''), who regarded all contact
with the vulgar crowd (am ha'drez) as defiling,
observed a strict regime of ceremonial purity, .and
called each other hdher {i.e. 'brother'). Tiie 'am
ha'drez was the antithesis of the hdher, outside the
pale of this higher Judaism, poor, ignorant of tlie
Law, despised. In Rabbinical literature, where he
is always regarded as a Jew, many detinitions of
the 'am hd'drcz are given. Thus in the Talmud
(Berakhoth 416) he is described as one ' who does
not give his tithes regularly,' or 'who does not
read the Shema morning and evening,' or ' who does
not wear tephillim,' or ' who has no meziizdh on his
doorposts,' or ' who fails to teach his children the
Law,' or ' who has not associated with the learned.'
Montefiore in his Hibbert Lectures denies that
such sliarp cleavage between the Hdsidim and the
'am ha'drez ever existed save in the minds of later
Rabbis who had difHculty in delining 'am ha'drez,
and ccmsequently he questions the authenticity of
Jn 7^", but on insufficient grounds. A great gulf
and much bitterness existed between the two.
A Pliarisee would not accept the evidence of an
'am hadrez as a witness, nor give him his daughter

in marriage. Even the touch of the garment of an
'ain ha'drez was defiling ; and Lazarus (Ethics of
Judaism) quotes a saying, ' An 'am hd^drez may he
killed on the Saltbath of Sabbaths, or torn like a
fish.' This can hardly be taken literally ; yet it
illustrates the feeling which doubtless prevailed iu
the time of Christ towards the 'am hd'drez. The
mind of Jesus triumphed over this narrow spirit.
In these poor despised outcasts He saw infinite
possibilities for goodness. They were the objects
of His special care. To them had the Father sent
Him, for at the very worst they were only ' the lost
sheep of the house of Israel' (Mt lO^).

LiTERATrRE. — Jeioish Encyclopedia (art. 'Am - haaretz ') ;
Schiirer, GJV'i ii. 40 [Eng. HJP u. ii. 22] ; Weber, Jiid. Theol.2
(Index, s. 'Am haarez'); Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus
the Messiah, i. 85 ; Wiinsche, Ber Bab. Talm. 11. i. 295 ;
Lazarus, Ethics of Judaism, Eng. tr. i. Apjiendix, note 48*,
258; C. G. Montefiore, Hibbert Lectures, 1892, 'Origin and
Growth of Hebrew Religion,' pp. 497-502 ; Rosenthal, Vier
Apokryphische Biicher, pp. 25-29; Hamburger, HEii. 54-56.

G. Gordon Stott.
AMMINADAB.— An ancestor of our Lord, Mt 1^

AMON.— A king of Judah (c. 640 B.C.) mentioned
in our Lord's genealogy, Mt 1'" (Gr. 'Ayutis, RVm
Amos).

ANDREW ('Ai'Sp^os, 'manly').— In the Synoptic
Gospels, Andrew is little more than a name ; but
the references to him in the Fourth Gospel are of
such a character as to leave upon our minds a
wonderfully clear impression of the manner of
man he was, and of the service Aviucli he ren-
dered to the Church of Christ. Andrew was a
native of Bethsaida (Jn l"), but afterwards shared
the same house (Mk l-**) at Capernaum, (v.-')
with his better known brother Simon Pfiter. Cy
trade he was a fisherman (Mt 4^*), but, attracted
by all that he had heard or seen of John the
Baptist, for a time at least he left his old work,
and, following the Baptist into the wilderness,
came to be recognized as one of his disciples
(Jn ps.JO). A better teacher Andrew could not
liave had ; for if from John he first learned the
exceeding sinfulness of sin, by him also he was
pointed to the promised Deliverer, the Land) of
God, who was to take away the sin of the world.
And when, accordingly, the Christ did come, it
was to find Andrew with a heart ready and eager
to welcome Him. Of that first interview between
the Lord and His new disciide the Fourth Evan-
gelist, who was himself present, has preserved the
record (Jn V^-*°), and he it is also who tells us
that no sooner had Andrew^ realized for himself
the truth regarding Jesus, than he at once went
in search of his brother Peter (vv.'^^-''-). And
thus to the first-called of Christ's disciples (jrpwTo-
kXtjtos, according to a common designation of
Andrew in early ecclesiastical writers) was given
the joy of bringing next his own brother to the
Lord. The call of James and of John, if they
had not been previously summoned, would seem
to have followed; but in none of these instnnces
did this imply as yet more than a personal re-
lationship to the Saviour. The actual summons
to work came later, when, by the Sea of Galilee,
Jesus bade Andrew, along with the same tln^ee
companions, leave his nets and come after Him
(Mt 4i8ff-). And this in turn was followed shortly
afterwards by Andrew's ajipointment to a place
in the Apostolic Band (Mt lO'-"'-)- His place,
moreover, was a place of honour, for his name
always occurs in the first group of four, and it is
with* Peter and James and John that he is again
associated in the ' private ' inquiries to Jesus re-
garding the time of the Last Things (Mk 13=*).

Still more interesting, however, as illustrating
Andrew's character, are the two occasions on which

ANGELS

he is specially associated with Philip, the only
other Apostle who bore a Greek name. The hrst
incident occurred at the Feeding of the Five
Thousand, when, in contrast to the anxious, cal-
culating Philip, the downright, practical Andrew
thought it worth while to draw the Saviour's atten-
tion to the lad's little store, even though he too
was at a loss as to what it could effect (Jn 6^^-).
And the second occurred when to Philip, again
perplexed by the desire of certain Greeks ((ientiles,
therefore) to see Jesus, Andrew suggested that the
true course was at least to lay the request before
Jesus Himself, and leave Him to decide whether
or nut it could be granted (Jn 12-"''''-).

After tliis, with the exception of the incident
already referred to (Mk 13^), Andrew is not again
mentioned in the Gospels, and the only subsequent
reference to him in Scripture is the mere mention
of his name in Ac 1'^. Tradition, however, has
been busy with his after-history ; and he is re-
presented as labouring, according to one account,
in Scythia (Eus. HE iii. 1), whence he has been
adopted as the patron - saint of Kussia ; or, ac-
cording to another, in Achaia. In any case, there
is general agreement that he was martyred at
Patraj in Achaia, being 1)ound, not nailed, to the
cross, in order to prolong his sutlerings. There
is, however, no warrant for the belief that the
cross was of the decussate shape (X)) ^-^ this cross,
usually associated with his name, is of a much
later date.

A striking tradition preserved in the Muratorian Fragment
brings Andrew and John together in their old age as they had
been in their youth: 'The fourth Gospel [was written by]
John, one of the disciples (i.e. Apostles). When his fellow-
disciples and bishops urgently pressed him, he said, " Fast with
me [from] to-day, for three days, and let us tell one another any
revelation which may be made to us, either for or against [the
plan of writing]." On the same night it was revealed to Andrew,
one of the Apostles, that John should relate all in his own
name, and that all should review [his writing] ' (see Westcott,
Gospel of St. John, p. xxxv ; History of .XT Canon, p. 523).

It is also deserving of mention tliat about 740 Andrew became
the patron-saint of Scotland, owing to the belief that his arm
had been brought by St. Regulus to the town on the East Coast
that now bears his name.

The character of Andrew, as it appears in the
few scattered notices that we have of him, is that
of a simple, kindly man who had the courage of
his opinions, as jiroved by his being the first of
the Baptist's disciples openly to follow Jesus ; Avho
was eager to share with others the privileges he
himself enjoyed (witness his search for Peter, and
his treatment of the Greeks) ; and who, his work
done, was always ready to efface himself (see
especially Liglitfoot, Sermons on Special Occasions,
p. 16Utf'.). Again, when we think of the Apostle
in his more official aspect, it is sufficient to recall
tiiat he was not only the first home-missionary
(Jn 1^'), but also the first foreign-missionary (12--)
— evidence, if evidence be wanted, of the close
connexion between the two sjiheres of work.

Literature. — In addition to what has been noted above, and
the references to Andrew in the different Lives of Christ, see
H. Latham, Pastor Pastonun, p. 150 fit. ; the present writer's
The Twelve Apostles (J. M. Dent), p. 24 ff. ; Expositor, 1st ser.
vii. [1882], 424 ff. ; Ker, Sermons, 2nd ser. 100 ff. The principal
authority on Andrew's traditional history is Lipsius, VieApokry-
phen Apostelqeschichten und Aj)ostellegenden, i. p. 543ff. ; cf.
M. II. James in Hastings' I)B, vol. i. p. 93. His place in Art is
discussed by Mrs. Jameson, Sacred and Legendary Art, i.
p. 226 ff. We may refer also to Keble's poem on ' St. Andrew's
bay ' in TJie Christian Year, and to the poem on 'St. Andrew
and his Cross' in the Lyra Innocentittm.

George Milligan.
ANGELS. — The .statements as to angels wliich
meet us in the Gospels are in most respects the
same as are found in the Jewish literature of
the period, botii Biblical and extra-Biblical. In
the main, Christ and His Apostles approjiriated
the Angelology of current Judaism — but not
without critical selection. It would be difficult

to point to a time when the Jews, as a people, did
not believe in angels ; yet there were exceptions.
Possibly it was the exuberance of the belief that
produced in some minds a reaction. At all events,
it is a fact that the portion of the OT known to
criticism as the Priests' Code is silent on the sub-
ject of angels ; and it is also noteworthy that the
Sadducees, Avho were the descendants of the high-
priestly families, protested in the time of our Lord
against some, if not all, of the popular notions re-
specting angels (Ac 23^).

It is probable that belief in angels is originally
a corollary from the conception of God as King.
A lone king — a king without a court — is almo.st
a contradiction in terms. And inasmuch as the
recognition of God as K'lnrj is the earliest and
most prevalent of Israel's conceptions of God, we
naturally expect the belief in angels, as God's
court, serving Him in His palace and discharging
the function of messengers, to be ancient and per-
vasive. We have then, doubtless, a very primitive
conception of angels in the words of jNIicaiah to
Aliab, in 1 K 22^^* ' I saw Jahweh sitting on his
throne, and all the host of heaven standing by
him, on his right hand and on his left.' A second
and quite distinct feature of the Angelology of the
OT is found in the appearances of one who is called
'the An<,'el of Jahweh' — who is described as un-
distinguishable from man in appearance, and yet
claims to speak and act in the name of Jahweh
HiuLself (Gn 18- i«- " 32-^- 2», Jg 13^- «■--). It is
noteworthy as a feature of OT criticism, that, as
P is silent as to angels, so the apjiearances of an
angel as a manlike manifestation of God and not a
mere messenger, are conhned to those portions of
the OT which, on quite other grountis, are assigned
to JE. Thirdly, when the Jews came to have
more exalted views of God, and of the incompati-
bility between Divinity and humanity, spirit and
matter, good and evil, and, in consequence, con-
ceived of God as aloof from the world and incapable
of immediate contact and intercourse with sinful
mortals, the doctrine of angels received mcne
attention than ever before. The same influences
which led the Persians to frame such an elaborate
system of Angelology, led the Jews, during and
after the Exile, to frame a similar .system, or in
some respects to borrow from the Persian sjstem ;
to believe in gradations among the angelic hosts ;
to give names to those who were of high rank,
and to assign to each of these some dehnite kind
of work to do among men, or some province on the
earth to administer as satrap under ' the King of
Heaven ' (see art. ' Zoroastrianism ' in vol. iv. of
Hastings' DB).

In the Gospels there are clear indications of the
first and third of these phases of belief. The
second is of interest to the NT student as a pre-
paratory discipline in the direction of Christulogy ;
and as such has no further importance for us at
present. Ewald has said (OT and NT Theology, [i.
79) that in Christianity there is ' no denial of the
exi-tence of angels, but a return to the simpler
colouring^ of the early narratives.' So far as sim-
plicity of narrative is concerned, there is certainly
a close resemblance between the angel-incidents
of St. Luke and Acts on the one hand, and of
Genesis on the other; but in the NT the angel
never identifies himself with Jahweh as is done in
Genesis ; and there are in the NT some phases of
Angelology which belong, not to ' the early narra-
tives,' but to post-exilic conceptions.

We wish now, with the help of Jewish literature,
more or less contemporary, to make a systematic
presentation of those beliefs as to angels which
are found in the discourses and narratives of the
four (iospels. It might be supposed that we should
hnd it helpful to keep apart the utterances of our

ANGELS

Lord from the descriptions of the Evangelists ; but,
in fact, there is such complete unity of ccmception
underlying both discourses and narratives, that no
useful purpose can be served by treating them
separately.

i. Angels in Heaven.— 1. They form an m^my
or host. Lk 2'^ ' There was with the angel (who
apjjeared to the shepherds) a multitude of the
heavenly host' (or/jaTtd). Our Lord carries the
military metaphor even further when He speaks
of 'more than 12 legions of angels' (Mt 26'''').
Oriental hyperbole was fully employed in express-
ing the magnitude of the heavenly army. Kev 5^^
speaks of ' myriads of myriads and thousands of
thousands ' ; and He 12^- sjjeaks of ' the myriads of
angels' — both in probable allusion to Dn 7"*. In
Job 25^ also the question is asked : ' Is there any
number of his armies 1 ' Similarly the Pal. Targ.
to Ex 12^2 teiig of 90,000 myriads of destroying
angels ; and in Dt S^ the same Targum speaks of
the glory of the Shekinah being revealed to the
dying Moses, with 2000 myriads of angels and
42,000 chariots ; as 2 K 6''' tells of a ' mountain
full of horses and chariots of lire round about
Elisha.'

2. They form a court. Heaven is 'God's throne'
(Mt 53^ 23^2), and there also ' the Son of ]\Ian shall
sit on the throne of his glory' (i\It 19-«). The
angels, as courtiers, stand in vast multitudes before
the throne (Rev 5" 7")- As in earthly courts there
are gradations of rank and dignity, so in heaven.
It is St. Paul who speaks most explicitly of 'the
principalities and powers in the heavenly places '
(Eph 8^"), and of Christ's being ' exalted far above
all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion '
(Eph 1-^) ; and ' evidently Paul regarded them as
actually existent and intelligent forces' (Robinson,
in loco) ; but the same conception jiresents itself in
the Gospels in the reference to archangels, who
were four, or in some authors seven, in number :
Gabriel, Raphael, Michael, and Uriel being those
most frequently mentioned. In Lk P^ the angel
who appears to Zacharias says : ' I am Gabriel,
that stand in the presence of God ' ; as in To 12^^
the angel says to Tobit : ' I am Raphael, one of
the seven holy angels, which present the prayers
of the saints and go in before the glory of the
Holy One.' Even in the OT the angels are spoken
of as forming 'a council': e.ff. in Ps 89^, where
God is said to be ' very terrible in the council of
the holy ones,' and in Ps 82^ where He is said to
'judge amidst the Elohim.' This idea was a great
favourite with later Jews, who maintained that
' God does nothing without consulting the family
above ' (Sanheclrin, 386). To the same circle of ideas
belong the words of the Lord Jesus : ' Every one that
sliall confess me before men, him will the Son of
Man confess before the angels of God ; but he that
denieth me in the presence of men shall be denied
in the presence of the angels of God' (Lk 12^-'').
Evidently the angels are interested spectators of
men's behaviour, responsive to their victories and
defeats, their sins and struggles ; and we are here
tauglit that to be denied before such a vast re-
sponsive assembly intensifies the remorse of the
apostate, as to be confessed before them intensifies
the joy of those who are 'faithful unto death.'
Again, in many courts, and particularly in that
of the Persians, there were secretaries or scribes,
whose business it was to keep a ' book of records '
(Est 6'), in which the names and deeds of those
who had deserved well of the king were honour-
ably recorded. The metaphor of heaven as a
palace and court is so far kept up, that the .lews
often spoke of books in heaven in which men's
deeds are recorded. Not only do we read in
Slavonic Enoch 19^ of 'angels Avho are over the
souls of men, and who write down all their Avorks

and their lives before the face of the Lord'; and
in the Ajiocalypse of John, where symbolism
abounds, of 'books' being 'opened,' and of the
'dead' being 'judged according to what was
written in the books': but even in an Epistle
of St. Paul we read of those ' whose names are
in the book of life' (Ph 4^), and in He 12-^ of
' the church of the firstborn who are enrolled in
heaven ' ; and jjrecisely in accord with the above
our Lord bade His disciples rejoice, because their
names 'are written in heaven,' i.e. enrolled for
honour (Lk 10-").

3. They form a choir in the heavenly temple.
The description of heaven in the Apocalypse is
quite as much that of a temi)le as a palace.
Heaven contains its altar (8^ 9^"), its censers (5^
8^), its musicians (5* I0-), and its singers (5" 14^
15^). In extra-Biblical literature the veil is often
mentioned, concealing the abode of God in the
Most Holy Place, within Avhich the archangels ure
permitted to enter (To 12'-'- ^^ Enoch 4U-). The
only reference in the Gospels under this head is
the song of the angels, described in Lk 2'^^-, It
is possible, in spite of the reading of some very
ancient Greek MSS (N*ABD), that this song, like
that of the seraphim in Is 6-, is a triple antiplioual
one —

' Glory to God in the highest [heaven],
Peace on earth,
Among men [Divine] good pleasure.'

4. They are 'sons of God.' In this respect the
saints who are raised again are ' equal to the
angels' (Lk 20^'^). They are sons of God by
creation and by obedience (Job 1^ 2^ 38'). They
' do not owe their existence to the ordinary process
of filiation, but to an immediate act of creation '
(Godet, OT Studies, 7) ; thus resembling in their
origin the bodily nature of those who are ' sons of
the resurrection.' Hence we find that they are
frequently described as 'holy' (Mt 25=*^ Mk 8=*^
Lk 9-'', Job 5' 15'5, Dn 8^^), and by im2)lication we
learn that angels obey God's will in heaven, since
we are taught by our Lord to pray that God's holy
will may be done on earth as it is in heaven (Mt 0"^,
cf. Ps 103-»).

5. They are free from sensuotis feelings. This
is taught in Mt 22^'^ ' In the resuri'ection they
neither marry [as men] nor are given in marriage
[as women], but are as the angels of God m
heaven.' These words were spoken by our Lord
in response to the doubts of the Sadducees on tiie
subject of the resurrection. Christ's reply is in
ettect this : The source of your error is that you do
not fully recognize the jjower of God. You seem
to think that God can make only one kind of body,
with one sort of functions, and dependent on one
means of life. In that way you limit unduly the
power of God. 'In that age' (Lk 20=*^), 'when
they rise from the dead ' (]\Ik 12-^), men do not eat
and drink ( Ro 14''). Not being mortal, they are not
dependent on food for nourishment, nor have they,
by nature, sensuous appetites, but are ladyyeXoi.
('equal to the angels'). Thus skilfully did Jesus
give a double-edged reply to the teachings of
the Sadducees (Ac 23*). While answering their
objection against the resurrection, He affirms tliat
' those Avho are accounted Avorthy to attain to that
alwi', and the resurrection from the dead . . . are
equal to the angels' — thus plainly disclosing His
belief in angels and setting it over against their
disbelief. As to the spiritual nature of angels,
Philo speaks of them as daufiaToi Kai evdai/xoves
\//vxa.i ('incorporeal and haiipy souls') ; and again,
as ' bodiless souls, not mixtures of rational and
irrational natures as ours are, but having the iira-
tional nature cut out, Avholly intelligent through-
out, pure-thoughts {\oyicr/j.ol, elscAvhere \6yoL) like
a monad' (Drummond's P/tj7o, 145-147; cf. Philo's

ANGELS

Confusion of Tongues, p. 8, Allegory, iii. 62). The
Rabbis interpreted Dn 7"* to teach tliat the nature
of the angels is fire. ' They are nourished by the
radiance which streams from tlie presence of God.
They need no material nourishment, and their
nature is not responsive to bodily pleasures '
(Weber, Jiid. Theol? 167 ; Pesikta, 5'(i ; Exodus
R. 32). They are also said to be ' spiritual beings '
(Lev. B. 24), 'without sensuous requirements'
[Yoma, lib), 'without hatred, envy, or jealousy'
{Chug. 14). The Jewish legends which interpret
Gn 6* as teaching a commingling of angels with
women, so as to jiroduce 'mighty men, men of
renown,' seem at variance with the above belief
as to tlie immunity of celestial intelligences from
all passion. It is true that Jude ^ and Enoch 15' '^
both speak of the angels as having first 'left their
habitation ' in heaven ; but the fact that they were
deemed capable, of sexual intercourse implies a
much coarser conception of tlie angelic nature
than is taught in the words of our Lord, of Pliilo,
and of the Talmud.

6. They have extensive, and yet limited, Jcnow-
ledge. This is clearly taught in one utterance of
Christ's, recorded in Alt 24^«|| Mk 13=2 <of that day
and hour knoweth no man, not even the angels
of heaven.' The implications clearly are (1) that
angels know most things, far better than men ; but
(2) that tliere are some things, including the day of
the Second Advent, whicii they do not know. Both
these propositions adnut of copious illustration
from Jewish literature. First, as to their exten-
sive knowledge. There are numerous intimations
of the scientific skill of the angels, their acquaint-
ance with the events of human lives, and their
prescience of futui'e events. The Book of Jubilees,
a pre-Christian work extensively read, affirms (1-'')
that Moses Avas taught by Gabriel concerning
Creation and the things narrated in Genesis ; that
angels taught Noah herbal remedies (10^-), and
brought to Jacob seven tablets recording the
history of his posterity (322^). In Enoch 8' Azazel
is said to have taught men metallurgy and other
sciences ; as Prometheus was said to have taught
the Greeks. In To 12''^ the angel assures Tobit
that he was familiar with all the events of his
troublous days : as in 2 S 14'''- ^^ the woman of
Tekoa flatters Joab that he was 'as wise as an
angel of God to know all things that are in the
earth.' But this knowledge has its ^iww;!*. Angels
were supposed to understand no language but He-
brew (Chagigah, liSa). In 2 Es A^', in revealing
eschatological events, the angel gives the tokens
of the coming end, but confesses his ignorance as
to whether Esdras will be alive at the time. The
Midrash on Ps 25" affirms that ' nothing is hidden
from the angels'; but according to Sanhedrin,
99a, and other Talmudic passages, ' they know not
the time of Israel's redemption.' In 1 P 1'- we are
told that ' the angels desire ' (but in vain) ' to look
into' some of the NT mysteries; and in Slav.
Enoch 24= 40^ Enoch tells his cliildren that not
even the angels know the secrets which lie discloses
to them.

7. They take a deep interest in the salvation of
men. We gather tliis from the evident joy with
which angels announced the advent of the Messiah
to tiie shepherds at Bethlehem. The angel who
brought the ' tidings of great joy' (Lk 2'") clearly
felt the joy himself ; and the song which the
heavenly host sang in praise to God was the out-
come of joyous hearts. Even more explicitly is
this taught in Lk 15^" 'There is joy in the pres-
ence of the angels of God over one sinner that
repenteth.' The word ivihwLov seems hei^e to mean
'in the midst of,' 'among.' 'Joy is manifest on
every countenance.' Even if tlie joy intended be
' the joy of God, which breaks forth in presence of

the angels' (Godet, in loco), still tiie implication
would be that the heart of the angelic throng is
en rripport witii the heart of 'the happy God.'
On this point the words of the angel are instruc-
tive which are recorded in Rev '22^" ' 1 am a
fellow-servant Avith thee and with thy brethren
the prophets, and with them that keep the words
of this book.' The interpreting angel confesses to
unity of service with the Church, and in so doing
implies a oneness of sympathy and love with the
saints. So also when, in 1 P 1'", Me read that ' tiie
angels desire to look into' the marvels of redemp-
tion, there is, as Dr. Hort says, 'a glimpse of the
fellowship of angels with prophets and evangelists,
and implicitly with the suffering Christians to
whom St. Peter wrote.' The same deep interest
in the progress of the Church appears in Eph 3'",
where we are taught that one great purjwse which
moved God to enter on the work of human salva-
tion was, that 'through the Church the manifold
wisdom of God might be made known to the
princiiialities and powers in heavenly places.' The
Church on earth is the arena on Avliich the attri-
butes of God are displayed for the admiration and
adoration of 'the family in heaven' (Eph 3^^).

ii. Angels as Visitants to Earth. — 1. To
convey messages from God to man. — (a) In dreams.
It is a peculiarity of the Gospel of tlie Infancy, as
recorded by St. Matthew, that the appearances of
the angels are in dreams to Joseph, l)idding him
acknowledge Mary as his wife (Ait 1-"), take tlie
young child and His mother to Egypti (2'-'), and
return to Palestine on tlie death of Herod (2'").
The only OT parallel to this is Gn 31^', where
Jacob tells his wives that ' the angel of God spake '
to him ' in a dream.'

(6) In other instances the message of the angel is
brought in full, wakeful consciousness. It was
while Zacharias was ministering at the altar of
incense in the Holy Place that an angel who called
himself Gabriel appeared, foretelling the birth of
John (Lk 1'^). It was while the shepherds were
keeping watch over their flock that the angel stood
near them and directed them to the babe in Beth-
lehem (Lk2'-'-i'); and it is narrated by the three
Synoptists that it Avas through angelic agency
that the disciples were informed of the Resurrec-
tion. St. Matthew narrates that it was an angel
who had 'descended from heaven' (28-), tliat spoke
to the women at the tomb (28^^- '). St. Mark
speaks of a young man 'arrayed in a white robe'
(16^), and St. Luke of 'two men in dazzling
apparel ' (24^), who assured the women that Christ
was risen. The author of the Fourth Gospel is
silent as to angelic appearances at the Resurrec-
tion, but he bears testimony to the popular belief
in angelic voices (Jn 12-"). When a voice came
from heaven, saying, *I have glorified and will
again glorify (my name),' the Evangelist records :
' Some of the people said. An angel spake to him.'

We reserve for special consideration the sacretlly
mysterious interview of the angel Gabriel with the
Virgin Mary (Lk l-^-^s). The salutation of the
angel was : ' Hail, thou favoured one ! The Lord
is with thee.' When she Mas periilexed at the
saying, the angel announced : ' Thou shalt coiieei\e
in thy womb and bear a son, and shalt call his
name Jesus.' This Son is further described as
' Son of the Most High ' and He to M'hom ' the
Lord God will give the throne of his father David.'
Then, in reply to the Virgin's further doubts and
perplexities, the angel vouchsafes the dread ex-
planation, ' The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power (ovvafus) of the Most High shall
overshadow thee. . . . No M'ord from God shall be
devoid of power.' The full consideration of these
Mords M'ill be fittingly considered under ANNUNCIA-
TION (M'liich see). On us it seems to devolve to

ANGELS

speak of the view which arose very early in Jewish
Christian circles, and which regarded the angel as
not merely the messenger, but the cause of the
conception. It was a general belief among the
Jews that a spoken word has causal eHicacy. This
lay at the root of the belief in the potency of spells
and charms. And if every spoken word is mighty,
the Avords of God are almighty. The expression
' No word from [wapd) God shall be devoid of
power' (Lk P^) was accordingly interpreted to
mean that the message brought from God through
the angel had causal efficacy : the Divine word
spoken by the angel caused the conception. In
the Protecangdium of James (IP) the angel is
recorded to have said : 'Thou shalt conceive from
His word ' [in rod X670U avrov), and the same ex-
pression occurs in the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy.
Tliis is the origin of the curious doctrine of the
ancient Church, that the Virgin conceived through
the car. The word of the angel, wliicli was a
Divine message, reached the Virgin through the
ear. The ear was thus believed to be the channel
througli which the Divine potency was operative.
Even Augustine says : ' Virgo per aurem impreg-
nabatur.' As bearing on this subject, we may
note that in the Ascension of Isaiah the .angel
Gabriel is called ' the angel of the Holy Spirit '
(316 723 936)^ jn pseudo-Matthciv (c. 10), Joseph says :
' Why do ye mislead me to believe th.at an angel
of the Lord hath made her pregnant?' and in tlie
Protci-angcliiim of James the Virgin explains her
condition to Joseph in tliese words : ' The case is
the same as it was with Adam whom God created.
He said, "Let him be" ; and he wa.s.'

2. Angels as performing physical actions. This
is an ancient representation of which the OT
furnishes many instances : Ps 91'^'* (cited Mt 4^, Lk
4'"'-), 'angels . . . shall bear thee up on their hands' ;
in Dn 6-- angels shut the lions' mouths ; in Ps 34'
anofels encamp round about them that fear God ;
so in Apocryplia (Bel ^, Three '''). It is therefore
precisely in accord with Jewish modes of thought
that we read in Mt 28^ ' There was a great earth-
quake : for an angel of the Lord descended from
heaven, and came and rolled aioay the stone ' ; and
in Mk 1'^ ' He was with the wild beasts; and the
angels ministered unto him ' (cf. Mt 4").

3. As performing psychical actions. When Jesus
was in the garden, and ' being in an agony prayed
more earnestly,' we are told tiiat 'there appeared
to him an anyel from heaven strengthening him'
(Lk 22^3) * So in Dn IQi"'- Daniel records that
there was ' no strength in him, and no breath
left in him,' and an angel ' touclied him and
strengthened him.' The Hebrews drew no dis-
tinction between the physical and the psychical.
It was in their regard just as easy for these
spiritual existences to roll away a stone as to
infuse vigour into the system, and give power to
the enfeebled nerves and will.

4. Angels are deputed to guard the righteous
from, danger. In Gn 24' Abraham prays for his
servant: 'May God send his angel before thee';
and Jacob saw angels ' ascending and descending '
over him in his sleep (Gn 28'-). In the time of
Christ it was a Jewish belief not merelj' tiiat
angels are sent to guide and guard men, but also
that everj' man has his own guardian spirit, or, as
others teach, two guardians. In the Talnmdic
treatise Berakhoth (606), when a man goes into an
unclean place, he prays his guardian angels to wait
outside till he returns. In Pal. Targum to Gn 33'"
Jacob says to Esau, ' I have seen thy face as if I
saw the face of thy angel ' ; on Gn 48^** the same
Targum reads: ' May the angel whom thou hast
assigned to me bless the lads.' Similarly the Sohar

* On the question of the grenuineness of this passage see the
' Notes on Select Readings ' in Westcott and Horfs NT in Greek.

to Exodus (p. 190) says : ' From the 13th year of
a man and onwards, God assigns to every man two
angels, one on the right hand and one on the left ;
and the Testament of Joseph (c. 6) names the angel
of Abraham as the guardian of Joseph. It is
here more than elsewhere that we seem to recog-
nize the influence of Persia on Jewish beliefs.

The question now occurs, What connexion is
there between the above and Mt 18"* ' See that ye
despise not one of these little ones, for I say unto
you, that their angels in heaven continually behold
the face of my Father who is in heaven ' ? It is
evident that ' their angels ' means angels that
watch over them. But did our Lord refer to the
' angels of the presence ' or to individual guardian
angels? The former is more probable for two
reasons — (I) It was not part of the Jewish creed
that any angels behold the face of God except
the archangels ; (2) the guardian spirits accom-
panying men on earth could hardly at the same
time be said to be in heaven continually beholding
the face of the Father who is in heaven. The
allusion probably is, then, to the ' angels of the
presence,' and especially to Michael the guardian
of the pious and the helj^less. It must be admitted
that in Ac 12^^ we seem to have the popular Jewish
notion in all its later development. When many
brethren were met in the house of Mary, mother
of John Mark, and were imalde to believe that
Peter had really been delivered, they said to
Rhoda, lirst, 'Thou art mad,' and then, 'It is his
angel.' This, if pushed to its apparent implica-
tions, seems to contain an allusion to a notion
which occurs in some .Jewish writings, that heaven
is a counterpart of earth, and every man has his
double in the celestial sphere ; or at all events the
guardian angel is like him whom he guards. It
is quite likely, however, that on the lips of the
disciples these words might be merely an allusion
to a popular conception, without carrying with
them any literal belief.

5. Angels ^nsit v)rath on the adversaries of the
righteous. This is implied in Christ's words : ' See
that ye despise not one of these little ones' (Mt
18'°). The word bpare implies ' beware ! ' and the
teaching clearly is that angels are capable of
punishing any who injure those whom it is their
business to guard. The OT contains instances of
tlieir punitive abilities. It was an angel of the
Lord who smote 185,000 in the camp of the
Assyrians (2 K lO'*^), and who destroyed tlie chil-
dren of Israel till, when he came to Jerusalem, the
Lord said to him, ' It is enough ' (2 S 24i«) ; and Ps
35^'- presents a pjicture calculated to inspire terror
in every breast : ' Let them be as ch.atl" before tlie
wind, the angel of the Lord driving them on. Let
their way be dark and s]ii)pery, the angel of the
Lord pursuing them.' It is very notewortiiy that
the Lord Jesus, even in His hour of intensest
agony, drew comfort from the thought of angelic
help. It was a real comfort to Him that tlie angels
were at His control, if He needed them. The
military band led by Judas could not arrest or
injure Him unless He voluntarily submitted Him-
self to tiiem. He had ' aut!iorit,y to lay down'
His 'life'; and when tiie struggle was over, and
tlie resolve retaken that tlie patTi of the cross was
the path of duty. He conveyed to the Eleven tiie
fact of His self-surrender by saying to Peter, wiio
had impetuously used the sword in his Lord's
defence. ' Thinkest thou that I cannot now beseech
the Father, and he would even now send me more
than twelve legions of angels ' ? (Mt 26'^). We note
here that the prayer is not to be addressed to
angels. There are very few instances of Jews
praying to angels. The Rabbis discouraged it.
Every pious Jew would, as Jesus did, pray to God
that He would send angelic ministry ; as in 2 Mac

AXGELS

ANGELS

15^, -svhere Judas is said to have prayed : ' O
sovereifjn Lord, send a good angel before us to
bring teiTor and trembling.'

6. Angels render aid at death. Lk 16" ' Lazarus
was carried away by the angels into Abraham's
bosom.' We come here upon a widespread belief
among Jews and Jewish Christians— that angels
convey the souls of the righteous to Paradise.
Michael is usually the one entrusted with tliis
duty. If he has a companion, it is Gabriel. The
Gospel of Nicodemus records that when Jesus de-
scended into Hades and released tlie righteous
dead from captivity, He delivered Adam and all
the righteous to the archangel Michael, and all
the saints followed Michael ; and he led them all
into the glorious gate of Paradise : among them
being the penitent thief. The History of Joseph
the Carpenter records that ^Michael and Gabriel
drew out the soul of Joseph and wrapped it in a
silken napkin, and amid the songs of angels took
him to his good Father, even to the dwelling-place
of the just. In the Testament of Ahraliam we
have a similar account of the death of Abraham.
The Ascension of Isaiah (7^) attirms that 'those
who love the ]Most High and His Beloved will
ascend to heaven by the Angel of the Holy Spirit.'

7. Angels are to be the ininistrants of Christ at
His Second Adrcnt. 'The reapers' in the great
Harvest ' are angels' ; and they separate the tares
from the wheat (Mt 13="). ' The Son of Man will
send forth his angels to gather out all that oHend '
(Mt 13"). ' He shall come in his glory, and all the
holy angels with him'(Mt 125^'). 'He shall send
forth his angels with the great sound of a trumi)et
to gather the elect ' (Mt 24^1 ; cf. 1 Th 4", 2Th 1").

8. To complete our survey, we must add one
word as to the appearance of angels when men
were conscious of their presence. It is taken for
granted that there needs to be a preparation of
vision before man can recognize their presence.
As Balaam was unaware that the angel con-
fronted him until the Lord opened his ej'es (Nu
22''"), and as Elislia prayed that God -w ould open
the eyes of his servant (2 K 6'"), so when the
risen Jesus appeared to Saul of Tai'sus, those who
travelled with him 'saw no man' (Ac 9''). ('^r)
Angels had a manlike appearance. As Abraham
and Manoah's wife mistook them for men(Gn 18^'^,
Jg 13""'), so, in describing the Piesurrection, St. Mark
says that the women ' saw a J'oung man ' (16^), and
St. Luke that ' two men stood by them ' (24^).— (6)
Their appearance was usually with brilliant light
or 'glory.' When the angel appeared to the shep-
herds, ' the glory of the Lord shone round about
them'(Lk 2"), and when the Son of ]\Ian cometh.
He will come ' in the glory of the holy angels ' (Lk
Q'-*^). So in To 3^^ Cod. B reads : ' The praj'er of
both was heard before the glory of the great
Raphael' ; in 2 Mac 3-"* two young men appeared,
'notable in their strength and beautiful in their
glory ' ; and the Protevangeliuni of James narrates
that 'an angel of the Lord appeared in the great
light to Joachim.'— ('') They wear raiment of great
luminousness. Mt 2S^ ' His ajipearance was like
lightning, and his raiment white as snow'; cf.
Dn 10^ Ezk l'^ Rev P* W-. So Apoc. of Peter
says of the angels, ' their body was whiter than
any snow.'

iii. Differences between NT and Rabbinism
AS TO Angels. — We undertook to show that 'in
the main Christ and His Apostles appropriated
the Angelology of Judaism ' ; and the above sys-
tematic treatment has surely rendered this evi-
dent. It has often been observed that ' Jesus says
very little about angels' ; and, so far as the bulk
of His sayings is concerned, this is quite true ; but
wlien we classify His utterances, we find that they
constitute almost a complete Angelology ; and so

far as it goes, it is in harmony with the Jewish
beliefs of the period. The Jews believed all that
the NT says of engels, but they also believed much
more.

1. It is very significant that the Gospels are
silent as to the mediation of angels. In Judaism
this was very prominent. In Tobit, e.g., one great
function of angels is said to be to carry the prayers
of saints within the veil, before the glory of the
Holy One (12'-- ^*). In Enoch 40^ the seer says:
' And the third voice heard I pray and intercede
for those who dwell on the earth, and supplicate
in the name of the Lord of spirits.' In the Greek
Apoc. of Baruch (c. 11), Michael is said to have a
great receptacle in which the prayers of men are
placed to be carried through the gates into the pre-
sence of the Divine glory (Texts and Studies, V.
i. 100). In the Midrash Exodus Rabba 21 an angel
set over the prayers of men is said to Aveave them
into crowns for the Most High. — But not only are
the Gospels silent as to the need of angels to be
mediators in carrying the prayers and necessities
of saints into the unapproachable chamber of the
]Most High, the teaching of Jesus was designed to
counteract such a view of God. When our I^ord
said : ' Your heavenly Father knoweth that ye
have need of all these things' (Mt 6^-); 'Your
heavenly Father feedeth the fowls' (G-**) ; 'Thy
Father seetli in secret' (6'^) ; ' Pray to thy Father
who is in secret ' (6^), — He certainly wished to break
down the barriers which the Jewish mind had
placed between itself and God, and encourage men
to come direct to the Father in childlike confidence.

2. In other respects the only difi'erence is, that
the Gospels are free from the extravagant embel-
lishment in which the Rabbis indulged, when
speaking of angels : (r/) as to their si^c. The Tal-
mudic treatise Chagigah (136) says that Sandalfon
is taller than his fellows by the length of a journey
of 500 years; and the Gospel of Peter (c. 9) tells
how the Roman soldiers saw two men descend
from heaven, and the head of the two reached
unto heaven, but that of Him whom they released
from the tomb overpassed the heavens. — (ft) As
to a fondness for the marvellous in describing
their appearance and actions. For instance, Yoina
21a naiTates how a high priest was killed by an
angel in the Holy of Holies, and the impress of
a calf's foot was found between his shoulders.
Joshua ben Hananiah is reported to have told
the Emperor Hatlrian that God hears the song of
new angels every day. When asked whence they
come, he replied, ' From the fiery stream which
issues from the throne of God ' (Dn 7'") ; see Bacher,
Agada der Tannaiten, i. 178. — (c) The Jews also
speculated much as to the origin of the angels,
their connexion with the four elements, etc. ; and
they had ingenious methods of computing their
number by Kabbalistic Gcrnatria — the whole thing
being the extravaganza of Oriental phantasy.

iv. The objective value of the NT doctrine
OF Angels. — The most difficult part of our task
now awaits us, to give some account of modern
views as to the reality of angels, and to discuss
whether there are valid reasons why we, as Chris-
tians, are bound to accept the ])rima facie NT
teaching as to the angelic ministry. Every Chris-
tian must feel that it is of very great importance
to decide whether the Lord Jesus really believed
in the objective existence and ministrations of
angels. To this question the present writer feels
obliged to give an affirmative reply [but see art.
Accommodation, above, p. 20], and that for the
following reasons : (1) Though .Jesus did not speak
much concerning angels, yet His recorded sayings
cover, with some intentional exce]jtions, almost
the complete Angelology of the Jews — which is
I evidence that He was, in the main, in agreement

ANGELS

with it. (2) If the disciples had been radically
mistaken on this subject, surely this is a matter
as to which Christ's words were applicable : ' If it
were not so, I would have told you,' Jn 14^. (3)
In controversy with the Sadducees, who were
sceptical as to angels, He adroitly gave them such
a reply to their objection against tlie resurrection
as to show that the existence and nature of angels
was to Him a settled matter, and miglit be used
to elucidate the nature of the resurrection body.
There is a wealth of conviction in the words of
Jesus : ' Those who rise again are like the angels.'
(4) Christ made mention of angels not merely in
the par.ables, where we expect symbolism and pic-
torial illustration, but also in the interpretation
(Mt 133a- «• ^»). (5) He used the punitive ability of
angels to warn men against despising the little
ones in His kingdom (Mt 18'"). Apart from a
literal belief in angels, such words are an empty
threat. (6) In the time of His most intense agony
He evidently derived comfort from the loving sym-
pathy of the ' cloud of witnesses ' ; for when He
emerges from the trial and its bitterness is past,
He assures Peter that, had He permitted it, more
than twelve legions of angels would readily have
intervened to deliver Him (Mt 2Q^^). — Stevens
[Theology of NT, p. 80) is impressed by other pas-
sages. ' In several places,' he says, ' Christ seems
to refer to angels in such a Avay as to show that
He believed in their real existence. He will
"come in the glory of his Father with his holy
angels" (Mk 8-'^). "Angels in heaven" neither
marry nor are given in marriage (Mk 12-'). Of
the hour of his Advent "not even the angels in
heaven" know (Mk 13^-).'

In recent times the views of scholars are much
divided on this subject. 1. There are large sections
of the universal Church to whom the existence of
angels is very real, not only as a matter of theo-
retical belief, but as a matter of religious experi-
ence. They set great value on the services of
angels as mediators between themselves, in their
sins and needs and miseries, and the holy, infinite
God ; and they delight to think that the spiritual
strength and light and succour which come to
them in answer to prayer, reach their low estate
througli the mediation of angels. We might readily
quote from saints of the Greek and Roman Churches
on this head, but we prefer to give the * disclosures '
of Swedenborg. ' According to him, we are every
moment in the most vital association with the
spirits both of heaven and hell. They ai'e the
perpetual ju'ompters of our thoughts : they inces-
santly work by insinuating influences on our loves ;
and they give force on tlie one hand to the power
of temptation, and on the other fortify the soul,
by hidden influx, to resist temptation' (Rev. G.
Bush, Disclosures of Sivedenborg, 79).

2. There are many who believe in angels theo-
retically. They take tlie teaching of tlie NT in
a thoroughly literal sense. They are prepared to
maintain and contend that Jesus Christ believed
in the real existence of angels ; and, in consequence,
a belief in angels forms part of their ' creed ' ; but
angels have no part in their inner religious life.
Some admit, not without regret and self-reproach,
that angels do not seem so real to them as they
did to Jesus ; while others are reluctant to admit
that it can be a fault to yearn as they do for heart-
to-heart fellowship with God Himself, without the
intervention of an angel ministry — to seek for
direct interaction with God, without even the
holiest angel intervening in the sacredness of the
communion. As a specimen of this attitude, we
quote from an article in the First Series of the
Expositor (viii. 4U9rt'.) by R. Minterbotham : 'I
do not mean to imply that we disbelieve either the
existence or the ministry of angelic beings : we

cannot do so without rejecting and denying point
blank the unquestioned and unquestionable dicta
of our Lord and of His apostles. But I do say
that our belief in angels is formal only, or at the
best merely poetic. It does not strike its roots
down into our religious consciousness, into that
inner and unseen, but most real and often passion-
ate, life of the soul towards God and the powers
of the world to come.'

3. There are others yet again who set such a
high value on the immediacy of the interaction of
fellowship with God, believing, as they do, that it
was the chief feature of Christ's teaching to reveal
the possibility of fellowship with God as our Father
— or led perhaps by scientific predilections to feel
that there is now no room for angels in our modern
world — that they sweep away the intervention of
angels, and are reluctant to admit that the Lord
Jesus really believed in their existence. They
would believe rather that He accommodated Him-
self in this matter to current popular notions. For
instance, Beyschlag maintains that ' the immediate
relation to the Avorld in which Jesus viewed His
heavenly Father left no room for such personal
intermeiliate beings' [as the Jews of that time be-
lieved in]. In passages like Lk 12** and 15'" angels
are 'a poetic paraphrase for God Himself.' 'The
holy angels of the Son of Man, with whom He will
come again in His glory, are the rays of Divine
majesty which is then to surround Him with
splendour : they are the Divine ]iowers with which
He is to waken the dead.' And again, ' The most
remarkable passage is Mt 18'", and it is the very
passage which we can least of all take in prosaic
literalness. According to it, even the least of the
children of men has his guardian angel Avho at all
times has access to the Heavenly Father, viz. to
complain to Him of the ottences done to his pro-
tege on earth. But as God, according to Jesus,
knows what happens to each of His children with-
out needing to be told, in ^^■hat other way can Ave
conceive this entirely poetical passage, than that
in every child of man a peculiar thought of God
has to be realized, which stands over his history,
like a genius, or guardian spirit, and which God
always remembers, so that everything whi(;h op-
poses its realization on earth comes before Him as
a complaint?' (New Test. Theology, i. 86 f.). Dr.
Bruce is even more pronounced. In his Epistle to
the Hebrews (p. 45) he says : ' For modern men,
the angels are very much a dead theological cate-
gory. Everywhere in the old JeM'ish world, they
are next to nowhere in our world. They have
practicallydisappeared from the universe in tliouglit
and in fact.' Then, with a strange lapse of the his-
toric sense, he adds: 'This subject was probably
a weariness to the writer of our Epistle. A Jew,
and well acquainted with Jewish opinion, and
obliged to adjust his argument to it, he was tired,
I imagine, of the angelic regime. Too much had
been made of it in Rabbinical teaching and in
popular opinion. It must not be supjjosed that he
was in sympathy with either.'

A belief in angels among men of to-day depends
entirely on one's religious outlook, one's general
view of (iod and the world. The man who has
scientific proclivities, who has toiled through much
doubt and uncertainty before he can sincerely altirm
the iirst article of the Christian creed, ' I believe
in God the Father Almighty,' will probably be re-
luctant to take more cargo aboard than his faith
can carry. In other words, he will employ the
Law of Parsimony, ' Entia pr.Teter necessitateni
non multiplicanda sunt,' and, finding the full satis-
faction of his religious needs in direct intercourse
with God the leather, will reject, or ignore as
superfluous, the ministry of angels. So also the
man of mystical tendencies, whose eager desire is

ANGELS

to have coniiuunion with the Divine — who claims
to be endowed with a faculty by which he can
coo'nize God, and receive immediate communica-
tions from Him, is also likely to regard the inter-
vention of angels between his spirit and the Divine
Spirit as an intrusion. And not less so is this the
case with one who has leanings to Pantheism —
whether he regards God as altogether immanent
in the Avorld, or as both immanent and transcen-
dent. In proportion as one's thoughts centre on
Divine immanence, and as one regards God as more
or less identical with Force, variant but transmut-
able, present everywhere, and everywhere causa-
tive, in that proportion are one's thoughts drawn
away from every theological conception but that
of the One Great Cause of motion, life, and mind.
There is no room for angels.

The only scientific conception which to some
minds seems to foster the belief in angels is the
Law of Evolution, or, to speak more accurately,
the anticipation of gradation of being, encouraged
by tliat law. T. G. Selby, in his volume of ser-
mons headed by one on ' The Imperfect Angel,'
contends that a true science welcomes the belief
in angels as intervening between man and God.
' It is surely not unscientific,' he says, ' to assume
the existence of the pure and mighty beings spoken
of by seers and prophets of the olden time.' ' The
spirit of inspiration, in seeking to convey to us
some faint hint of the strict and awful and abso-
lute holiness of God, depicts ranks of angels in-
definitely higher and better than the choicest saints
on earth : and then tells us that these angels,
which seem so lofty and stainless and resplendent,
are creatures of unwisdom and shortcoming in
comparison with the ineHable wisdom and stirpass-
ing holiness of God ' (p. 7). Godet in his Biblical
Studies on the OT has elaborated a scientific apo-
logia on behalf of angels. He contends that science
recognizes three forms of being : species without
indisiduality, in tlie vegetable world ; individuality
under bondage to species, in the animal world ;
individuality overpowering species, in the human
race. He holds, therefore, that it is antecedentlj^
probable that there is a fourth form of being —
individuality without species — each individual
owing his existence no longer to parents like
himself, but immediately to the Creative Will.
This fourth form would exactly be the angel

(p. 2fr.).

It remains now to show that a belief in angels
is in precise accord with the fundamental views of
God and the world which present themselves in
the recorded life and teaching of the Lord Jesus.
Were the belief in angels at variance with Christ's
personal religious outlook, we might readily regard
it as an excrescence which modern thought might
lop oft' without much detriment ; but if it is closely
allied to our Lord's fundamental doctrines, then
this will surely confirm the impression arrived at
from other evidence, that Jesus sincerely believed
in the reality of angels, and would have us derive
from the belief the same comfort and support
which He did. Where shall we look with niore
assurance for the first principles of the doctrine of
Jesus than to the Lord's Prayer? There our
Saviour taught His discijdes to say, 'Our Father
which art in heaven. Hallowed be Thy name. . . .
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.' Be-
yond all contradiction, then, it is an axiom of the
creed of Jesus that there are beings in heaven
who do God's will. It is generally recognized that
Jesus presented to men a conception of God which
meets the needs of man's religious nature, rather
than of his reason and intellect. Men of culture
and philosophical training may aspire to know God
as 'the One in all,' 'the Absolute,' 'the First
Cause ' ; and may appeal for support to isolated

sayings of the Apostles, but not to sayings of the
Master. His sayings owe their eterna' permanence
to the fact that they appeal to that which is com-
mon to all men — the innermost in all men — the
heart — the religious nature. To conceive of God
as the Absolute, or the First Cause, may satisfy
the reason ; but before the heart can be satisfied, it
must know God as Father, the ' Father in heaven.'
But the very phrase ' Father in heaven ' seems to
imply that He has sons in heaven. And that this
implication is Avarranted, is irrefragably substan-
tiated by the words which follow : ' Thy Avill be
done on earth as it is in heaven.' Surely no one
can deny that Christ firmly believed that there are
beings in heaven who do God's will, to say the
least, far more perfectly than we do, since their
obedience is the model to which we are constantly
taught to pray that we may attain. Again, it was
the outstanding feature of Judaism to push God
aloof from men and the world, whereas Jesus
brought God nearer to men, as a Father who takes
a minute interest in all that concerns us. But if
Jesus thus brought heaven nearer to man. He must,
in the very act, have brought the occupants of
hejiven nearer, and must wish us to believe that
they also are deeply interested in our welfare.
There is no need that angels should tell God any-
thing that concerns us. He knows already far
more than they can tell. Those avIio object to the
doctrine of angels because it interposes a barrier
between our ])rayers and our Father's love, mis-
underst.and Christ's teaching. His disclosure of
the Fatherliness of God was meant to correct
Judaism, in so far as it made angels the bearers
of our prayers and the informants to God of our
requirements. Those Christians also who approach
God through angels (iontravene in this waj' Christ's
teaching : and also His example, for in the garden
He said to I'eter (Mt 26^''): 'I could pray the
Father, and he would send . . . angels.' Christ's
teaching and example both show that it is our
duty and privilege to have direct intercourse with
Gotl in prayer and fellowship. But this is not to
say that there is no room for the ministry of
angels. We may still believe that angels are sent
on errands of mercy. Indeed, we may well say to
those who on this subject are of doubtful mind,
as the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews said :
' Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to
do service on behalf of those who shall inherit
salvation?' (!'■')• There is nothing at all in the
Gospel doctrine of angels which is at variance with
the religious needs of the most cultured among us.
It may present difficulties to reason, as everything
which is supernatural does ; but the heart of man
which loves God must surely rejoice to think that
the heavenly Father has also a ' family in heaven '
as on earth (Eph 3^^). It must always find a re-
sponsive chord in the nature of men who allow the
heart a place in their creed, to be told that there
are beings who 'continually behold the face of our
F"ather,' who are deeply interested in us (Mt IS'") ;
that our penitence gives the angels joy (Lk 15'");
that in our times of depression and anguish it
may be our privilege to have ' an angel sent from
heaven, strengthening ' us (Lk 22^"), as in our times
of gladness it is our privilege to ' give thanks to
the Father from whom the a\ hole family in heaven
and earth is named' (Eph 3'^^-).

Literature. — Artieles on ' Anjijels ' in Hastings' DB (by
Davidson ; cf. also Extra Vol. p. 285 ff.), Schenkel's Bihellexicon
(by Sebenkel), Riehni's HWB (by Delitzsch), Encyclojjcedia
Britannica (by Robertson Smith). For Jewish beliefs see
Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. i. p. 583 ff. ; Edersheini, Life and Times
of Jesus, vol. ii. Appendix xiii. ; Bousset, Jielicp'on des Juden-
ihums, 313-325 ; Gfrorer, Urchristenthum, i. 352-378 ; Weber,
Jiidische Theolojiie 2 (see Index s. ' Engel ') ; Donehoo, AjMcry-
phal and Legendary Life of Christ ; Schiefer, Die religiosen
und ethischen Anschaxmnqen des IV Ezralniches; Kohut, Die
Jiidische Angelologie. On the general subject see Everling,

angp:r

ANGER

Die Paulinische Angelolorjie ; Latham, The Service ofAnijels;
Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 127 if. ; Expositor, First Series,
viii. 409 ff. ; Expository Times, iii. 437, vi. 145, 193 ; Davidson,
Theology ofOT, 289-306 ; Beyschlag, NT Theolomji, i. 80 ff.

J. T. MAR.SHALL.

ANGER. — Anger is the instinctive resentment
or reaction of the soul against any tiling which it
regards as wrong or injurious. It is jiart of its
equipment for self-preservation, and the prompti-
tude and energy with whicli it come.s into play are
a fair niea.sure of tiie soul's power to protect itself
from the e\il w Inch is in the world. If there is
not an instant and indignant repulsion of evil, it
creeps into tiie apathetic soul, and soon makes it
not only its victim but its in.strument. The child's
anger with the lire which burns him is in a sense
irrational ; but one true meaning and purpose of
anger in the moral world is illustrated by it. It
is the vehement repulsion of that Avhich hurts,
and there is no spiritual, as there is no natural,
life without it.

An instinct, however, when we come into the
world of freedom and responsibility, always needs
education ; and the radical character of the educa-
tion required by the instinct of anger is apparent
fi'om the fact that the first thought of almost all
men is that anger is a vice. Taking human nature
as it is, and looking at the actual manifestations
of anger, this is only too true. There is, as a rule,
something vicious in them. They are self-regard-
ing in a selfish way. Men are angry, as Aristotle
l)uts it {Ethics, iv. 5. 7), on Avrong grounds, or with
the wrong people, or in a wrong Avaj^, or for too
long a time. Their anger is natural, not spiritual ;
sellish, not guided by consideration of principle ;
the indulgence of a temper, not the staking of
one's being for a cause. In the NT itself there are
far more warnings against anger than indications
of its true place and function. Yet when we read
the Gospels with the idea of anger in our minds,
we can easily see that justice is done to it Ijoth as
a virtue and a vice. There is a certain arbitrari-
ness in trying to systematize the teaching of Jesus
on this or on any other subject, but most of the
matter can be introduced if we examine (1) the
occasions on which Jesus Himself is represented as
being angry ; (2) those in which He exjnesses His
judgment on moral questions with a vehemence
Mhich is undoubtedly inspired by indignation ;
and (3) those in which He gives express teaching
about anger.

1. Occasio7is on which Jcstts Himself is repre-
sented as being angry. — {a) The most explicit is
Mk 3* ' He looked round on them with anger (fj-er
dpyris), being grieved (avv\vTrovtievos) over the har-
dening of their heart.' The objects of Christ's
anger here are the people in the synagogue, who
maintained an obstinate and prejudiced silence
when He asked them, ' Is it lawful on the Sabbath
day to do good or to do evil, to save life or to
kill?' What roused His anger was partly their
inhumanity, which cared nothing for the disable-
ment of the man with the withered hand, but even
more, perhaps, the misrepresentation of God of
Avhicli they were guilty, when in His honour (as
they would have it) they justified inhumanity on
the Sabbath day. To be inhuman themselves was
bad enough, but to impute the .same inhumanity
to the Heavenly Father was far worse, and the
indignation of Jesus was visible as He looked
round on them. He pa.ssionately resented their
temper, and repelled it from Him with veliemence,
as injurious at once to God and to man. Yet His
indignation was expressed in one indignant glance
{■7repijiXe\//dfxevos, aorist), Avhile it was accompanied
by a deep pain, Mdiich did not pass away {avi'Xvirou-
fievo^, present), over the hardening of their heart.
This combination, in which resentment of wrong-
is accompanied Avith a grief which makes the

ofrender's case one's own, .and seeks to win him by
reaching the inner witness to (iod in his soul
before insensibility has gone too far, is character-
istic of Jesus, and is tlie test whether anger is
Christian.

(b) The next occasion on which we see our Lord
display an emotion akin to anger is found in Mk
jQiatt._ He was 'moved with indignation' (RV
rjyavdKTTjaei') when the disciples forbade the chil-
dren to be brought to Him. The other instances
in whifdi the same word is used (Mk 10^' U^ Mt
21'5, Lk 13'^) show that a natural feeling of being
hurt or annoyed is what the Avord specifically
means. The discijdes sliould have known Him
better than to do Aviiat they did : they wronged
Him in forbidding the approach of the children.
Hence doctrines and practices Avhicli refuse to
children, and to the intellectually and morally
innnature in general, their place and interest in
the kingdom of God, are proper subjects of resent-
ment. In one aspect of it, the kingdom of God is
a protest against nature, and to enter into it we
must be born again ; but in another, there is a real
analogy between them ; the order of nature is
constituted with a view to the order of grace ; man
is made in God's image and for God, and it is his
true nature to welcome God ; if the children are
' suffered,' and not forbidden, they will go to Jesus.
They Avrong God Avho deny this, and therefore the
denial is to be resented.

(c) There is a striking passage in Luke (H^^"'-),
Avhere, although anger is not mentioned, it is im-
possible not to feel that Jesus is si)eaking with a
profound and even passionate resentment. ' Great
multitudes followed Avith him, and he turned, and
said to them. If any man cometli to me, and liateth
not his father, and mother, and Avife, and children,
and brothers, and sisters, yea, and his oavu life also,
he cannot be my disciple.' Jesus Avas on His Avay
to die ; and it moved Him as an indignity, Avliich
He was entitled to resent, that on the very path
to the cross He should be attended by a shalloAV
tlirong Avho did not have it in them to do the
slightest violence to themselves for the sake of the
kingdom of God. The Avhole passage, in Avhich
the moral demands of discipleship are set at the
highest, vibrates Avitli indignation. To follow
Christ is a great enterprise, like building a tower,
or going to war ; it requires the painful sacrifice of
the tenderest natural affections, the renunciation
of the most valued possessions ; and Aviien it is
affected by people who have no moral salt in
them — who could not Avin it from themselves to
give up anything for God and His cause — the
resentment of Jesus rises into scorn (v.^^'-). With
all His love for men, there Avas a kind of mail
Avhom He did not shrink from describing as ' good
for nothing.'

{d) The last passage is that in Avhich Jesus
cleanses the Temple: Mk 11'^ and parallels. What
stirred His indignation here was in part the |iro-
fanity to Avliich sacred places and tiieir proper
associations had lost all sacredness ; in part, the
covetousness Avliich on the pretext of accommodat-
ing the pilgrims had turned the house of prayer
into a den of thieves ; in part, again, the iiihu-
nianity which, by instituting a market so noisy in
the Court of the Gentiles, must have made worship
for these less privileged seekei^s after God ditlicult,
if not impossible. The text quoted in Jn 2" (Ps
69"), as remembered by the disciples in connexion
with this event — 'the zeal of thy house shall eat
me up' — sums up as Avell as anything could do
the one characteristic Avhich is never wanting in
the anger of Jesus, .and Avhicli alone renders
anger just. It is jealousy for God — the identifica-
tion of oneself with His cause and interest on
earth, especially as it is reijresented in human

ANGER

beings, and resentment of everything which does
it wrong.*

2. The occasions on which Jesus expresses His
judgment vn morrrl questions with a vehemence
which is undunMedhj inspired by indignation. —
Every moral judgment, of course, contains feeling:
it is not merely the expression of assent or dissent,
but of consent or resentment. We are all witiiin
the moral world, not outside of it ; we cannot be
spectators merely, but in every thought we are
actors as well ; to deny this is to deny that there
is a niorsil world .at all. Hence all dissent is con-
demnation, and all condemnation, if real, is resent-
ment ; but there are circumstances in which the
condemnation is so emphatic that the resentment
becomes vivid and contagious, and it is illustra-
tions of this that we wish to find in the life of
Jesus.

(a.) The most conspicuous is perhaps that which
we find in the passage on aKavSaXa (Mt IS"'-)-
Jesus has taken a little child to rebuke the am-
bitious strife of the Twelve ; but ' tiiese little ones
wlio believe in me' are not children, but the
disciples generally (cf. Mt 10^'-). ' To make one of
them stumble ' {(XKavSaXi'^eLv) is to perplex him, to
put him out about Christ, to create misunderstand-
ing and estrangement, such as we hear of for a time
in tiie case of the Baptist (ll-*^-) and tlie Nazarenes
(1.3"), and so to make his discipleship void. In a
more general sense it means to mislead, or to be
the cause that anotiier falls into sin which his
better conscience condemns. If we are to judge
from His language, nothing ever moved Jesus to
such passionate indignation as this. The sin of
sins was that of leading others into sin, especially
'tlie little ones' — the weak, tiie untaught, the
easily per[)lexed and easily misled — whose hearts
were otherwise naturally right with Him. Every
word in Jesus' sentence is laden with indignation :
' Better for him that a great millstone were hanged
about his neck, and that he were drowned in the
dei)tli of the sea.' This anger of Jesus is exactly
what is meant in the OT by ' the jealousy of God,'
i.e. His love pledged to His own, and resenting
Mith all the intensity of the Divine nature any
wrong inflicted on them (cf. Zee 8-^-). Though anger
is often sinful, tiie absence of anger may be due to
the absence of love : and the man who can see the
' little ones ' being made to stumble and who takes
it quite coolly is very far from tiie kingdom of God.

(6) It is possibly an instance of this same indig-
nation that we find in Mt 16-^ Peter tempts
Jesus to decline the cross — in other words, tries to
make Him stumble at the will of the Father ; and
the indignant vehemence with whicii he is repelled
— 'Get thee behind me, Satan' — shows how real
the temptation was, and how a prom})t and deci-
sive resentment is the natural .security in such
trials. We have a right and a duty to be angry
with the tempter.

(c) In the answer of Jesus to the Sadducees in
Mk VI'^^- we have another light on what moved
Him to indignation. In the scornful iroKv irXavdaOe
with Mhich the discussion closes, resuming the
TrXavaade of v."^, Jesus' resentment shines out.
The question at issue, that of man's immortality,
was a great and solemn question. It involved tiie
whole character of God — -what He was, and what
in His power, His goodness, and His faitii fulness
He could and would do for the souls He had made

* In Mt 21:ji Wellhausen adopts the reading S ilmpo; instead
of TpiJTn;. This makes the .Tews deride Jesus, instead of
seriously answering Him ; and Wellhausen, taking it so, finds
in the words whii'h follow — ' The puhlicans and the harlots go
into the kingdom of God before you ' — not an explanation of
the iiarable, but a Zornesaushmch, an outburst of wrath, which
could hardly be cleared of petulance {Das Evangelium Mat-
thcei, lOG f.). O. Holtzmann's idea that Jesus cursed the fig-
tree in a momentary fit of temper is only worth mentioning as
a warning (see his Lcben Jesu, p. 324).

in His own image. The Sadducees had tried to
degrade it and make it ridiculous, and the indigna-
tion of Jesus is unmistakable. It is an example
wliich justifies indignation with tliose who by
unworthy controversial methods profane or render
ritiiculous subjects in which tiie dearest concern-
ments of humanity are involved.

(rf) To these passages may be added Jesus' de-
nunciation of the Pharisees in Mt 23^^'''-. The long
series of woes is not merely a revelation of things
wliich in the mind of Jesus are illegitimate, it is a
revelation of the passionate resentment wliich
these things evoke in Him. They are tlie things
witli which God is angry every day, and it is a sin
in men if they can look at them without indigna-
tion. To kee]) people ignorant of religious truth,
neither living by it ourselves, nor letting tliem do
so (v. '2) ; to make piety or the pretence of it a
cloak for avarice (v.^*, only introduced here from
11 Mark) ; to raise recruits for our own faction on
the pretext of enlisting men for the kingdom of
God (v.^^) ; to debauch the simple conscience bj'
casuistical sophistries (vv."''--); to destroy the
sense of proportion in morals by making morality
a matter of law in which all things stand on the
same level (v."^^) ; to put appearance above reality,
and reduce life to a play, at once tragedy and
farce (vv.-S"-^) ; to revive the spirit and renew the
sins of the past, while we atlect a pious horror of
tliem, crucifying the living prophets while we
build monuments to the martyred (v.-^'^-) : tliese
are the things Avhich made a storm of anger sweep
over the soul of Jesus, and burst in this tremendous
denunciation of His enemies. Yet it is entirely in
keeping with the combination of ideas in Mk 3^
(fier 6pyr)s . . . ■<ni!'Xi'7roL'//ei'os) when the Evangelist
attaches to this our Lord's lament over Jerusalem
(ySTff.^ cf. Lk 13^''f). His anger does not extin-
guish His compassion, and if the city could be
moved to repentance He Avould still gather her
cliildren together as a hen gathers her chickens
under her wings.

Putting tlie whole of the passages together, and
generalizing from them, we may infer that the two
things in huiiian conduct which moved Jesus most
quickly and deeply to anger, were (1) inhumanity,
wrong done to the needs or rights of men ; and (2)
misrepresentation of God by professedly religious
people, and especially by religious teachers. He
stood in the world for the rights and interests, or,
we may say, for tiie truth of God and of human
nature ; and His whole being reacted immediately
and vehemently against all that did wrong to
either.

3. Something may further be learned from the
passages in lohich Jesus gives express teaching about
anger. — (a) The chief of tliese is Mt 5'-^"-''. Here
our Lord interprets the sixth commandment for
tiie citizens of the kingdom of God. It is not
only the act of murder which is condemned, but
the first movement of the passions which leads in
that direction. ' He who murders shall be liable
to the judgment? I tell you, every one who is
angry witli his brother shall be liable to the judg-
ment.' The reading ei'/c?; ('without cause,' temere)
is no doubt erroneous here ; but the introduction
of it is rather a rhetorical than an exegeticul
blunder. As Tholuck observed, to bring in tlie
idea that there is such a thing as lawful anger
would only weaken the condemnation passed here
upon such an<|er as men are familiar with in them-
selves and otliers ; but after wliat has been said
under (1) and (2), it does not need to be proved
that there is a place for anger in the Christian in
the world in whicli we live. What Jesus condemns
here is not any kind of anger, but anger witli a
brotlier, whicli forgets that he is a brother, and
that we have a brother's duty to him ; the anger

ANGER

ANIMALS

which leads straight to contemptuous and insult-
ing words (the pa/id and ixwpe of v."), and ends in
irreconcilable bitterness (v.'-'^^-). Anger like this
on the part of one Christian toward another is sin,
and sin so deadly that no words could exaggerate
the urgency of escape from it. No religious duty,
not even the most sacred, can take precedence of
the duty of reconciliation. If a man should be
oll'ering his gift at the altar — if he should actually
be seated at the communion table with the com-
munion cup in his hand, let him put it down, and
go first, and get out of these angry relations with
his brother, and tiien come and have fellowship
with God (v.--'^-). How can an angry man, with
the temper of a quarrel in him, have communion
with the God of peace ? It is possible to raise
casuistical questions in all such situations as are
here supposed, but as these questions present them-
selves only to the spectators, not to the respon-
sible actors, it is not worth while to raise them.
The one duty insisted on here, as in tlie partly
parallel passage in JNIt IS'-^'^**, is the duty of placa-
bility. The person who has suffered the wrong —
that is, who is in the right, who is entitled to be
angry — is for that very reason to take the initiative
in reconciliation, and to bear the expense of it.
That is how God deals with us, who have offended
Him, and that is how we are to deal with those
who offend us. There is to be no anger in the
sense of a selfish resentment into which the bad
passions of unregenerate human nature can pour
themselves ; and the lawful anger of tlie soul,
whose wrong is a wrong done to the kingdom
of God, will pass away at once when he who has
done the wrong is brought to repentance. The
penitence and the resentment are the guilty and
the innocent index of the reality of the wrong ;
and each is as inevitable as the other if the Chris-
tian life is to be morally sincere.

(b) It is natural to take account here of the pas-
sage on retaliation and non-resistance in Mt 5^^"'-.
Anger seems to be unconditionally precluded by
such a saying as, ' Whosoever smiteth thee on the
right cheek, turn to him the other also.' It is
difficult to believe that any one was e\ er struck
on the face unjustly (as is assumed in the con-
nexion) without resenting it, and just as difficult
to believe that it would be for the good of humanity
or of the kingdom of God that it should be so.
But Jesus, who came to abolish one literalism,
did not come to institute another. His words are
never to be read as statutes, but as appeals to
conscience. Wiiat He teaciies in this place is that
there is no limit to be laid down beforehand beyond
which love is no longer to regulate the conduct of
His disciples. No provocation can be so insult-
ing, no demand can be so unjust, so irrational, so
exasperating, as that His disciples shall be entitled
to cast love overboard, and meet the world with
weapons like its own. Love must to all extremities
be the supreme and determining principle in their
conduct, the .same love, Avith the same interests in
view, as that of their Father in heaven (v.^^) ; but
no more in them than in Him does it exclude all
manifestation of anger. Wliat it does exclude is
the selfish anger which is an alternative to love,
not the Divine resentment which is a mode of
love, and expresses its sense of the reality of
wron^. If this died out of the world, society
would swiftly rot to extinction ; but the gospel,
in the sense of the words, the example, and the
spirit of Jesus, is so far from proscribing this that
it is tlie greatest of all powers for keeping it alive.
For those who have learned that where the spirit
of the Lord is tiiere is liberty, the literal inter-
pretation of Avords like Mt 5^"-*2 is a combination
of pedantry and fanaticism whicli no genius will
ever make anything else than absurd.

Echoes of the teaching of Jesus on anger are
probably to be traced at various points in the
teaching of the Apostles. E.g. in Ilo 12, a chapter
which often recalls the Sermon on the Mount,
yy is-ji jj^j.y entirely in the key of ]\It o*"'^-. 'The
Avrath ' of Ro 12"*, to which Christians are to leave
room, is the wrath of God which Avill be revealed
at the last daJ^ God has reserved for Himself
(1(101 eK5iK7}crts, cyit diraTroScicrco) the vindication of
the wronged, and they are not to forestall Him
or take His work out of His hands ; in the day of
wrath, when His righteous judgment is revealed,
all wrongs will be rectified ; meanwhile, as Christ
teaches, love is to rule all our conduct, and we
must overcome evil with good. It is perhaps with
a vague recollection of Mt 5-^'" that men are
directed in 1 Ti 2* to pray x^^P's opyijs : an angry
man cannot pray. Accordingly a bishop must not
be opyiXos, given to anger, or of an uncontrollable
temper (Tit 1"). Exliortations like those in Eph
4^\ Col 3*, Ja V^, show that anger Avas known to
the Church mainly in forms Avhich the Christian
conscience condemned. Ja P* is particularly in-
teresting, because it reminds us of the danger (in
anger) of enlisting self in the service of God, call-
ing on the old man to do Avhat can be done only
by the ncAV : ' The Avrath of man Avorketh not tlie
righteousness of God.' But though, it is difficult,
it need not be impossible that the Avrath Avliich a
man feels, and under the impulse of Avhich he ex-
presses himself, should be, not ' the Avrath of man,'
but a Divine resentment of evil. The Avords of
Mt 185 or Mt 23'3ff- fell from human lips, but they
are the expression and the instrument of the
jealousy of God. To be angry Avithout sin is diffi-
cult for men, but it is a difficult duty (Eph 4-^).

Apart from anything yet alluded to is the use
of the verb i/x^pi/jciadai to describe some kind of
emotion in Jesus (Mk 1«, Mt 9^, Jn 1 1^- ^). Ordi-
narily the Avord conveys the idea of indignation
Avhich cannot be repressed ; but this, though found
elseAvhere in the Gospels (e.g. Mk 14^), is not obvi-
ously appropriate in the passages quoted. In the
first tAvo it may be due to our Lord's consciousness
of the fact that the persons on Avhom He had con-
ferred a great blessing Avere immediat(dy going to
disregard His command to keep silent about it ;
the sense of this put something severe and peremp-
tory into His tones. In the last two it has been
explained as expressing Jesus' sense of the indignity
of death ; He resented, as something not jjroperly
belonging to the Divine idea of the Avorld, such
experiences as He Avas confronted Avith on the Avay
to the grave of Lazarus, liut this is precarious,
and on the Avhole there is little stress to be laid on
any inference Ave can draw fiom the use of ^^/3pi-
ndffOai. in the Gospels.

LiTEiiATrRE. — Butler, Sermons, viii., ix. ; Law, Serious Call,
ch. xxi. ; Seelev, £cccifo»no, chs. xxi.-xxiii. ; Da\e, Atonemenf^,
p. 338 ff. ; Expos. Times,iv. [1893], pp. 256 ff., 492 fP. ; Expositor,
1st ser. i. [1S75], 13311. JaMES DENNEY.

ANIMALS. — It cannot be said that animals play
a very important part in the life and teaching of
our Lord ; yet the Gospel references cover a Avider
range than is usually imagined. The Evangelists
use no feAver than 40 different Greek Avords denot-
ing animals, and, apart from such general terms
as 'birds of the air,' 'Avild beasts,' and 'serpents,'
they mention at least 20 particular kinds. The
references may best be classified under the head-
ings 'Domestic' and 'AVild.'

i. Domestic Animals.— 1. The beasts of burden
in Palestine in the time of our Lord Avere the ass
and the camel. The horse is not mentioned in the
Gospels, its use in the East being restricted to
purposes of Avar. Thus the horse becomes pro-
minent in the military imagery of the Apocalypse.

ANIMALS

A n-eneral term for ' beast of burden ' occurs in the paraWe of
the Good Samaritan (Lk 10-^ x.ty,vi>;). In Rev ISl* 'beasts of
burden' are distinguished from horses. Josephus {Ant. iv. vi. 3)
uses the word of asses in particular. In Ac 232* a ' beast ' is
pro\ided to carry St. Paul to Caisarea ; in tiie NT therefore
zTJjvo; is clearly some 'beast of burden ' which is not a horse.
Probably the Good Samaritan rode on an ass, or possibly on a
mule.

The ass is denoted by four other Avords in the
GcspeLs, viz. tfcDAos, ovdpLov, 6voi, and inro'gvyiov. The
animal on -whicli our Lord made His triumphal
entry into Jerusalem is described by all four Evan-
gelists as a colt (TFciXos, Mt 21-- s- \ Mk 11-- •»• s- \ Lk
2030. 3a. S3^ jn I2i5)_ 'j'he word is not used else-
where in the Gospels, and in John it occurs only
in the quotation from Zechariah. St. John de-
scribes the colt as ovapiov, a young ass. St. Matthew
introduces the she-ass, the mother of the colt, into
the story. In the ]\Iattha;an form of the quota-
tion from Zechariah (Mt 21^) the mother ass is
further described as a draught beast {vwo^vyi.ov).

The nieaning: of this fulfilment of prophecy is well brought
out by Chrysostom. Jesus entered Jerusalem riding on an ass,
' not driving chariots like the rest of the kings, not demanding
tributes, not thrusting men off, and leading about guards, but
displaying His great meekness even hereby ' (Horn. CO in Mt.).

The triumphal entry into Jerusalem is the only
incident iu the life of our Lord in which an ass is
concerned ; but in His teaching, as reported by
St. Luke, there are two other references. The
synagogue-ruler, who forbade people to come to
be healed on the Sabbath, received the rebuke,
' Hypocrites, does not each one of you loose his ox
or iiis ass (roc di^ov) from the .stall on the Sabbath
and lead him away to watering?' (Lk IS^'). On
another occasion, with reference to tiie same ques-
tion of Sabbath healing, our Lord asked, ' Which
of you shall have an ass or an o.\ fallen into a well,
and will not straightway draw him up on a Sab-
bath day ' (Lk W).

Tlie text of the latter passage is uncertain, the evidence of
H and B being divided. B reads vii;, adopted by Westcott and
Hort ; while N reads oto;, retained by the Revisers. Possibly
neither is the correct text ; but if we follow the Revisers, we
may notice that on the only two occasions when the ass is men-
tioned in our Lord's teaching, it is coupled with the ox, as if to
imply that the Jewish fanner took equal care of each. 'The
ox, the ass, and the sheep are the (chief) domestic animals with
which an Israelite household is provided ' (O. Holtzmann).

The ass occupies a nuich more important place
in the farm life of the East than his neglected de-
scendant occupies in England to-day. The liner
breeds are regularly used for riding, while the
commoner breeds draw the plough and carry bur-
dens. ' The ass is still the most universal of all
beasts of burden in Bible lands' (Post, in Hastings'
DB).

Tlie camel (Kd/j.7]\os) figures in two sayings of
our Lord which have a proverbial ring. (Thomson
notes that the camel is still tiie subject of many
Arabian proverbs). The three Synoptics record
the saying, ' It is easier for a camel to pass through
a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the
kingdom of God ' (Mt 19■-^ Mk l()-^ Lk 18-5). xhere
is no need to stumble at the hyperbole involved in
' a needle's eye,' nor is it necessary to explain the
phrase as a reference to a particularly small gate
(see art. ' Camel ' in Hastings' DB). Tiie second
reference is found in the denunciation of the
Pharisees, who strain out a gnat while they gulp
down a camel (Mt 23-^). A camel-caravan would
be one of the sights of our Lord's boyhood, and the
awkwardness of meeting a camel in the narrow
street, which modern travellers experience, was
not unknown nineteen hundred years ago. The
camel must have been the largest animal with
wliicli our Lord was familiar, and in both sayings
it is mentioned for its size.

The only other reference to the camel occurs in
the description of the dress of John the Baptist,

whose garment, like that of Elijah, was of camel's
hair (Mt S\ Mk 1«).

On this Sir Thomas Browne notes : ' a coarse garment, a cilicious
or sackcloth garment, suitable to the austerity of his life — the
severity of his doctrine, repentance — and the place thereof, the
wilderness — his food and diet, locusts and wild honey.'

2. Of larger cattle * oxen, bulls, and calves find
a place in the Gospels.

The ox (/3oCs) is mentioned three times in Luke,
twice in connexion Avith the ass in the passages
previously cited (Lk 13^^ l-l^), and again in the
parable of the Great Supper, when one of the
invited guests excuses himself on the ground that
he has bought five yoke of oxen which need to be
tested (Lk 14^^*). The ox was employed in the
East for ploughing and tiireshing ; it Avas also used
for sacriiice, as appears from the only other pas-
sage iu the Gospels Avhere oxen are mentioned,
viz. St. John's account of the cleansing of the
Temple court. Sheep and oxen (Jn 2^^'-) Avere
driA' en out along Avith their vendors.

Bulls (raiJpoi) and fat beasts (o-tno-Td) t are men-
tioned only in Mt 22''. They form samples of the
rich dainties prepared for the marriage feast of
the king's son, and illustrate the magniiicent scale
of the entertainment Avhich tiiose summoned to
partake so insolently spurned. Similarly the fatted
calf (6 /uLoaxos 6 ctreuTos), Avhich appears only in the
parable of the Prodigal Son(Lk 15-^- ^v. so^^ indicates
an unusual feast, made to celebrate an unusual
joy. The fatted calf is contrasted Avith the kid,
the customary repast, Avhich Oriental hospitality
provides to this day. The elder brother complains
that he has never been alloAved to offer his friends
the entertainment Avhicli his father is Avont to pro-
vide for any chance visitor ; Avhile for the graceless
prodigal is killed the fatted calf, Avhich is destined
only for high festivals. The bulls and fatlings in
the parable of the ^Marriage Feast, and the fatted
calf in the parable of the Returning Prodigal,
alike stand for the lavish generosity of God's love,
Avhich the Scribes and Pharisees could not ap-
preciate, even Avhen offered to themselves, the king's
invited guests, much less Avhen those prodigals,
tiie publicans and sinners, Avere likeAvise embraced
therein.

3. Of smaller cattle, goats and sheep are men-
tioned.

Goats (^pKpos, €pi(piov, lit. 'kid,' a meaning re-
tained in Lk 15-^; in LXX the AA'ord = ' goat ' as
Avell as 'kid') appear only in the picture of the
Last Judgment (Mt 25^-*-), Avhere they are con-
trasted Avitli sheep. Tlie point of the contrast lies
iu the colour ratlier tiian tiie cliaracter of tiie
animals, tiie siieep being pure Avhite, Aviiile the
goats are covered Avith long jet-black hair. So in
the Song of Solomon (4') the locks of the beloved
are compared to ' a flock of goats that appear from
Mt. Gilead.' Tiie Son of Man shall sejiarate all
tlie nations 'as a sheplierd separateth tiie sheep
from tlie goats,' and tiie simile is quite true to
pastoral life. Tristram {N^at. Hist. p. 89) says
tiiat slieep and goats pasture together, but never
trespass on each otiier's domains ; tliey are folded
together, but they do not mix ; they may be seen
to enter the fold in company, but once inside they
are kept separate.

Tlie Syrian goat, Capra mambrica, is the most
common breed in Palestine. It is distinguished
by long pendant ears, stout recurved horns, and
long black silky hair. Flocks of goats are most
frequent in hilly districts from Hebron to Lebanon,
Avliere their habit of broAVsing on young trees tends
to deforest the country.

* The word ' cattle ' is used to tr. Bpe/x/Mcra in Jn 412. The
word is also found in the AV of Lk 17''.

t Wyclif, following the Vulg. altilia, translates 'my volatilig
(fowls)' ; but fatted cattle are probably meant.

ANIMALS

A kid i^pKpos, some MSS ipl4>Lov) is mentioned in
the parable of the Prodipjal Son (Lk 15-"). The
kid formed tlie ordinary dissli at an Eastern feast,
as lambs were preserved for tiie sake of wool, and
were, as a rule, slain only in sacrifice. For the
contrast between the kid and the fatted calf see
above, s. 'fatted calf.' There is no other direct
mention of the fj;oat in tlie Gospels, thonc;li the
wine-bottles (aaKol) referred to in Mt 9" (ll Mk 2'''-,
Lk 5^'^-) were doubtless made of f;oat-skin. These
bottles were made by cutting otf the head and legs,
and drawing tlie carcass out by the neck, and then
tying the neck, legs, and vent, and tanning the
skin, with the hairy side out (Post, in Hastings'
DB ii. lt)5).

The word for sheep {vpSlSaTov) is to be found in
the Gospels no fewer than 36 times, while words
connected with sheep, e.g. voi/j.i'rj, iroljj.vLov, ' a flock,'
are not infrequent. Sheep were so often in the
thoughts of Jesus that we have postponed fuller
consideration of tliese passages to § iv.

Of the two words for lamb, one, d^icj?, is applied
only to our Lord, Avhoin John tlie Baptist twice
describes as ' the Lamb of God,' adding in one
case ' which taketli away the sin of the world '
(Jn 123.3G)_ I'lm title iniplies sacrilice.

Whether the Baptist was thinkintr of the Paschal lamh or of
the lamb daily offered in the temple matters little. In Jesus he
saw 'the realitj' of which all animal sacrifice was the synibol'
(Marcus Dods). No doubt the patience of the lamb is implied
in the title, as unfolded in Is ."JS' 'as a lamb before its shearer is
dumb, so he opened not his mouth.' The purity of the lamb,
without spot and without fault, on which St. Peter dwells
(1 P li'J), is also involved. But the idea of redemption through
sacrilice is fundamental in the Baptist's words.

The second word for ' lamb ' occurs in two forms,
dpvas (ace. pi.) and apvioi'. Tlie diminutive form is
found only in Jn 21'^, where our I>ord bids Peter feed
His lambs. 'Lambs' is used instead of 'sheep,'
to bring out more strongly the appeal to care, and
the consequent comi)lete confidence in Peter (M.
Dods). In the Apocalypse our Lord is called ' the
Lamb ' (rd dpvlov) no fewer than 27 times. The form
apvas is confined to Lk 10-' ' Lehold, I send you forth
as lambs into the midst of wolves.'

The parallel Mt 1016 reads 'sheep,' but the Lukan form is

supported by Clement of Rome, Ep. ii. 5, ' Ye shall be as lambs
(xpna.) in the midst of wolves. But Peter answered liim, say-
ing, If then the wolves tear the lambs in pieces? Jesus said to
Peter, Let not the lambs fear the wolves, after they (the lambs)
are dead.' Further support for the reading 'lambs' may per-
haps be derived from Justin's casual description of Marcionites
as lambs torn by wolves (iptes a-vn,pniii(ru.ivu, Apul. c. 58).

i. Poultry were kept in Palestine in the time
of our Lord, as is clear from the references to the
cock (oKiKTwp) and the hen (6pvis). If we except
the mention of cock-crow (see sep. art.) in J\Ik
13^^, the cock appears only in the story of Peter's
denial, and our Lord's prediction of it (Mt 2G^'*''^'-,
Mk 143«(«8).72^ Lk 223J-6of.^ jn is^s 18-^). The hen
{6pvis) affords a simile in the lament over Jeru-
salem. ' How often would I have gathered thy
children together, as a hen gathereth her chicken's
(Lk. 'h(;r brood') under her wings ! ' (Mt 2.3'^ Lk
13^^). The action l)y which the hen gives rest and
protection to the chickens under the shelter of her
wings is too well known to need comment. The
tenderness of the simile witnesses to the love of
Jesus for His own countrymen, and His longing
to avert national disaster. The words used for
'chickens' and 'brood' (voaaiov and voacnd) are
found here only, though a word from the same
root is employed in the phrase ' two young pigeons '
{voaffovs irepidTepQiv, Lk 2-''').

5. To the list of domestic animals we may add
dogs and swine, which were classed together as
unclean.

Dogs (/v-iVf?) are mentioned twice. In the Sermon
on the Mount the disciples are warned not to give
that which is holy to dogs (Mt 7"). The pariah

dogs that infest Eastern towns, and have to he
cleared off periodically with poison, are ' a lean,
mangy, and sinister brood,' acting as scaven"^ers
and living on offal. Naturally these animals do
not possess a fastidious palate, ,and their manner
of life is disgusting enough to justify the Je\vs'
contempt for them. To call a man a dog is tlirou<di-
out the Bible a customary form of abuse. These
wild dogs, says Tristram (Nat. Hist. p. 80), were
the only dogs known in Palestine, Avith the excep-
tion of the Persian greyhound ; and though they
could be trained enough to act as watch-dogs for
the sheep-folds,* they hardly became companions
to man [the dog of To 5'** 1 !■* is altogether an excep-
tional case]. To the Jew the dog was a very fitting
symbol of the man who had depraved his moral
and spiritual taste by evil living. In the Didache,
' Give not that which is holy to dogs ' is interpreted
to mean. Do not administer the Eucharist to the
unba|)tized ; but the principle involved in the text
is capable of wider .ipplication. A t'hristian is
not requii'ed to wear his heart on his sleeve ! In
the parable of Dives and Lazarus it is said that
these street-dogs came and licked the beggar's
sores (Lk 16-'). This is an aggravation rather than
<an alleviation of Lazartis' suffering. It shows his
destitute and defenceless condition, that he could
not even keep the dogs away ! A diminutive form
of Kvuv, viz. Kvvapiov, occui's in the story of the
Syro-Phcenician woman. ' It is not right,' said the
Master, ' to take the children's bread and cast it
to dogs.' 'Yea, Lord,' replied the woman, 'yet
the dogs eat of the crumbs that fall from their
masters' table ' (Mt 15-"'-, Mk 7'-'^-). Bochaft treats
the diminutive Kwdpiov as tlouljling the contempt
inherent in the word. But it is clear from the
Avoman's reply that the dogs in question are kept
within the house ; they are household pets. Tris-
tram saj's that he found no difficulty in making a
pet of a puppy taken from among the pariah dogs
(Net. Hist. p. 80). Probably the Kvvapia. were
])U[ipies which had been taken into Jewish house-
holds as pets in a similar way. The word is not
intended to add to the harshness of our Lord's
saying ; the woman saw in it her ground for appeal.

Swine (xoTpos, not Os) appear in the story of the
Gadarene demoniac (Mt 8=*"t-, Mk S'^"'-, Lk S^-^-).
'The fact that swine M'ere kept in Palestine at all
is evidence of the presence of the foreigner '(0.
Holtzmann). Cf. Lv W, Dt 14^, Is Go-*. The
country on the east side of the Lake was much
under Gentile influence. The Prodigal Son is put to
tend swine. The nature of the task is evidence at
once of the difference between his home and the
far country, and of the want and degradation into
which he has fallen (Lk IS'^^-) The only further
reference to swine is the saying, ' Cast not your
pearls before swine' (Mt 7'^), in which our Lord
emphasizes the necessity of tact in religious work.

ii. Wild animals. — 1. e-qplov, the general word
for wild brast, is found in tlie (lospels only once.
Mk P' tells us that during the Temptation our
Lord Avas with the wild beasts. Thomson says
that 'though there are now no lions (in Palestine),
wolves, leo])ards, and panthers still prowl about the
wild wadys' (Land and Book, 'Central Palestine,'
p. 594). ' In the age of Jesus, the chief beast of
prey in Palestine was, as to-day, the jackal.
Mark's addition indicates Jesus' complete sever-
ance from human society' (0. Holtzmann, Life of
Jesus, p. 143 f.).

The word fr^^/ov is now to be found in the second of the five
new Sayings recently recovered by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt :
'The birds of the air and whatever of the beasts are on the
earth or under it are they who draw us into the kingdom.'

* It would be truer to say that the pariah dogs have degene-
rated from the sheep-dogs than that the latter have developed
from the former.

ANIMALS

lere the word is not confined to 'beasts of prey ' ; it stands for
he whole kingdom of wild animals. There is a similar use of
he word in a saying of our Lord as given by Justin Martyr :
Be not anxious as to what ye shall eat or what ye shall put on :
re ve not much better than the birds and the beasts?' (1 A2X1I.
5). ' These considerations support the conclusion that St. Mark's
.ddition does not imply physical danger, but is rather intended
o suggest that our Lord was alone with Nature.

Two beasts of prey mentioned by name in the
iicspels are the fox (dXtiTrr;!) and the wolf {\vkos).
riie fox, which has at least a hole to live in, is
■ontrasted with the homeless Son of Man (Mt 8-",
Lk 9"*). In Lk 13^- our Lord speaks of Herod as
that fox.' The cunning and perhaps the cowardice
if the animal are the basis of the compari.son.
The name," says O. Holtzniann, ' must have been
:iven to Herod because he was inimical, jet, not
laring to make any open attack, timidly prowled
ilxjut until he found an o[>]tortunity to murder in
secret' {Ltfe of Jesus, p. 364).

The wolf is mentioned only in connexion with
)r in contrast to sheep. The wolf is the chief
memy against which tiie shepherd has to guard
lis Hock. 'A single wolf,' says Tristram, 'is far
nore destructive than a whole pack of jackals '
Nat. Hint. p. l.')3|. Eastern shepherds employ
logs (if they employ tliem at all) not to help in
lerding the sheep, but to ward off' wolves. In
•ontrast t^j the hireling, the (iood Sliepherd faces
he wolf even at the risk of his life (Jn 10'-).
[''alse prophets are wolves in sheep's clothing (Mt
■13). The contrast between outward profession
md inward character could not be more vividly
jxpressed. The same antithesis is used by our
L,ord to portray the contrast Ijetween the Church
ind the world, between the patient non-resistance
)f the one and the brutal violence of the otiier.
rhe discijjles are sent fortli a.s sheep (Lk as lambs)
nto the midst of wolves (Mt 10'«, Lk lO^*).

2. Tlie general term for vydd birds is to. irereivd,
the birds,' often ra nereiva rov ovpavov, ' the birds
»f lieaven.' They are mentioned in the Sermon on
lie Mount : ' Consider tiie birds : tliey do not sow,
lor reap, nor gather into barns' (Mt G-'' ; in the
jarallel passage, Lk 12^, the reading is K^pa/cas,
ravens,' which, however, are themselves called
rereiva at the end of the ver.se). Dean Stanley
ays that the birds most in evidence round
he Sea of Galilee are partridges and pigeons,
''inches and bulbuls are also abundant, accord-
ng to Thomson. l'"or the <loctrine of j)rovidence
nvolved in ti)i.-> and simil.ir .sayings of our Lord,
ve nm>t refer our re.'uiers to § iv. Like the
oxes, the birds are contrasted with th* Son of
^lan ; they have ne.sts, while He hath not where
,0 lay His head (Mt 8^\ Lk •>«*). The binis appear
n tlie parable of the Sower, when; they pick up
-he seed that falls by the wayside (Mt \'.'>\ Mk 4-',
Lik 8'). No doubt the fields round the lake, with
he birds busy uj»on them, could Ije seen from the
ilace where Jesus stood to teach the jHJople. Prob-
iltly the [larable was spoken early in the year,
riie parable of the Mustard Seed aUo introduces
he birds, which come and lodge in the branches
>i the full-grown tree (Mt 13^-, Mk 4»-, Lk 13"*).
tiere the imagery seems to be drawn from Dn
t'--'", where the kingdom of Nebuchadrezzar is
ikened to a tree 'upon wiiose branches the birds
)f the heavens had their habitations.' Daniel
nterprets the tree to represent the greatness of
^Nebuchadrezzar's dominion, which is to reach to
;he end of the earth. The description in the
:jarable carries with it the same implication with
regard to the kingdom of heaven. There is one
ather reference to 'the birds' in Lk 12^ 'How
much }>etter are ye than the birds ! '

The following ])articular wild })irds are men-
tioned in the Gospels: — dove (pigeon), eagle, raven,
sparrow, turtle-dove.
VOL. L — 5

In all four Gospels the doYe appears as the !
symVjol of the Holy (iho.st at our Lord's Baptism. ,
In Mt 3'^ the vision of the Holy Ghost descending •
in the form of a ilove (waei wepuxTtpdv) seems to '
have been granted Uj all present at the Baptism.
In Mk 1"* and Lk 3-- the vi.sion is apparently
addres.sed more esj>ecially to Jesus Himself. In
Jn F- it is a sign given to John tlie Baptist. In
the story of the Creation, a metaphor from bird-life '
is emploj-ed to describe the Spirit of Go<l fluttering
(KVm ' brooding ") over the waters ((in 1-). The
same Spirit rests on the Saviour with whom begins
God's new creation. But the mention of the dove
naturally carries us back to the storj^ of the Flood
(Gn 8"). For Jesus the dove with olive-leaf after
the Flood is the emVjlem of the Spirit (A. B. Bruce
in Expositor\s Greek TeMrxraetd, on Mt 3'*).
The Holy Ghost in the form of a dove typifies the
hope of the gospel, peace between man and God.
In cleansing the Temple -court our Lord came
uiKjn them that sold doves for sacrifice. It is to
these dove-sellers that the words in Jn 2'*' are
addressed, ' Take these things hence.' The cattle
can l>e driven out : the doves must be carried out.
This detail, which is perfectly natural, is recorded
only in John, who consef|uently mentions 'doves'
twice (Jn 2''*- '•*), while Matthew and Mark have 1
only one reference each (Mt 21'-, Mk II").

The word vipianpo. is used in the LXX where
the EV reads ' pigeon ' as well as where it reads
'dove.' The same bird is proVjably meant bj' the
two English words. But in the directions for
sacrifice in Leviticus, the word 'pigeon' is regu-
larly used, and in Lk 2-* Trfpiarfpa is translated
' pigeon,' though elsewhere in the Gospels it is
rendered 'dove.' In Lv 12* a poor woman, ' if she
be notable to bring a lamb, shall bring two turtles
or two young pigeons.' The mother of Jesus
brings the poor woman's sacrifice.

To the ancients the dove symbolized purity
(Aristotle mentions the chastity of the dove), and
this fact perhaps made birds of this class suitable
for sacrifice. The only other reference to the dove
in the Gospels is found in .Mt 10'", where the dis-
ciples are bidden to Ije as pure [aKipaioi) as doves,
a command which St. Paul echoes in Ko 16"* and
Ph 215.

The tuFtle-dove {Tpv/uv) is mentioned only in
the quotation from Lv 12** in Lk 2--'. There are
three species of turtle-doves in Palestine. The col-
lared turtle (T. risorius) is the largest, and f re- •
quents the sliores of the Dead Sea. The palm
turtle (T. Senegnlensis) ' resorts much to the
gardens and enclosures of Jerusalem.' ' It is
very familiar and confiding in man, and is never
molester!.' The common turtle (T. auritiis) is the
most abundant of the three species.

The eagle (deroj) is the subject of a proverbial
saying recorded in Mt 24^ Lk 17" 'where the
carca.ss is, there shall the eagles be gathered
together.' According to Post, there are four kinds
of vultures and eight kinds of eagles to be found
in the Holy Land. Here the term ' eagle ' is
generic. Thomsfjn describes the eagles' Hight as
majestic, and their eyesight and, apparently, sense
of smell, are both extremely keen.

The exact force of the above saying is hard to determine.
Some old commentators, following the Fathers, take it U) refer
to 'the conflux of the godly to the light and liberty of the
Gospel ' (Master Trapp). More modem exegesis regards the
passage as hinting at the gathering of the Roman eagles round
the moribund Jewish nation. But Bengel rightly observes that
in Mt 24 the reference of v.28 goes back to the false prophets
and false Christs of v.23. in the decay of Judaism as a religious;
faith, such men will find their opportunity, and will turn i>opu-
lar fanaticism to their own profit. In Matthew the proverb is
perfectly general in form, and is capable of wider application.
National ruin and feverish religiosity go hand in hand. Kalse
Messianism marked the final overthrow of the Jews in a.d. V.'A \
and when the barbarians laid siege to Rome in 408, even a Pope
consented to resort to Etruscan magic rites ! (Milman, Latin

ANIMALS

Christianitu, i. 126). In Lk 1737 the 'wheresoever' becomes
'where,' and the saying is in answer to a definite question
refjarding the signs that are to mark the sudden return of the
Son of Man. Here it is difficult not to interpret the eagles of
the Roman standards. For St. Luke evidently does not take
the saying as a statement of a general law. The Matthsean
form and position give the more attractive interpretation.

The raven (/c6pa^) i.s mentioned only in Lk 12-^,
'Consider the ravens how they neither sow nor
reap.' The parallel Mt 6-8 reads, 'birds.' The
wliole pa.ssase and the force of Luke's change will
be considered in § iv. The term ' raven ' includes
the numerous tribes of crows. Tristram mentions
eight different species as common in Palestine.
God's care for tlie ravens is twice mentioned in
OT (Job SS", Ps 147"). These passages may have
inHuenced Luke, if he changed 'birds' into
'ravens.' Again, they may have been in the
mind of our Lord, if Luke gives the original form
of the saying.

The sparrow (cTpovdlov) is twice mentioned in
sayings recorded both in Matthew and Luke. In
Mt lU^ we read, ' Are not two sparrows sold for a
farthing?' and in Lk 12* 'Are not live sparrows
sold for two farthings ? ' In Tatian's Diatessaron
the words in taberna, ' in the cookshop,' are added.
Doubtless we have here the prices current in
popular eating-houses in the time of our Lord.
'Sparrows, two a farthing ; five a halfpenny.' In
Mt 10'=i and Lk 12^ our Lord adds, ' Ye are much
more worth than many si^arrows.' For a dis-
cussion of these references to sparrows and of
their bearing on our Lord's teaching, we must
again refer our readers to § iv.

3. For fish, three words are used, t'x^'A-, Ix&v^i-ov,
and 6\p6.piov. The latter term is confined to John.
In the feeding of the five thousand, the Synoptics
speak of 'two fishes' {5vo ixdva%, Mt 14''- 1*, Mk
0S8. 41. 4s^ Lk 913- 18). The parallel narrative in John
re.ads Siio oxj/dpLa, which is also translated ' two
fishes' (Jn G**- ")• But while tlie Syn. ixBv^ is a
general term, o^papiov, saj's Edersheim, ' refers, no
doubt, to those small fishes (probably a kind of
•sardine) of which millions were caught in the lake,
and which, dried and salted, would form the most
common savoury, with bread, for the fisher-popula-
tion along the shore' (Life and Times of Jesus the
Messiah, i. 682). The parable of the Drag-net (Mt
J347-5UJ is, taken from the life of the Galihean tisher-
folk. But tliis definite meaning of 6\pdpiov cannot
always be maintained : for in John's narrative of
the miraculous draught of fishes, 6\pa.pLov and
ixdiis are interchanged as equivalents {6\pdpiov, Jn
2]:u. 10. 13. i-^f){,.;^ vv.8-8-11). Jesus says to the dis-
ciples, 'Bring of the fish (oi/'apiwc) which ye have
now caught. Simon Peter went up, and dragged
the net to shore full of great fishes ' (ixdvwv).' Both
in the narratives of the miraculous multiplication
of loaves and fishes and in His post-resurrection
appearance by the lake, our Loi'd makes use of tlie
disciples' own resources, while adding to them
something of His own. In the similar miracle
recorded in Lk 5, IxOv^ is the word used (vv."-^).
When narrating the feeding of the four thousand,
l)otli Matthew and Mark speak of a few small
fishes (6\iya ixOvdia, Mt 15=^, Mk 8"). These are
proliably the same as tlie 6i/'dpia of Jn 6. In Mt
15*' ixdvs reappears. The remaining references to
iisii do not require much comment. Mt 17'"'' is
concerned with the stater in the fish's mouth.
This passage contains the only reference to line-
fisiiing in the Gospels : ' Cast a hook and take the
first fish (t'x^i^") that cometh up.' In Lk 24^^ we
read tliat our Lord convinced the disciples of the
reality of His resurrection by eating before them a
piece of cooked fish (Ixdijos otttov /xipos). In Mt
y^^llLk 11" the word IxOA^, 'fish,' is found in the
teaching of Jesus. In Matthew the pas.sage runs
thus : ' What man is there among you wlio, if his

son ask for bread, will give him a. stone? or if he
ask for fish, will give him a serpent?' Here fish and
bread are the subject of joint reference, as in the
narratives of the feeding of the five and four
thousands. Bread and fish are clearly the custo-
mary diet of the common peojile of Galilee, and in
the form of these questions, as in so many other
details, the teaching of Jesus closely rellects the
daily life of His countrymen.

In the Catacombs the figure of a fish was often
used as a symbol of Christ. The letters wliicii
make up ixOus form the initial letters of 'IrjcoOs
XptcTTos Oeov Tibs 'Zwrrip, so that the word served as
a summary of the faith. See art. Christ in Art.

4. The general word for sei'pcnt (6(pis) occurs
7 times in the Gospels. No human fatlier will
give his son a serpent as a substitute for hsh (Mt
71", Lk IP'). Some small reptile as common as the
scorpion must be meant, as Luke twice (10'" U''-')
couples scorpions and serpents (o^ets). The dis-
ciples are to be as wise as serpents [or ' as the
serpent,' reading 6 6(pis for ol 6<peis : the sense is
the same in either case] (Mt 10'*'). The ideal of
discipleship is a combination of the prudence of the
serpent with the guilelessness of doves. As in the
saying about not casting one's pearls before swine,
our Lord here condemns recklessness and tactless-
ness in religious work. ' Religion without policy
is too simple to be safe : Policy without religion
is too subtle to be good ' (Trapp). In Mt 23»» the
word ' serpents ' is applied to the Pharisees.

In the later appendix to Mark's Gospel, power to take up
serpents is numbered among the signs that are to follow faith
in Christ (I6I8). The passage is paralleled in Lk 1019 ' Behold,
I have gi\ en you power to tread upon serpents and scorpions,
and upon all the might of the evil one.' VVH here note a refer-
ence to Ps 91i:f ' Thou shalt tread upon the lion and the adder.'
Possibly the passage is to be interpreted metaphorically, and
the 'serpents' are to be explained by the might of the Evil
One. The words, however, find a more literal fulfilment in St.
Paul's experience at Melita (Ac 283- *>).

The viper {^x^Sya) is referred to only in the
]iihrsx»e yevprj/uiaTa exi-Svi^f, 'offspring of vipers,' and
the phrase is applied only to scribes and Pharisees.
John the Baptist thus addresseii the Pharisees that
came to his baptism, 'O otfs])ring of vipers, who
hath warned you to Hoe from the wrath to come?'
(Mt 3'', Lk 3'). According to Mt., our Lord on
two occasions adopted the same mode of address
(Mt 12^23^). Sand-vipers about 1 foot long are
common in Palestine. The young are said to feed
upon the mother. But the force of the phrase,
Bochart observes, is not to be derived from any
such special characteristic ; the sense implied is
simply 'bad sons of bad fathers.' This comment
satisfactorily interprets Mt 23^* : but perhaps we
may read a little more into the phrase. The words
of John the Baptist suggest the familiar picture of
vipers roused from torpor into activity by the ap-
proach of heat (cf. Ac 28»). In Mt 12-'^ the phrase
receives added point from the fact that tiie Phari-
sees have just been attempting to poison the popular
mind against Christ by suggesting that the miracles
were the work of Beelzebub ; there is something
spiteful and venomous about their attacks on our
Lord.

5. Scorpions {a-Kopirios), which we are told may be
found under every third stone in Palestine, are
twice mentioned in Luke. The discijjles are to
tread on scorpions with impunity (Lk 10"*). How-
ever we interpret the passage, the addition of
'scorpion' seems to imply that the disciples are to
be protected against some small, frequent, and at
the same tiuie serious danger. The other refer-
ence is in Lk 11'-. If a son asks for an egg, the
father will not give him a scorpion. In both
passages the scorjjion and the serpent are men-
tioned together, being common objects of the
country in Palestine. The scorpion at rest is said
closely to resemble an egg in appearance.

AXIMALS

ANIMALS

6. The worm (o-koiXt;^) is mentioned only in Mk
9'** in the phrase ' where their worm dietli not,' a
description of Gehenna based on the last verse of
Isaiah (G6-^).

In the TR the verse appears 3 times, Mk 944.46.48^ and there
is somethinj,' impressive in the repetition : WH, however, retain
only 9W Whether literally or metaphorically understood, the
phrase must not be taken as the basis of a Christian doctrine of
future retribution. The worm does not stand for remorse : it is
simply part of a picture of complete physical corruption. A
man lias sometimes to choose between losing a limb and losing
his life : the part has to be sacrificed to save the whole. The
same law of sacrifice, says Christ, holds g'ood in the spiritual
world.

7. Of insects the bee is indirectly referred to,
while the gnat, tlie locust, and the moth are all
mentioned. In Lk 24^^, the Western Text says the
disciples gave our Lord part of a bees' honeycomb
(dTTo fieXicraiov K-qplov), i.e. the product of hived bees.
John the Baptist, on the other hand, lived on wild
rock honey, i.e. honey deposited in clefts of the
rock by wild bees ; this honey was often very
dilHcult to get.

liees, wild and hived, are very common in Pales-
tine. Tristram (Nat. Hist. p. 325) says : ' Many
of the Bedouin obtain their subsistence by bee-
hunting, bringing into Jerusalem skins and jars of
the wild honey on which John the Baptist fed.'
Bee-keeping is mucii practised, especially in Galilee.
The hives are very simple in construction ; being
' large tubes of snn-dried mud, about 8 inches in
diameter and 4 feut long, closed with mud at each
end, having only a small aperture in the centre.'

The gnat {Kdii>ui\p) is mentioned in Mt 23^^ As
one of the smallest animals, it is contrasted with
tlie camel, one of the largest. The Pharisees strain
out a gnat with scrupulous care, while they will
swallow a camel. Tlioy are careful to tithe mint,
but they fail to do justice. The Pharisees may
have adopted a practice which is still in use among
the Brahmans, viz. of drinking through muslin in
order to avoid swallowing any lly or insect present
in tlie water.

Locusts (cLKpiSes) formed part of the food of John
the Baptist (Mt 3^ Mk 1"). The LXX uses ciA-p/j
for the third of the four kinds of edible locusts
mentioned in Lv 11'--. They formeil a common
article of diet in Palestine, and there is no need to
alter the text, as one or two MSS have done, read-
ing e7/v-pi'5e5, 'cakes.'

The moth (cttjs) is mentioned as disfiguring earthly
treasures (Mt G'"- -", Lk 12^^). The common clothes-
moth is meant, of whicli there are many species in
Palestine. ' In this warm climate it is almost im-
possible to guard against their ravages' (Post).
Tliere is an indirect reference to the saying of
Jesus in Ja 5-.

8. A sponge (inroyyos) full of vinegar was offered
to our Lord on tlie cross (Mt 27'"*). Of sponges, the
finest in texture and the most valued is the Turkish
or Levant sponge. The sponge-tisheries of the
Mediterranean have always been and still are very
considerable. For the method of diving for sponges
see Post in Hastings' DB iv. 612^.

iii. This place of animals in the life of our
Lord. — In this connexion it may be worth Avhile
to point out that the part played by animals in
many of the incidents in whicli their presence is
recorded, serves to emphasize tlie humility of Jesus.
The two young pigeons which Mary brings as an
oll'ering when she presents Jesus in the Temple (Lk
2--*), are a mark of her poverty. Jesus belonged to
a i)oor family. The peaceful* character of Christ's
teaciiing, which is marked at the outset by the
descent of tlie dove at His baptism, is confirmed at
the close by the fact that He rode into Jerusalem
(Mt 2r--'!l) not on the warrior's horse, but on the
ass, which, as prophecy foretold, was to be a sign
of the lowliness of the coming Messiah.

iv. The place of animals in the teaching of

our Lord. — We have reserved for discussion under
this head the imagery drawn from pastoral life in
which Jesus described His own mission, and the
doctrine of providence unfolded more especially in
His sayings about the birds of the air.

1. ur Lord s mission illustrated. — (a) Jesus con-
fined His earthly ministry to ' the lost sheep of the
house of Israel' (Mt 15^). When He sent forth
the Twelve on a preaching tour, He bade them
observe the same limits (Mt 10^). W^e need not
suppose from this phrase that the work of Jesus
embraced only the outcasts of Israel. 'The lost
sheep of the house of Israel' describes the nation
as a whole [grammatically the words ' of the house
of Israel' [oIkov 'I.) are best taken as a defining
genitive, i.e. ' the lost sheep who are the house of
Israel']. The very sight of a Galila;an crowd
touched the heart of Jesus, for they were like
worried and scattered sheep that have no sheplierd
(Mt O^'i, Mk 6=*^). In the eyes of Jesus, the spiritual
condition of His countrymen agreed with the de-
scription of the shepherdless people given in Ezk
34. More particularly the Jews needed guidance
in their national and religious aspirations. Tliey
had mistaken alike the character of the coming
Messiah and the nature of the coming kingdom.
The hope to re-establish by force the throne of
David made the people the helpless victims of
political agitators like Judas the Gaulonite (Ac
5^^), and led at length to the chastisement inflicted
on the nation by the Boman power.

The exact interpretation of Jn 10 is exceedingly
difficult, but it may in part be understood, in rela-
tion to this view given in Matthew and Mark, of
the nation as a shepherdless flock. Jesus speaks of
Himself as the door of the sheep, through which if
a man enters, he shall be saved (vv.^- "). The only
hope of salvation for the Jews lay in their realizing,
through the teaching of Jesus, that God's kingdom
was not of this world. Those who oflTered them-
selves as leaders before Christ, and who proposed
to subdue Rome by arms, were thieves and robbers
who came only to steal and destroy (vv.*-^"). The
best comment on these thieves and robbers, and
their treatment of those helpless sheep, the house
of Israel, is perhaps Josephus' account of the Judas
above mentioned —

'There was one Judas a Gaulonite, . . . who, taking with him
Sadduc, a Pharisee, became zealous to draw (the people) to a
revolt ; who both said that this taxation (under Cyrenius) was
no better than an introduction of slavery, and exhorted the
nation to assert their liberty ; as if they could procure them
happiness and security for what they possessed, and an assured
enjoyment of a still greater good, which was that of the honour
and glory they would thereby acquire for magnanimity. . . .
All sorts of misfortunes also sprang from these men, and the
nation was infected with this doctrine to an incredible degree :
one violent war came upon us after another, and we lost our
friends, who used to alleviate our pains ; there were also very
(/real robberies and inurders of cur principal men. This vas
done in pretence of the public welfare, hut in reality from the
hopes of gain to themselves' (Jos. Ant. xvni. i. 1).

If Barabbas was one of these robbers (cf. Jn 18'*"
with 10*)., the fact that the Jews chose Barabbas
in preference to the Good Shepherd shows the be-
wilderment of the popular mind, which led Jesus
to compare the house of Israel to lost sheep. Jesus
further describes Himself as the Good Shepherd in
contrast to the hirelings, who care nothing for the
sheep (Jn 10"- ^*). If the thieves and robbers be-
token political agitators like Barabbas and Judas,
'the hirelings' are probably the Pharisees and
Sadducees, the shepherds wiio, in the words of
Ezekiel, ' fed themselves and did not feed the
sheep.'

The interpretation here suggested is not usually
adopted. Godet, for example, understands the
thieves and robbers to be the Pharisees. The wolf
(v.'-) he takes as a fnrtiier symbol of the same
party, the hirelings being the scribes and priests,
whom cowardice kept from opposing Pharisaic

ANIMALS

domination: This latter interpretation fits in well
with the context, i.e. with ch. 9 (see Godet, St.
John, vol. ii. pp. 375-397).

But without attempting to decide questions of
exposition, it is suHicient for us to point out that
the imagery of the parable is true to life.

' A sheep-fold in the East is not a covered building like our
stables, but a mere enclosure surrounded by a wall or palisade.
The sheep are brought into it in the evening, several flocks
bein^' generally assembled within it. The shepherds, after com-
mitting them to the care of a common keeper, a porter, who is
charged with their safe keeping during the night, retire to their
homes. In the morning they return, and knock at the closely
barred door of the enclosure, which the porter opens. They
then sejiarate each his own sheep, by calling them : and after
having thus collected their flocks, lead them to the pastures.
As to robbers, it is by scaling the wall that they penetrate into
the fold (Godet, I.e. p. 378).

The details are confirmed by all Eastern travel-
lers. Tlius, speaking of the power of the sheep in
distinguishing between the voice of the shepherd
and that of a stranger, Thomson tells us that, if a
stranger calls, they stop, lift up their heads in
alarm ; and if the call is repeated, they turn and
flee from him. ' This is not the fanciful costume
of a iiarable, but a simple fact. I have made the
experiment often ' (' Central Palestine,' p. 594).

Godet cites ' the well-known anecdote of a Scotch traveller,
who, meeting under the walls of Jerusalem a shepherd bringing
home his flock, changed garments with him, and thus disguised
proceeded to call the sheep. They, however, remained motion-
less. The true shepherd then raised his voice, when they all
hastened towards him, in spite of his strange garments ' (I.e.
p. 382).

All the sheep distinguish the voice of a shepherd
from that of a stranger : a shepherd's own sheep
distinguish his voice from that of any other shep-
herd (v.^). The practice of naming sheep {(pwvei
KUT^ oVojua, v.^) is conmion in the East. The picture
of the shepherd thrusting his sheep out of the en-
closure (eKJ^dX-tj, v.'*, implies the use of a certain
amount (jf force) and then placing himself at the
head of the flock, is likewise a simple fact, and not
fanciful imagery.

Though the historical application of the parable
in Jn 10 is not easy to determine, yet it is clear
that the chapter deals with the relation of Christ
to the Church and to the individual Christian, and
it is unnece.ssary to draw out in detail the lessons
that follow from the fact that Christ is for us the
door of the sheep and the Good Shepherd. It is,
however, important to notice tliat in Jn 10 o!ir
Lord speaks of the Jewish nation as a whole and
of His disciples alike as sheep (' his own sheep,' i.e.
the disciples, ai"e distinguislied from the other
flocks in the fold, i.e. the Jewisli people), and that
He compares His mission towards both to the
Avork of a sliepherd. Tliese ideas are common to
St. John and the Synojjtists, and the pastoral
imagery we are considering links the Fourth
Gospel to tlie other three.

(b) We have seen that in the Synoptics our Lord
spoke of tlie ])eople as lost sheep. But though the
Mattha^an ])hrase ' the lost sheep of the house of
Israel' applies to the nation as a whole, the parable
of the Lost Slieep in Mt 18^-'- is a defence of
Christ's view of chiklren, and in Lk 15^"** (where
alone in Luke the word irpd^arov is used) a similar
parable forms an answer to the criticism of the
Pharisees, who could not imderstand our Lord's
eating with publicans and sinners. In a sense all
the Jews were like lost sheep ; in a very special
sense the comparison applied to these social out-
casts. ' No animals are more helpless than sheep
that have strayed from the flock : they become
utterly bewildered, fur sheep are singularly desti-
tute of tlie bump of locality. They have to be
brought back' (Thomson). The figure of the lost
sheep illustrates to some extent the character of
the puliiicans and sinners. In tiie East, says
Thomson, the sheep have to be taught to follow

the shepherd : they would otherwise leave the
pasture lands and stray into the corn-fields.
Naturally some sheep follow the shepherd closely,
while others straggle and have to be recalled to
the path by means of the crook. So a lost and
wandering sheep is an ill -trained and troublesome
one. But the main point of the jiarable is tlie
action of the shepherd, who would regard it as
part of his ordinary duty to seek the lost. Though
Je.sus does not call Himself the Good Shepherd in
the Synoptics, yet the pai'able recorded in Mt. and
Lk. sliows us how naturally He came to compare
His ministry to the work of a shepherd, and how
He used the comparison to justify His friendly
attitude to publicans and sinners. According to
Mt 12"**, our Lord also adduced an owner's care for
a single sheep as a defence of His healing a man
with a withered hand on the Sabbath-day.

(f) If the weakness and the helplessness of sheep
siipplied Jesus with similes whereby to describe
the Jewish people as a whole, the purity symbol-
ized by their white wool, their harmlessness and
patience, led Him to speak of His own disciples in
similar terms. The disciples are sent forth as
sheep (or as lambs) into the midst of wolves (Mt
10i«, Lk 10=* ; Clem. Pvom. Ep. ii. 5). Christians are
to be ready even to suffer death without resist-
ance, so at least the epistle attributed to Clement
interprets the saying (see above under ' lamb ').

(d) In the Synoptics the few other pas.sages
where the disciples are described as sheep throw
little light on the subject. In Mt 25 the righteous
and the wicked are contrasted as sheep and goats ;
but, as has already been pointed out, the character
of the animals concerned has little to do with the
comparison. The woi'ds ' I will smite the shep-
herd, and the sheep shall be scattered' (quoted
from Zee 1.3^ in Mt 26^1, Mk 14-^), serve only to
show that tlie death of Christ would place the dis-
ci[)les in the same leaderless bewilderment Avhich,
in the eyes of our Lord, marked the nation as a
whole. But in a somcAvhat different connexion
(Lk 12^-) our Lord spoke of His disciples as a little
flock. After bidding them forego anxiety about
earthly goods and seek the kingdom, our Lord
adds, ' Fear not, little flock : for it is your Father's
good pleasure to give you the kingdom.' There-
assuring Avords Avere needed, no doubt, because the
disciples Avere but a little feeble band. But surely
the little flock implies something as to character
as Avell as number. It is the duty of the shepherd
at all times to find suitable pasture, and in the
autumn and Avinter he has to provide fodder.
Sheep cannot fend for themselves. Similarly the
disciples, intrusting to God the care of their
earthly interests, Avill appear to the Avorld at once
foolish and inettectual ; yet this little flock is to
inherit the kingdom. God chooses the weak things
of thisAvorld(l Co 1^7).

Further references to sheep in the Gospels are
less important. Mt 7'® speaks of the false pro-
piiets Avho are sheep in appearance and Avolves in
reality, a saying A\'hich also appears in Justin,
Dial.' So. In Jn 2P"- Peter is bidden to tend
(TToi/jLaiveiv) Christ's sheep (TrpojBdTia, ' lambs,' is
given as a variant in WH). Here Ave have in
germ the pastoral view of the ministerial oflice.
See art. Shepherd.

Jesus' description of Himself as the Good Shep-
herd laid hold from the first of the Christian
imagination. In the NT Jesus is tAvice spoken of
as tiie Shepherd (He 13-», 1 P 2-% In the Cata-
combs no symbol of Christ is more frequent than
the picture of the Good Shepherd. See Christ in
Art.

2. Our Lord illustrates His teaching concerning
Goers providence by one or two sayings about the
birds. He bids His disciples ' consider the birds of

ANIMALS

ANISE

the air : for they neither sow nor reap nor gather
into barns ; yet your heavenly Father feedeth
them. Are ye not much better than they ? ' ( Mt 6"^).
In conjunction with this passage, we must ex-
amine tlie reference to sparrows in Mt 10-*- ^\ Lk
226f.. ' Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing ?
yet not one of them shall fall to the earth without
your Father. . . . Fear not then : ye are of more
value than many sparrows.' Bochart well brings
out the force of Luke's mention of ' ravens ' instead
of ' birds of the air,' and he rightly discerns the
bearing of the reference to the sparrows, when he
says, ' Express mention is made of ravens and spar-
rows among the other birds, to make it clear tiiat
God's providence is not only concerned with birds
in general, but even extends to the most Avorthless
and the most despised among birds : so that men,
especially those that believe, may the more cer-
tamly draw from this fact the conclusion that God
cares for them, since He will not deny to those
who worship Him and call upon Him, the care
which He so graciously bestows on animals of the
lowest order.' Bochart further dwells on the harsh
grating voice, the ugly black colour, and the awk-
ward movements of the raven, which make him a
despicable bird. Concerning the sparrows, Thom-
son says they are ' a tame, troublesome, vivacious
and impertinent generation : they nestle just
wliere they are not wanted. Their nests stop up
stove-pipes and water-gutters. They are destroyed
eagerly as a Avorthless nuisance ' (' Lebanon,' etc.,
p. 59). Jesus then insists that the birds which
men hold cheap are not unthought of by God :
' our Lord has taught us that God providently
caters for the sparrow, and Himself conducts its
obsequies.'

By taking the references to sparrows and ravens
closely together, we may save ourselves from a
onesided interpretation of Mt 6-^ which has found
favour with many. Thus O. Holtzmann {Life of
Jesus, p. 102) says : ' With the drudgery and toil
of human labour, Jesus contrasts the toilless life
of nature, in which God feeds the raven and clothes
the lilies.' A parallel saying from the Talmud is
cited in Delitzsch's Jcivish Artisan Life, which
suggests the same view of our Lord's teaching.
'Didst thou ever see in all thy life,' says llabbi
Simeon, sou of Eleazar, ' a bird or an animal
working at a craft? And yet these creatures,
matle simply for the purpose of serving me, gain
their living without difficulty. But I am created
to serve my Creator : and if those who are created
to serve can gain their livelihood without difli-
culty, shall not \, who .am made to serve my
Creator, earn my living without trouble ? ' If this
saying is modelled on Mt 6-", then Kabbi Simeon
and O. Holtzmann seem to agree in interpreting our
Lord's teaching to the effect that ' the birds are
fed, without working : surely we may expect God
to feed us too, without our toil.' Such an inter-
pretation makes Mt 6-'® the magna charta of idle-
ness. But the superiority of the birds does not lie
in their not Morking, but in their not worrying.
If we may paraphrase the passage, ' the birds do
not engage in any methodical toil : yet they trust
God for daily food, and praise Him for His care :
men are better than birds, a suijeriority shown in
the fact tiiat men work in an orderly manner :
now, if God feeds the birds, which live a hap-
hazard kind of life, how much more will He re-
ward men's patient labour without their needing
to be sinxious?' This section of the Sermon on
the Mount is best interpreted by St. Peter's words,
'casting all your care (i.e. your worries and
anxieties) on hiiu ; for he careth for you' (1 P 5"),
or by St. Paul's lesson of contentment under all cir-
cumstances (Ph 4"-'''). Our daily wants are tlie
care of God. The saying about the sparrows for-

bids us to assume that daily needs will be met
exactly in the way we expect. We are not to
assume that food and raiment will be provided
amply and at all times. Privation and suffering
may fall to men's lot ; but suffering even unto
death is not to be feared, because the very death
of a sparrow is not forgotten before God.

Our Lord's teaching as to the trust in God's providence,
which may be learnt from the animals, appears to be summed
up in the second of the five new Sayinrfs recently discovered by
Grenfell and Hunt. They restore this logion as follows : ' Jesus
saith (je ask ? who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom, if)
the kingdom is in Heaven ? . . . The fowls of the air, and all
beasts that are under the earth or upon the earth, and the fishes
of the sea (these are they which draw) you, and the kingdom of
Heaven is within you ; and whoever shall know himself shall
find it. (Strive therefore?) to know yourselves and ye shall be
aware that ye are the sons of the (almighty?) Father ; (and?)
ye shall know that ye are in (the city of God?) and ye are (the
city ?).' The restoration of the saying is highly conjectural, but
it seems to be based in part on Job 127. 8. ' Ask now the beasts
and they shall teach thee ; and the fowls of the air and they
shall tell thee. Or speak to the earth and it shall teach thee ;
and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee.' And the con-
clusion which the saying is intended apparently to enforce may
be stated in the following verses taken from the same passage
in Job. ' Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the
Lord hath wrought this? In whose hand is the soul of every
living thing and the breath of all mankind ' (v.9f-). In effect we
are taught that converse with nature should produce a calm
trust in God.

It does not fall within the scope of this article to
discuss the wider aspects of our Lord's attitude
towards Nature. But the place taken by animals
in His teaching bears out the truth of the follow-
ing Avords of a recent writer. ' Jesus loved Nature
as Nature : here as everywhere He was in touch
Avith the actual. Plenty of people — from yEsop to
Mrs. Gatty — have made or drawn parables from
Nature, but not like His. His lost sheep have no
proverbs : His lilies may be dressed more charm-
ingly than Solomon, but they have not Solomon's
wisdom : and His sparrows are neither moralists
nor theologians, but sparrows, — two for a farthing,
sparrows chirping and flying about and building
their nests, — just sparrows ! But the least motion
which they made seemed a thrill of pleasure. . . .
Sparrows, lilies, lost sheep, hens and chickens,
midnight stars and mountain winds, — tliey all
entered into His mind and heart, and spoke to Him
of the character of God, of His delight in beauty,
and His love ' (T. R. Glover).

LiTERATUUE. — Without attempting to provide a complete
bibliography, it may be worth while to give a list of books that
the present writer has found helpful. Bochart's Uierozurcon
(ed. Rosenmiiller) is encyclopaedic. Tristram's Natural History
()/ t/ie Bible is a most handy manual of compact and accessible
information. References to animals are frequent in books of
Oriental travel : e.g. Stanley's Sinai and Palestine ; Robinson's
BliP ; and Thomson's Land and the Book [the latest edition
of Thomson's work in 3 vols, is especially valuable, though
the information is widely scattered and is not always easy
to find]. The articles on natural history and on particular
animals in Hastings' DB and the Encjic Bihl. may be consulted
with advantage. The standard ' Lives of Jesus ' deal with the
references to animals incidentally ; Edersheim is perhaps the
fullest and most reliable. There are some fresh, though not
always accurate, observations on the subject in the Life of
Jesus by O. Holtzmann. Of the many commentaries tliat ex-
pound the passages in the Gospels which concern our subject,
the present writer has found vol. i. of the Expositor's Greek
Testament (' Synoptics' by A. B. Bruce, ' St. John ' by M. Dods)
most useful. H. G. WoOD.

ANISE. — ' Anise ' is the translation given in AV
and IIV of avr)Oov (Mt 23'-'*) : the marginal render-
ing ' dill ' is tlie correct one. Tlie true anise is the
plant Pimpinella anisum, which is quite distinct
from Ancthum gvaiKolens, the anise of the Bible.

By the Jews dill was cultivated as a garden,
plant, but in Egyi)t and Southern Europe, to which
it was indigenous, it is often found growing Avild
in the corntields. It possesses valuable carmina-
tive properties, and in the East the seeds are eaten
with great relish as a condiment. It is a hardy
annual or biennial umbellifer, and grows to a
height of one, two, or even three feet. The stem

ANNA

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

is round, jointed, and striated ; the leaves are
finely divided ; tlie flowers, which .are small, are
yellow ; the fruits are brown, oval, and flat.

In Mt 23-^ dill is represented as siibject to tithe.
That is in strict accord with the provision of the
Law (Lv 27^", Dt 14^-), and is corroborated by the
express statement of the Mishna (Maaserothiv. 6).
See, further, art. RUE ; and cf. note by Nestle
in Expos. Times, Aug. 1904, p. 528'*.

Hugh Duncan.

ANNA ("Avva, Heb. njn). — When His parents
brought the infant Jesus to the temple to present
Him to the Lord, two aged representatives of the
OT Church received Him with songs of praise,
Simeon and Anna (Lk 2^"^-). Anna was the
daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher (v.^**),
which, though one of the Ten Tribes of the Dis-
persion, was still represented in Palestine. From
it some beautiful women are said to have been
chosen as wives for the priests (Edersheim, Life
and Times of Jesus the Messiah, i. p. 200). Anna
was a widow 84 years of age (AV), or more prob-
ably (RV) about 105, as 7 years of married life
followed by 84 years of widowhood would make
her to be. She was a devout and saintly woman,
worshipiung constantly in the temple, with fast-
ings and supplications, night and day; and, like
Deborah and Huldah of the OT, she had prophetic
gifts. Her desire, like the Psalmist's (Ps 27^), was
to dwell always in the house of God, though it is
hardly likely that a woman would be allowed
literally to dwell within the sacred precincts.
Having entered the temple at t'.ie same time as
Jesus was brought in, she followed up the song of
Simeon in similar strains, and spake of the Holy
Child 'to all them that were looking for the re-
demption of Jerusalem' (v. ^). Anna would seem
to later times an ideal saint of the cloister, as such
stress is laid on her virginity, her long life of
widowhood, and her ceaseless devotions. Possibly
her name may have had to do with the name
Anna, given to the mother of the Virgin Mary, in
the Protevangelium of James.

David M. W. Laird.

ANNAS ("Ai'j'as, Heb. j:n, Hanan, Jos. "Aj'u^'os,
Ananos). — High priest of the Jews from A.D. 6 to
15, and thereafter exercising commanding influ-
ence through his high priestly rank and his family
connexions. The son of one named Sethi, who is
otherwise unknown, he was appointed high priest
by Quirinius, probably in A.D. 6, and exercised
that ottice, which involved political as well as re-
ligiousheadshipof the nation, until he was deposed
by the procurator Valerius Gratus in A.D. 15 (Jos.
Ant. XVIII. ii. 2). The duration of his rule, and
the fact that of his sons no fewer than live suc-
ceeded him at intervals in the high priesthood
('which has never haj)pened to any other of our
liigli priests'), caused him to be regarded by his
contemporaries as a specially successful man (Ant.
XX. ix. 1). On the other hand, he incurred in an
unusual degree the unpopularity for which the
high priests were proverbial, hi addition to their
common faults of arrogance and injustice, Annas
was notorious for his avarice, which found oppor-
tunity in the necessities of the Temple worshippers.
It was lie, probably, who established the ' bazaars
of the sons of Annas' {lumnityOth bene Hdnan), a
Temple market for the sale of materials requisite
for sacriflces, either within the Temple precinct
(Keim, Jesus of Nazara, v. 116) or on the Mount of
Olives (Derenbour"), the profits of which enriched
the high priestly family. Beyond this, the house
of Annas is charged with the "special sin of * whis-
pering' or hissing like vipers, 'which seems to
refer to private influence on the judges, whereby
"morals were corrupted, judgment perverted, and
the Shekinali withdrawn from Israel'" (Eders-

heim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, i
263).

Annas is referred to by St. Luke and by St.
John. In Lk 3- ('in the high priesthood of Annas
and Caiaphas') he is linked with Caiaphas, who
alone was actually high priest at the time (A.D. 2(3).
The explanation of this is found partly in tiie
fact that the office having become to some extent
the prerogative of a few families, it had ac(]uiiL'd
some degree of hereditary and indelible quality,
and partly in the unusual personal authority exer-
cised by Annas. The result was that even after
his deposition he continued to enjoy much of tlie
influence, and even to receive the title, of las
former office (Schiirer, HJP II. i. 195 fl". ; against
this Keim, I.e.. \'\. 30 fl". ; H. Holtzmanii, Hdconi.. ad
Lk 3'-). In like manner in Ac 4" Annas appears at
the head of the chiefs of the Sanhedriii in its action
against the Apostles, though the actual president
was the high priest. See CHIEF Priests.

The only other passage in which Annas is re-
ferred to is in the narrative of the trial of Jesua
in the Fourth Gospel (Jn IS'^"--*). The Evangelist,
speaking with teclinical accuracy, refrains from
calling him high priest, and assigns as a reason for
Jesus being led before Annas the relationship be-
tween Annas and Caiaphas. The ex-highpriest
had probably been the chief instigator of the plot
against Jesus, and before him He was brought not
for trial, but only for an informal and private
examination (so Schiirer, Z.c. p. 182). 'The Lord
Himself is questioned, but there is no mention of
witnesses, no adjuration, no sentence, no sign of
any legal process' (Westcott, adloc).

C. A. Scott.

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH.- It is certain
that we have words from Jesus concerning His
death ; for such ruthless criticism as that of
Schmiedel (Eneyc. Bibl. 'Gospels'), who admits
only nine genuine sayings of the Master, is un-
critical and unscientific. These words appear in
the Synoptics as wel 1 as in the Fourth Gospel. The
genuineness of the latter is here assumed, thougli
there is a wide dill'erence in character between it
and the Synoptics.

The main point in the announcements of His
death by Jesus rests on the time of their utter-
ance. Hence the chronological grouping of these
sayings of Jesus must be followed. If He spjke
of His death only as a disappointed man after He
saw the manifest hate of the rulers, there would
be little ground for claiming ISIessianic conscious-
ness concerning His death as an atonement for sin.
And the heart of the whole problem turns on the
Messianic consciousness. When did He beeonie
eonscioiis of His death? Why did He expeet a
violent death? What did He think tvas to be
aecomplished by His death? Was His death a
voluntary sacrifiee, or merely a martyr's crown ?
These and similar questions can be answered only
by a careful and comprehensive survey of Christ's
own words upon the subject. It is noteworthy
that Jesus put the empliasis in His career on His
death rather than on His incarnation. That is so
out of the ordinary as at once to challenge atten-
tion. Here is One who came to give life by dying.
That is in deepest harmony with nature, but not
in harmony with man's view of his own life.

1. The first foreshadowings. — (a) Jesus first ex-
hibits knowledge of His death at the time of the
Temptation, immediately after the Baptism and
the formal entrance upon the Messianic ministry.
The Avord 'death' or 'cross' is not mentioned
between Jesus and Satan, but the point at issue
was the easy or the hard road to conquest of the
world. It is the unexpressed idea in this struggle
for the mastery of men. Hence, before Jesus
began to teach men, He had already wrestled with

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH 71

His Messianic destiny and chosen the path that
led to the cross. This tone of liigh moral conflict
is never absent from Jesus till the end. The
Synoptic Gospels thus 5j;ive the first account of
Christ's consciousness of His struggle to the death
for the spiritual mastery of men.
I (6) Another* occasion for the mention of His
death by our Lord grew out of the failure of Nico-
denms to understand the new birth and the sj)iritual
nature of the kingdom of God ( Jn 3"). If the teacher
of Israel could not apprehend these aspects of what
took place in the kingdom on earth, how could he
lay hold of the purposes of God in heaven (v.'-)
about the work of the kingdom ? One of the chief
of these ' heavenly things' is the necessity of the
death of Christ for the sin of the world. The
brazen serpent of the older history serves as an
illustration (v.'-»), but 'das gottliche "M" Todes-
schicksals' (Schwartzkopfi", Die Wcissaqungcn Jesii
Christi, p. 20) is grounded in the eternal love of
God for the world (Jn 3i«). The Son of Man (Jn
S'-*) who ' must' be lifted up is the Son of God (3'").
It is not perfectly certain that 3'" is a word of
Jesus and not of the Evangelist, but at any rate
it is a correct interpretation of the preceding
argument. The high religious necessity for His
death, of which Jesus is here conscious, could come
to Him by revelation from the Father (Schwartz-
kopfi', I.e. p. 22). The consciousness of Jesus is
clear, but He finds in Nicodemus an inability to
grasp this great truth. The word 'lifted up'
(vxpudrjvai) refers to the cross, as is made plain
afterwards (Jn 8-** \2^'^-). Even when the multi-
tudes heard Jesus use the word just before His
death, they did not understand it (Jn 12^-'), tliougii
the Evangelist gives the correct interpretation in
the light of the after history (12^='). In itself the
word could refer to spiritual glory (Paulus) or
heavenly glory (lileek), but not in view of the
later developments. So then the cross is con-
sciously before Jesus from the very beginning of
His ministry.

(<:) It is possibly nearly a year before we have
the next allusion by the Master to His death.
Again in parabolic phrase Jesus calls Himself the
bridegroom who will be taken away from the
disciples (Mk '2-", Mt 9l^ Lk S^). The Pharisees
from Jerusalem (Lk 5") are now in Galilee watch-
ing the movements of Jesus, so as to gain a case
against Him. On this occasion they are finding
fault because the disciphis of Jesus do not ob-
serve stated seasons of fasting. The answer of
Jesus is luminous in marking oft' the wide differ-
ence in spirit between a ceremonial system like
Judaism and a vital personal spiritual religion like
Christianity. There is a time to fast, but it is a
time of real, not perfunctory, sorrow. Such a
time will come to the disciples of Jesus when He
is taken away. By itself tlds reference might
.illude merely to the death that would come to
Christ as to other men, but the numerous other
clear passages of a different nature preclude that
idea here. Gould is right (Intcrnat. Crit. Com.
on Mk 2-") in saying that ' even as a premonition
it is not premature,' though tliere is more in it
than this, for Jesus understood the significance of
His death. Soon the historical developments con-
firm the prejudgment of Jesus, for the enmity of
the historical cons]iiracy grows apace. At the
next feast at whicdi Jesus appears in Jerusalem
(Jn 5') the rulers make a definite attempt to kill
Him as a Sabbath-breaker and blasphemer, also
for claiming equality with God the Father (Jn
5'**). This decision to kill Jesus soon reappears in

* Jn 229 and Mt 12'*9 are passed o\'er because of doubts (not
shared by the present writer) as to their interpretation or
genuineness. The case is strong enough without these dis-
puted passages.

Galilee (Mk 3^), and often in Jerusalem during
the closing six months of the ministry.

(d) The use of the cross as a metai)hor, as in Mt
10«» (see also Mk82^ Mt 16-'^ Lk 14'-'), would not of
itself constitute an allusion to the death of Jesus,
since death on the cross was so common at this
time. But in the light of the many allusions by
Jesus Himself to His death, the background of
the metaphor would seem to be personal, and so
to imply His own actual cross. He is Himself the
supreme example of saving life by losing it. Meyer,
in loco, considers that this verse was transferred
from the later period ; but this is unnecessary ; for
it is eminently pertinent that in the directions to
the Twelve, who are now sent out on their first
mission, they should be urged to self-sacrifice by
the figure of His own death on the cross. In this
same address occurs an apocalyptic saying that pre-
supposes the death of Christ (Mt 10'^^). It is not
an anachi'onism (J. Weiss) to find self-sacrifice and
self-realization in the words of Jesus about losing
life and finding it (Mt lO^"), for Jesus Himself
gives the historical Isackground of this image in
the sublime justification of His own death in His
resurrection (Jn 12-'').

(e) It is just a year (Jn &*) before the death of
Jesus that He is addressing the Galila^an populace
in the synagogue at Capernaum. He explains
that He is the bread of heaven, the true manna,
the spiritual Messiah. It is the climax of the
Galilivan ministry, for but yesterday they had tried
to make Him king (v.^^). To-day Jesus tests their
enthusiasm by the supreme revelation of His gift
of Himself ' for the life of the world ' (v.^'), a clear
allusion to His atoning death on the cross. Thus
will it be possible for men to make spiritual appro-
priation of Christ as the living bread. The people
and many of the so-called disciples fall back at
this saying (v.*'''), and thus justify the wisdom of
Jesus in having said no more as yet concerning
His death, and life by His death. For at the first
dim apprehension of this basal truth the people
left Him. But it was time for the truth to be told
to the Hippant multitudes. Here Jesus reveals
His consciousness of the character and work of
Judas as the betrayer, a very devil (Jnti'"^). The
bald truth of the betrayal is not at this point told
to the Twelve, for John's comment is made after-
wards ; but Jesus expressly saj's that one of them
is a devil. Jesus clearly knows more than He
tells. There is this bitterness in His cup at the
very time that the people desert Him. The
shadow of the cross is growing closer and darker,
but Christ will go on to meet His hour.

2. The dejinitc announcement'^. — (a) The new
departure at Cjcsarea Philippi. Just after the
renewed confession by Peter that Jesus is the
Messiah, St. Matthew says that ' from that time
began Jesus to show unto his disciples how that
he must go unto Jerusalem, and sutter many
things of the elders and chief priests and scribes,
and be killed, and the third daj' be raised \ip'
(Mt 16-1). g|^_ Uiixli (8'") also says that ' he began
to teach them.' Clearly, then, this was an epoch
in the teaching of Jesus concerning His death.
When He withdrew from Galilee this last summer,
he devoted Himself chiefiy to the disciples, and
especially to preparing them for His departure.
The specific teaching concerning His death follows,
therefore, the searching test of their fidelity to
Him as the Messiah. This is not a new idea to
Jesus, as we have already seen. It has been the
keynote of His mission all the time, but He had
to speak of it in veiled and restrained language
till now, when 'he spake the saying openly' (Mk
8^-). Now Jesus told the details of His death, the
place and the iiersecutors. He repeats the neces-
sity (od) of His death as He had proclaimed it in

72 ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

Jn 3'*. The disciples are still unprepared for this
plain truth, and Peter even dares to rebuke Jesus
for such despondency (Mt W^). The sharp rebuke
of Peter by Jesus (v.-*) shows how strong a hold
the purpose to die had on His very nature. Peter
liad renewed the attack of Satan in the Tempta-
tion. The Gospels record the dulness of the dis-
ciples, thus disproving the late invention of these
sayings attributed to Jesus. The principle of
self -giving is a basal one for Jesus and for all
His followers (Lk 9-^--^). The disciples could not
yet, any more than Nicodemus, grasp the moral
necessity of the death of Jesus. They recoiled at
the bare fact.

(h) On the Mount of Transfiguration a -week
later, somewhere on the spurs of Hermon, Peter,
James, and John get a fresh word from Jesus
about His de.ath (Mk 0"). It is not necessary to
f5upj)ose that they understood or even heard the
conversation of Jesus with Moses and Elijah
about ' his decease which he was about to
accomplish at Jerusalem' (Lk 9^^). Most likely
they did not, if Peter's remarks are a criterion
(Lk 9-*'*-). There is a fitnes.s both from the manner
of the deaths of Moses and Elijah, and from their
respective positions in law and prophecy, that these
two should talk with Jesus about His atoning and
predicted sacrificial death. This exalted scene lifts
the curtain a little for us, so that we catch some
glimpse of the consciousness of Jesus concerning
His death, as He held high converse with Moses
and Elijah. But the remark of Jesus (Mt 17**) was
a caution to the three disciples to keep to them-
selves what they had seen till His resurrection,
when they would need it. But the lesson of
strength was lost on them for the present. Even
tlie chosen three questioned helplessly with each
other about the rising from the dead (Mk 9'").
They could not understand a dying Messiah
now or later till the risen Christ had made it
clear.

(f) In Galilee Jesus renewed His earnest words
al>out the certainty of His death (Mk 9^1, Mt IT--^-,
Lk 9''''). He concealed His presence in Galilee as
far as possible (Mk 9*"), but He was very insistent
in urging, ' Let these words sink into your ears :
for the Son of Man shall be delivered up into the
hands of men' (Lk 9*^). But it was to no purpose,
for they understood it not (Mk 9*-). St. Luke
(9^''), in fact, says that it was concealed from them,
thus raising a problem of God's purpose and their
responsibility. They were sorry (Mt 17"'*), but
afraid to ask Jesus (Lk 9^^). Hence Jesus has not
yet succeeded in making the disciples understand
His purpose to die for men. So then He will have
no human sj'mpathy, and Avill have to tread the
path to Calvary alone.

{(i) At the feast of Tabernacles, or a few days
afterwards, just six months before the end, in the
midst of the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem, Jesus
emphasizes the voluntary character of His death
for His sheep (Jn 10'^). He does this to distinguish
between Himself and the Pharisees, who have been
vehemently attacking Him. They are robbers,
wolves, and hirelings, while Jesus is the Good
Shepherd. He is not merely caught in the mael-
strom of historic forces, nor is He the victim of time
and circumstance, for He has voluntarily put Him-
self into the vortex of sin (Jn lU'''^'). The Father
has given the Son tiie power or right (i^ovcrla) to lay
down and to take up His life again. It was a ' com-
maiulment' from the Father, but not to the ex-
clusion of the voluntary nature of His death ; just
as tlie necessity of His death Avas an inward neces-
.sity of love, not an outward compulsion of law.
It is in the realm of spirit that Ave find the true
value of the death of Jesus for our sins (He 9'^),
artd the moral grandeur of it is seen in the fact

that He made a voluntary offering of His life for
those who hated Him (Ro 5^).

(e) As the time draws nearer, Jesus even mani-
fests eagerness to meet His death (Lk 12-'"'-)- It is
only some three months till the end. HoAvever Ave
take Ti, Avhether as interrogative or exclamation,
Ave see clearly the mingled eagerness and dread
with Avhich Jesus contemplated His death. It is
a fire that Avill burn, but also attracts. He had
come just for this purpose, to make this fire.
It Avill be a relief Avhen it is kindled. It is a
baptism of death that presses as a Divine coui-
pulsion upon Him, like the 'must' of the earlier
time (Jn 3'^ Mk S^J). Here Ave feel the inward
gloAv of the heart of Christ as it bursts out for a
moment like a flame from the crater, unable to be
longer restrained. So Jesus had a double point of
view about His death, one of joy and one of shrink-
ing, but He did not go now one Avay and noAv the
other. He Avill pursue His Avay steadily, and as
the time draAvs nigh. His view of His death Avill
amount to rapture (Jn 17^' ^*). But Jesus Avas
never more conscious and sane than Avhen He
spoke thus about His death. It Avas, in fact. His
inner self speaking out. He thus gave us not only
a ncAv view of His OAvn death, but a neAV vieAv of
death itself.

(/) Jesus even tells His enemies that He expects
to be put to death in Jerusalem (Lk 13^^). They
Avere posing as His friends, but were either repre-
sentatives of Herod Antipas or of the Jerusalem
Pharisees. Jesus as.serted His independence of
' that fox ' and of them, but announced the iuAvard
neces.sity ( ' I must') that He should ultimately at
the right time meet the fate of other prophets in
Jerusalem. His lament over Jerusalem rcAcals
the depth of His love for that city, and demands a
Juda^an ministry such as that described by John.

(g) It IS not till the death of Lazarus that the
disciples realize that Jesus may be put to death
(Jn IP); and then as a dread groAving out of the
last attempt of the Jews to kill Him at the feast
of Dedication (10^"). Thomas has the courage of
despair (IP") in the gloomy situation, but Jesus
speaks of His oavu glorification (11^- *"). One item
in this glorification Avas the formal decision of the
Sanhedrin to put Jesus to death (11"). With this
formal decision resting over Him, Jesus Avithdrew
to the hills of Eidnaim, near Avhere in the begin-
ning He liad refused Satan's offer of a compromise,
and had cho.'-en His own Avay and the Father's.
Had He made a mistake ?

3. Facing the end.— (a) The relation betAveen the
death of Christ and the consummation of the king-
dom. It is in the last journey to Jerusalem tiiat
the Pharisees ask Avhen the kingdom of God comes
(Lk 17-"). They are thinking of the apocalyptic
conception current in their literature. There are
tAvo difficulties thus raised. One is their utter
failure to understand the nature of the kingdom,
for it is inner and spiritual, not external (the Papyri
shoAV that eVros means 'Avithin,' not 'among ).*
But, though the kingdom had already come in this
sense, there Avould be in the end a fuller and com-
pleter realization of the Avork of the kingdom. It
is in this sense that Jesus addresses the disciples
in Lk 17^. The day Avhen the Son of Man shall
be revealed (Lk 17^) Avill be the end. 'But first
must he sutler many things, and be rejected of this
generation.' Thus Jesus separates His own death
from the final stage of the Messianic Avork on earth.
The other diificnlty is raised by the disciples, and
concerns the place Avhere the Son will manifest
Himself (Lk 17^"). He Avill come when there are
people for Him to come for.

(b) Jesus uses the Avord 'crucify' before He
reaches Jericho on this last journey to Jerusalem
* CI., however, Expos. Times, xv. [1904], 387.

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH 73

(Mt 20^^). Stapfer scouts this item as put in jiost
ei'cntinn (Jcsns Christ during His Ministrij, p. 202),
because it is expressly used by Christ only twice
before His death (see also Mt 26-) ; but the Master
particularizes beforehand other details, such as
the mocking, scourging, spitting, delivering to the
Gentiles (these all now mentioned for the first time,
Mk \{P^-, Mt 20'9, Lk ISf-'). Besides, now for the
lirst time also Jesus claims that His death will be
in fullilment of the prophetic writings concerning
the Son of Man (Lk IS^i). See later Mt 21^-. Jn
13'8, Mk U-'', Lk 22" 24^. Jesus is not, however,
jilaj'ing a part just to fulfil the Scripture, but He
sees this objective confirmation of the inner witness
of His spirit to the Father's will concerning His
death. Besides, on this occasion Jesus had made
a special point of talking about His coming death,
taking the Twelve apart (Mt20''''-)> and explaining
that He does so now because they are near Jeru-
salem. There was an unu.sual look on the Master's
face, so much so that the disciples were amazed and
afraid (Mk \(fi-). But with all this pain, thej^ were
hoi)elessly dull on this subject (Lk 18^^).

(c) There is strange pathos in the next occasion
Jesus had for speaking concerning His death.
James and John and their mother (Mt 20-^, Mk
ICP) seem hardly able to wait for the Master to
cease telling about His death before they come and
ask for tlie chief positions in the temjxtral kingdom
for which they are still looking. It was a shock
to Jesus. Waiving their ignorance, He asked if
they could drink His cup of death and take His
baptism of blood (Mt 20", Mk 1(F). They actually
said that they were able. And James was the first
of the Twelve to die a martyr's death, and John
the last ; for Jesus had said that they would have
His cup and baptism (Mk 1(F^).

(d) It was on the same occasion, as Je.sus pro-
ceeded to give the disciples a needed lesson in true
greatness and taught tlie dignity of service, that
He set forth in plain speech the purpose of His death
(Mt 202^, Mk lO'^). Certainly Jesus had the right to
tell the purpose of His voluntary death. XvTpov is
obviously ' ransom,' but it need not be said that
this word exhausts all the content in the death of
Christ Jesus Himself elsewhere Npoke of the
vital connexion between Himself and the believer
(Jn IS'"^-)- This view of the redemptive deatli of
Christ is furtlier emphasized by the symbol of
Ba[itism and also of the Supper, in lx)th of which
tiie vital as[)ect of mystic union is expressed. 'Avri
is here used to express the idea of substitution,
though i'Wfp is more common in this sense in tiie
NT (Jn IP") and in the earlier (ireek (Alcestis, for
instance). It is a ransom instead of many.

A distinction needs to be made between the atoning death of
Christ as a basis for reconciliation and the consummation of
reconciliation in the individual case by the Holy Spirit's work
in the heart. The doctrine of the substitutionary atonin"; death
of Jesus, with vital and mystic union of the believer with Him,
is not a rabbinic and lefjal refinement of St. Paul. He simply
echoes the words of the Master more at length, while true to
the heart of the matter.

(e) The request of the Greeks during the last
week brought forth one of the deepest words of
Jesus concerning the necessity of His death (Jn
12-3-25) y\q gives, in fact, the philosophy of grace
about His death, which is, in truth, the same as
the law of nature. It is the law of self-giving.
Thus the wheat grows, and thus will Jesus estab-
lish the kingdom. By His death the middle wall
of partition between Jew and Gentile, and between
botli and (iod, will be broken down (Eph 2i^''*).
The agitation of Jesus on this occasion is sur-
passed only by tiiat in the Garden of Gethsemane,
and the cause is tiie same. In facing His deatli He
shrinks from it, but instantly submits to the
Fatiier (Jn 12'-^*), and is comforted by the Father's
voice. To the multitude Jesus boldly announces

that His lifting up (on the cross) will be the means
of drawing all men (Gentile as well as Jew) to Him
(v.^-). And it has been so. Jesus gloried in His
own cross as the means of saving the lost world.

( /') In the famous controversy with the Jewish
rulers in the temple on the last Tuesday, Jesus
identified Himself as the rejected Stone in the
Messianic prophecy in Ps 118--, and pronounced
condemnation on those who collided with the re-
jected Stone (Mt 21^^). At every turn during
these last days the death of Jesus is in the back-
ground of His words and deeds ; especially is this
true of the great eschatological discourse (^It 24 f.),
as well as of the third lament over Jerusalem (Mt
2337-^9)^ and the previous defiance of His enemies
(Mt 23^-).

(g) It is on Tuesday night (beginning of Jewish
Wednesday) that Jesus definitely foretells the time
of His death (Mt 26-). It will be at tiie feast of the
Passover, which begins after two days. Strangely
enough, on this very niglit tlie rulers were in con-
ference, and had decided, owing to the popularity
of Jesus witli the multitude at the feast, as siiown
by tiie triumphal entry and the temple teacliing, to
postpone the effort to kill Him till after tiie least
(Mt 26'"''). And so it would have been but for the
treaciiery of one of Christ's own disciples, who this
very niglit, after the doleful announcement by
Jesus of His near deatii, and after a stern rebuke
for his covetous stinginess (Jn 12"^-), went in dis-
gust and showed the Saniiedrin iiow to seize Him
during the feast (Lk 22''). But Jesus saw in the
beautiful act of Mary a jnophecy of His burial (Jn
12').

(/i) Jesus is fully con.scious that tiie Pasclial
meal which He is celeljrating is His last, is, in
fact, taking place on the very day of His deatli
(Jn 1331-^- *i). Xhe material is now so rich and
full, as the great tragedy draws near, that it can
only be alluded to brieliy. He is eager to eat this
meal before He suffers (Lk 22'*'- )• He knows that
now at last His hour has come (Jn 13'), and that
He will conquer deatli (v.^). Tiie contentious spirit
of the Twelve .at sucii a time occasions tiie object-
lesson in humility. Jesus points out the betrayer,
who leaves the room ; comforts tiie disciples, and
warns tiiem of tiieir peril, though all fail to grasp
the solemn fact or tiie moral greatness of the tragedy
tiiat is coming sw iftly on them, actually producing
two swords for a fight under the new jjolicy of
resistance now announced by Jesus (Lk 2:^^'**).

'PAe\AeTCT {E volution and Theolo<jy,y. 179)seeks to reconstruct
the whole story of Jesus' attitude towards His death by the
answer of Jesus, ' It is enoujjh.' He forgets that this answer
may be neither irony nor sober earnest, but rather an in-
ability to make the disciples understand more about the matter
before the time. It is chimerical for Ptleidcrer to set up his
view of this one passage against all the clear words of Jesus,
and say that Jesus did not expect to die.

(t) When Jesus introduces the Supper just after
the Passover meal. He speaks a strong word about
His deatli. He calls the cup of tiiis new ordinance
' my blood of the covenant ' (Mk 14'-^, Mt26-'*) ; and
it is the 'new' covenant, i.e. of grace (1 Co 11''^
Lk 22-"). Not only so, but the blood of Jesus is
shed for many (Mk 14-*, Mt 26'-^), as He had pre-
viously said (Mt 2U-», Lk 18^5). jjnj yt. Matthew
has tiie further clause 'unto remission of sins'
(Mt 26-«).

H. Holtzmann (Hand-Corn., in loco) would expunge this
phrase, while Spitta (Crchristeiitum, p. 2(56 ff.) denies thai Jesus
made any reference to His death on this occasion. HoUmann
admits that He spoke of His death, but rejects the liturgical
observance commanded in 1 Co ll®'-. Bruce(A'm(jrrfo)/i. of God,
p. 247) bluntly calls all this ' criticism carried to an extreme in
the interest of a theory.'

There is just doubt as to the true text of Lk
22'^'', but this in no way affects any of the points
above mentioned. Certainly expiation of sin by
the shedding of His blood is the idea of Jesus Irere.

74 ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DEATH

ANNUNCIATION, THE

The world had long been familiar with blood sacri-
fice, but the new thing in His vicarious sacrifice is
that it has real efficacy and is not mere type and
shadow. The blood is the life, and Jesus gave
Himself, a sinless and free self, the representative
Man and God's own Son. The moral value of this
voluntary and vicarious blood-offering comes from
the worth of the spiritual self of Jesus. Jesus
could see that this atoning sacrifice was in Is 53'o,
but it was also inwrought in His very conscious-
ness.

(j) The very heart of Jesus is laid bare in Jn
14-17. The Master tries once more to prepare the
Eleven for the tremendous fact of His death.
Nothing in life or literature approaches the touch
of Christ as He makes plain the awful truth of His
separation, silences the doubt of Thomas, Philip,
Judas, cheers them with tlie j^romise of another
Paraclete, reminds them of their high dignity
as His friends, exhorts them to courage against
the woi'ld, and promises victory in spite of tribula-
tion. In the prayer that follows, a halo is around
the cross in the mind of Christ, for He asks for His
glorification in death (Jn 17i- ^). He had already
sanctified Himself to this mission (vv.^^- ^^), and
now the hour is at hand.

(k) And yet in Gethscraane Jesus Himself is
'greatly amazed' at His own agitation of spirit
(Mk l-i^'i). He needs the Father's help, and for
the moment has difficulty in finding Him fully,
for Satan has renewed his temptation with fresh
energy. For a moment Satan seemed indeed to
triumph, but Jesus quickly surrendered to the
Father's will and won supreme mastery over Him-
self (Mk 1435f). But Ritschl is in error in saying
that Jesus ' is first of all a priest in His own
behalf ' (Justification and Beconciliation, p. 474).
What broke the heart of Christ in Gethsemane
was no thought of His own sin, but the sin of the
world. Here in Gethsemane the heart of Jesus was
touched to the quick by the essence of the redemp-
tive sacrifice. The disciples gave Him no human
sympathy, and Satan even souglit to poison His
heart toward the Father. The picture in Hebrews
S''-^) of the strong Son of God, having learned
obedience through suffering, crying out to the
Father for help, is the acme of soul agony. Jesus
won the power to drink the cup, and in the dregs
of the cup was the kiss of Judas. His hour has
come at last, and His enemies take Him now only
because He allows them. It is the hour and the
power of darkness (Lk 22^^)^ xhe hour and the
power of light will come later. Once again He
speaks of the necessity of His death that the Scrip-
tures may be fulfilled (Mt 2(P"<).

(I) In the trial it is a foregone conclusion that
Jesus will be condemned, and on the cro.ss He ' sees
what He foresaw.' He knows that His public con-
fession of His Messiahship means His death, but
He asserts His ultimate triumph over His enemies
(Mt 2G^f). He claims superiority over the world,
and that He is now fulfilling His destiny (Jn 18^6f.)_
On the cross itself He practises the forgiveness of
enemies which He had preached (Lk 233*), exercises
saving power though dying (vJ^), is in some sense
forsaken by the Father (Mk 153^), is conscious to
the last of what He is performing (Jn 19-8), and
proclaims the completion of His Messianic work
(Jn 1930) as He dies with submission to the Father
(Lk23-«5).

After the resurrection Jesus had a new stand-
point from which to teach tlie disciples the signifi-
cance of His death (Lk 2^'^''- 3-'- «). gm j^ ;§ ^^t
till they receive the new light from the Holy Spirit
at Pentecost that the disciples fully appreciate the
moral greatness of the death of Christ, and see the
glory of the cross, with something of the dignity
with which Jesus Himself went into the shadow.

** Copyright, 1(106. by

Literature. — Schwartzkopff, Die Weismgunrjen Jenu
Christi von seinem Tode, neiner Auferstehung und Wieder-
kuvft (1895) ; Babut, La Pennee de JHu sur la Mort (1S97) •
Smeaton, Our Lord^s Doctrine of the Atonement (1871)"
Fairbairn, 'Christ's Attitude to His Own Death,' ExponUor
(Oct. Dec. 1896 ; Jan. Feb. 1897) ; Denney. The Death of Chrixt
(1902) ; Hollmann, Die Bedeutung des Todeg Jenu; Dale, The
Atonement (1881) ; Kltschl, Jufitification and Reconciliation
(1900) ; Belser, Die Gexchichte des Leidens und Sterheiix, dtr
Auferstehung und IKmmeifahrt den ITerrn (1908); Barth
Die Ifauptprobleme des Lebens Jesxt, (190.3); Baldensperper'
Das Selbstbewusstsein, Jesii (1892) ; Schiirer, Das Messian-
ische Selbstbewusstsein (1903) ; Hoffmann, Das Selbstbewusst-
sein Jesu nach den drei ersten Evangelien (1904): Appel, IHe
Selbstbezeichnung Jesu (1896); Bruce, Training of the Twehe
pp. 167 ff., 273 ff., 289 tf., 346 ff. A. T. ROBERTSON. '

**ANNUNCIATION, THE {Annuntiatio, EiayyeX-
iffixds, XapLTi(rfi6i). — The announcement of the fpct
that the Son of God was to be born of the Virgin
Mary, who at the time was espoused to Joseph,
the descendant and heir of David. St. Luke
(1-6-38) tells us that this announcement was made
to Mary by the angel Gabriel at Nazareth six
months after the same angel had told Zacharias
in the Temple at Jerusalem that his wife Elisabeth
should bear him a son, who was to be called John.
St. Luke is our sole authority for this announce-
ment by the angel to Mary. St. Mark and St.
John are silent ; and the narrative of St. Matthew,
who is our other authority for the fact that Jesus
was born of a virgin, is very different, being
written as entirely from Joseph's point of view as
St. Luke's is written from Mary's point of view
(see below). Nevertheless there is no contradic-
tion between the accounts, and in some important
particulars they confirm one another. They are
wholly independent narratives, as their wide
differences show. Yet they agree, not only as to
the central fact of the virgin birth, but also as to
the manner of it, viz. that it took place through
the operation of the Holy Spirit. This agreement
is all the more remarkable when we remember
that there is nothing like this effect of the Spirit
of God upon a virgin in the Old Testament, and
that, prior to the New Testament, the very ex-
pression ' Holy Spirit ' is rare (see the art. in
Hastings' DB ii. p. 402 ff.) ; also that the fact of
the Incarnation is elsewhere indicated in quite
other terms, as by St. John (l^'*). Moreover, the
two narratives agree as to four other points, which
are of some importance. Both state that at the
time of the announcement Mary was espoused to
Joseph, that the child was to be named ' Jesus,'
that He was born at Bethlehem in Judaea, and
that the parents brought Him up at Nazareth.

It is well to remember that there are stories,
more or less analogous to what is told by the two
Evangelists, in heathen mythologies. The his-
torical probability of the Gospel narratives is not
weakened but strengthened by such comparisons.
St. Luke's Gentile readers must have felt the un-
speakable difference between the coarse impurity
of imagined intercourse between mortals and
divinities, in the religious legends of paganism,
and the dignity and delicacy of the spiritual narra-
tive wliich St. Luke laid before them. And St.
Matthew's Jewish readers, if they compared his
storv with their own national ideas, as illustrated
in the Book of Enoch (6. 15. 09. 8(5. 106), would
find a similar contrast. Nor should the legendary
additions to the Gospel story, which are found in
the Apocryphal Gospels, be forgotten. These show
us what pitiful stuff the imagination of early
Christians could produce, even when the Canonical
Gospels were there as models. All the.se three
classes of fiction, heathen, Jewish, and Christian,
warn us that we must seek some source for the
Gospel narrative other than the fertile imagina-
tion of some Gentile or Jewish Christian whose
curiosity led him to speculate upon a mysterious

Charles Scribner's Sons

ANNUNCIATION, THE

subject. We should have had something very
different, both in details and in tone, if there had
been no better source than this. And this applies
even more strongly to St. Luke's narrative than
to that of St. Matthew. It required more delicacy
to tell the story of the virgin birth from Mary's
side than from Joseph's ; and this greater delicacy
is forthcoming. And it is all the more conspicuous
because St. Luke's narrative is the richer in
details. We conclude, therefore, that St. Luke
had good authority for what he has told us, viz.
an authority well acquainted with the facts. For
if he was incapable of imagining what he has
related, equally incajjable was his informant. The
narrative which he has handed on to us is what
it is because in the main it sets forth what is true.

Then who was St. Luke's authority ? Assuming
the truth of the narrative, it is obvious that, in
the last resort, the authority for it must have
been iMary herself. No one else could know what
St. Luke records. It does not follow from this
that he got the information from her directly,
although there is nothing incredible in the sup-
position that he and she had met. And the form
of the narrative leads one to think that there can-
not have been many persons between her and him.
By frequent transmission from mouth to mouth
details about the angePs outward appearance, his
beauty and brightness, and about Mary's attitude
and employment, would have crept in, and the
conversation would have been expanded ; all of
which corruptions are found in the Apocryphal
Gospels. Moreover, such touches as 2^'^-^^ would
be likely to drop out ; and they have dropped from
the Apocryphal Gospels.

We may go a step farther, and say that if St.
Luke did not get his information direct from
Mary herself, the penson who pas.sed on the mys-
terious story from her to the Evangelist was
almost certainly a woman. Mary would be much
more likely to tell it to a woman than to a man ;
and, in spite of her habitual reticence, she would,
after Joseph's death, be likely to contide it to some
one. She would feel that such an astounding
fact, so much in harmony with the life and death
and resurrection of her Son, nuist not be allowed
to die with her ; and she would therefore com-
municate it to .some intimate friend, who may have
communicated it to St. Luke.

It is quite possible th.at this communication was
at its first stage, or had not even started, when St.
Mark composed his Gospel, so that when he wrote
he was ignorant of the virgin birth. But as the
plan of his Gospel excludes all tliat preceded the
preaching of the Hapti.st, St. Mark's silence would
be natural even if he already knew it. Probably
most of the first generation of Christians were
ignorant of this mystery, for the Book of Acts
and the Epistles show us that what was preached
by the Apostles was not the miraculous birth, but
the death and resurrection of Christ (Ac I'-i^a^s- 24. 32
315 410 103J.40 lo2.c;io 1731 etc.).

That the Fourth Evangelist knew the Synoptic
Gospels, and sometimes silently corrects them, is
certain ; but he does not correct the story of the
virgin birth. On the contrary, what he says
about the Incarnation and about the pre-existence
of the Son of Man and His oneness with the
Father, is in harmony with it. Such passages as
li« 313 63^.44.51.62 ^.H.r,. 58 iQio 1125 202'*- 31 are more

intelligible if written by one who believed the
virgin birth, than if written by one who knew the
doctrine and rejected it. It is indeed urged that
this Evangelist's beliefs about the Christ are such,
tiiat he must have stated the virgin birth, if he
believed it. But, as the story had already been
twice told, there was no need to repeat it. And
the whole of his Gospel shows that he is reserved

about the Virgin Mother, whose name he alone
among the Evangelists never mentions. She had
become his mother (192'), ^nd he is reticent about
all thmgs connected with himself. He nowhere
names his own brother.

Nevertheless, when the mystery became known
through the diffusion of the First and Third
Gospels, its importance as a completion and con-
firmation of the faith was recognized. Ignatius
(c. A.D. 110), in a passage {Eph. 19) which is fre-
quently quoted by later Fathers (Origen, Euse-
bius, Basil, Jerome, etc.), places the virgin birth
in the front rank among Gospel truths ; and we
find it as an article of faith in the Old Roman
Creed, which can be traced almost to the beginning
of the second century, rbv yewrjd^i'Ta iK irvevnaros
aylov Kai Maplas ttjs ivapdivov : qui natits est de S.S.
ex, M. V.

The antecedent probability that St. Luke de-
rived the information respecting Mary either from
herself, or from a woman to whom she had con-
fided it, is confirmed by the characteristics of these
first two chapters of his Gospel. The notes of time
(^126.36.56-) are specially feminine; and competent
critics find a feminine touch throughout (124.25. 4i-«. 57
25-7. 19. 35. 48. 51), Lange {Life of Christ [ed. 1872], i.
p. 258) says: ' The colouring of a woman's memory
anda woman's view is unmistakable in the separate
features of this history. When it is once ascribed
to a female narrator ... we comprehend the in-
describable grace, the quiet loveliness and sacred-
ness of this narrative.' Kamsay ( Was Christ born
at Bethlehem ? p. 88) says: 'There is a womanly
spirit in the whole narrative which seems incon-
sistent with the transition from man to man.'
Sanday (Expository Times, April 1903, p. 297)
agrees that the narrative came not only from a
woman, but through a woman, and he thinks tliat
Joanna, the wife of Chuza, steward to Herod
Antipas (Lk82-3 24"'; of. 23'9, Ac 1"), may have
been the person through whom the information
passed from Mary to St. Luke. Both Lange (con-
fidently) and Sanday (less confidently) believe that
St. Luke received the information in writing, and
that he wrote the first two chapters with a docu-
ment before him. On the whole, this is probable.
It is quite true that the peculiarities and character-
istics of St. Luke's very marked style are .specially
frequent in these two chapters (Plummer, St. Luke,
p. Ixx) ; but they are also very frequent in other
places where he was working from a document.
St. Luke seems never to have simply copied his
authority. In using written material he freely
altered the wording to expressions which were
more natural to himself : so that mere frequency
of marks of his style is no proof that he was not
using what was already in writing. And, of
course, when he was translating from an Aramaic
document his own favourite words and construc-
tions would come spontaneously.

But, while this is admitted because it admits of
something like proof, we are not compelled to
admit the unproved assertion that the hymns of
praise with which these chapters are enriched have
been composed by St. Luke himself, and have no
more basis in fact than the speeches in Livy. Each
of these canticles suits the time at which it is sup-
posed to have been uttered better than the time at
which St. Luke wrote, and it may be doubted
whether he could in imagination have thrown
himself back to the surroundings and anticipations
of Zacharias and Mary and Simeon. There may
have been on his part ' a free literary remodelling
of material ' (B. Weiss). Before anything was
written down there may have been some modifica-
tion in the wording as the result of reflexion upon
what had been uttered and done. There may even
have been conscious elaboration. But it is reason-

ANNUNCIATION, THE

able to believe that these exquisite and appropriate
songs represent fairly accurately what was said
and felt on each occasion. What was said and
felt would be remembered, and perhaps was com-
mitted to writing long before St. Luke obtained
the precious record, although not till many years
after the events. And there is nothing extrava-
gant in the belief that Mary herself may at last
have thought it best to commit her recollections
and meditations to writing. The feeling, merim
secretum mihi, would prevail for a long time :
'she pondered these things in her heart.' Then,
as the end of her life drew nearer, she might put
on record what ought not to be lost. Finally, she
committed the sacred mystery to another woman,
or to a small group of women ; and from them it
passed to St. Luke. But we must be content to
remain in ignorance as to whether Mary, or some
confidante, or St. Luke himself, was the first to
put the story in writing.

That St. Luke should be the Evangelist to
receive this womanly story of women is not sur-
prising. The rest of his Gospel shows a marked
sympathy with the sex which was so commonly
looked down upon by both Jews and Gentiles. To
this day, in the public service of the synagogue,
the men thank God that they have not been made
women. No other Evangelist gives us so many
types of women. Besides those in the first tAvo
chapters, we have the widow at Nain, the sinner
in Simon's house, Mary Magdalene, Joanna,
Susanna, the woman with the issue, Martha and
Mary, the woman bowed down for eighteen years,
the widow with her two mites, the daughters of
Jerusalem, and the women at the tomb. And he
alone gives us the parable of the Woman and the
Lost Coin. We may believe that he was one in
whom a woman might naturally confide.

While in St. Luke everything is grouped round
Mary and her kinswoman Elisabeth, in St.
Matthew everything is grouped round Joseph.
Joseph's genealogy is given by way of preface.
The Annunciation is made to him ; and all revela-
tions about the name of the Child, and the provi-
sions to be taken for His safety, are made also to
him. Obviously, if the story is true, Joseph must
have been the ultimate source of a great deal of it ;
but it may have passed through many mouths
before it took the form iu which it appears in the
First Gospel.

Doubt has been thrown upon the two narratives,
because in the First Gospel the revelations are
made by the angel of the Lord in dreams, whereas
in the Third they are made by angels to persons
in their waking moments. It is argued that in
each case the miraculous agency is due to the ima-
gination of the writer. This is possible. But it is
also reasonable to believe that the special method
of communication was in each case adapted to the
character of the recipients. It cannot be said that
St. Matthew always gives us dreams, or that St.
Luke objects to such things. St. Matthew men-
tions the ministry of angels (4ii), and communica-
tions made by means of them (28''-'); and St. Luke
mentions communications made by means of visions
in the night (Ac IG^ IS^- 1'^). And if the writers
had imagined the substance of the heavenly
message, would not St. Matthew have given the
promise of the Kingdom, and St. Luke the \n-o-
mise of Salvation ? But it is St. Matthew who
has the latter (V^^), while St. Luke has the former
(l^--3«). It is worth noting that in the New Testa-
ment we do not read of dreams or visions in the
night anywhere but in St. Matthew and in Acts ;
cf. 2 Co 121.

Again, doubts have been raised about the two
narratives, because in the one the revelation of the
miraculous conception is made to Mary, in the

other to Joseph ; and either revelation, it is urged
would render the other unnecessary. On the con-
trary, both are necessary. If the virgin birth was
to take place, God in His mercy would not leave
Mary in ignorance of the mysterious manner in
which He was abovit to deal with her. We may
reverently say that the Annunciation to Mary was
a necessity in order to save her from dreadful
perplexity and suffering. And this rendered a
revelation to Joseph also necessary. On the mere
testimony of Mary he could not have accepted so
extraordinary a story. The fact that, in spite of
his inevitable suspicions, he took her in marriage
requires us to believe that to him also had been
revealed God's purposes respecting his betrothed.

It is evident that St. Matthew and St. Luke
give the narratives as historical. Each believed
his own story, and expected that others would
believe it also (Lk 1*). Indeed, the isolation in
which these two very different intimations of the
virgin birth stand in the New Testament makes
the explanation of them very diflicult unless there
is an historical basis. They are not needed to
exi^lain anything else. They are intensely Jewish
in tone ; but we may be sure that Judaism, with
its enthusiastic estimate of the blessings of mar-
riage, would not have invented them. Moreover,
at the time when these Gospels were written,
Judaism was antagonistic to the new faith, and
would not have tolerated such a glorifying of its
Founder.

In the Annunciation to Mary we are not told
that she saw anything, for the Idova-a read by A C
in Lk l'-^3 is almost certainly not genuine. Gabriel
was sent, and entered some building in which she
was living at Nazareth, and there delivered his
message. The el(7€\dwv is against the later tradi-
tion that she was at the fountain drawing water
{Protevangelium of James, 11 ; Gospel of pseudo-
Matthew, 9). The angelic me.ssage is given 'in
three little pieces of trimeter poetry, which have
become somewhat obscured by the Greek transla-
tion ' (Briggs, llie 3Iessiah of the Gospels, p.
45 ff.), the first of which is the Ave Maria 'in the
form of a distich ' —

' Hail, thou that art endued with grace,
The Lord is with thee.'

The much discussed KexapiTuixdv-rj must mean
'endued with grace' (Sir l&i') : vi<XTi.v kuI x'^P'-"
'Ka^oucra Mapla (Justin Martyr, Try. 100) ; and
both here and in 1^^ the usual translation ' grace '
should be retained for x^P'^- ' The Lord is with
thee ' is frequent in the Old Testament (Jos 1^
G2", Jg fii'-, Is 435). The RV is probably right
in omitting 'Blessed (art) thou among women,'
which may have come from 1^-: K ^ L, with the
Egyptian and Armenian Versions, omit.

By the first words of the angel, Mary was
greatly disturbed (dierapdxdv) t)Oth in mind and
heart : then her perplexity and emotion gave place
to thought (8if\oyil€To). But, although woTairoi
originally meant ' from what country or nation,'
she was not deliberating, like Hamlet about the
ghost, whether the message came from heaven or
hell, i.e. whether it was Divine or diabolical. The
Latin Versions rightly have qnalis, not cttjas, as
an equivalent. Nowhere in the New Testament
has woTa-irds a local signification, but means simply
' of what kind or quality ' (ttojos), and implies
astonishment (Lk T^a, Mt 8^^ Mk l^i, 2 F 3",
1 Jn 31).

In his second address Gabriel calms the Virgin's
fears and explains the purpose of his mission.
'Thou hast found grace with God' is another
Old Testament expression (Gn 6« 183 low 394, Ex
3312. 13. 16. 17). This ' grace ' is manifested in making
her the mother of the longed-for Messiah, an un-
speakable joy to a Jewish mother. In the promise

ANNUNCIATION, THE

great

which follows there are allusions to two prophecies.
'Sou of the Most High' recalls Ps. 2% and 'the
throne of his father David ' recalls the
Messianic prediction in Is O^- '.

By the second utterance of Gabriel, which con-
tains the substance of the Annunciation, Mary is
astounded. Yet she does not, like Zacharias, ask
for proof (1^^). Nor is her 'How?' a request for
an explanation. Rather it is an exclamation of
amazement. She is not married: how can she
have a son? And how can a humble maiden like
herself have such a son ? This seems to be the
natural import of her words. It is unlikely that
' I know not a man ' means that she has already
taken, or there and then takes, or intends to take,
a vow of perpetual virginity. And can Mt 1^5,
with its Imperfect tense (not Aorist, as in Gn lO^),
be reconciled with any such vow? Mary's dvSpa
ov yivwaKoj is a confession of conscious purity,
drawn from her by the surprising promise that
she is to have a son before she is married (see
Sadler, ad loc).

Although Mary does not ask for an explanation
or a sign, Gabriel gives both in a third utterance.
As to the explanation, it is an influence that is
spiritual and not carnal, that is holy and not
sinful, that is to come upon her and enable her to
become a mother, and the mother of the Messiah.
' Wherefore also the holy thin<r which shall be born
Shall be called the Son of God.'

' Son of God ' was a recognized title of the
Messiah. Both in the Book of Enoch and fre-
quently in 4 Ezra the Almighty speaks of the
Messiah as His Son. Jesus rarely uses this title
of Himself (Mt 27«, Jn 10^^). But we have it in
the voices from heaven (Lk S"" 9^^) and in the
devil's challenge (i^-^), in St. Peter's confession
(Mt 16i«), in the cries of the demoniacs (Mk S^i !)'),
and in the centurion's exclamation (15^9). The
primitive Church adopted it as a concise statement
of the Divinity of Jesus Christ (Swete, Apostles'
Creed, p. 24). It is worth noting, in connexion
with the part assigned to the Holy Spirit in the
virgin birth, that in a fragment of the Gospel
according to the Hebrews quoted by Origen
{Com. in Johan. iii. §(53) the words, 'My
mother, the Holy Spirit, took Me,' are put into
the mouth of Christ.

As to the sign, which was granted unasked,
Mary receives one which is as convincing as the
one given to Zacharias, but much more gracious.
Another wonderful birth is about to take place,
and by the mention of ' the sixth month ' the angel
assures Mary that all is known to him. Mary can
verify his words respecting Elisabeth, and thereby
know that this message to herself is true. He
intimates that there is to be close relationship
between Elisabeth's son and her own, and directs
her to her kinswoman for confirmation and sym-
pathy.

Mary's final response to the angel is not a prayer
that what he has promised may be fulfilled, but
an expression of absolute submission. She fore-
sees the difficulty with Joseph and with all who
know her. But she accepts, without reserve,
God's decree respecting her, as made known to
her by His messenger, and leaves the is.sue in His
hands. She is the Lord's bondmaid, and His will
must be done.

There is perhaps more irreverence than wisdom
in speculating whether God could have redeemed
mankind by one who was produced without human
parent ; or, again, by one who had a human father
as well as a human mother. But suggestions of
this kind have been made, and perhaps call for
comment. It may be pointed out thjit a new act
of creation would have left no nexus between the
Redeemer and those to be redeemed. He would

not have belonged to the same race as those whom
He came to save. He would not have taken their
flesh, and His life would have had little relation to
theirs. It is difficult to see how the death and
resurrection of such a being would have aided the
human race. But the virgin birth avoided all
violent breach with humanity. Just as the pro-
phet (John the Baptist) who was to renovate
Israel was taken from the old priesthood, so the
Christ who was to redeem the whole of mankind
was not created out of nothing, but 'born of a
woman.'

Again, if the Christ had had two human parents,
it is difficult to see how the hereditary contamina-
tion of the race could have been excluded. It may
be said that such contamination remains even with
only one human parent, and that the choice lies
between admitting the contamination and sever-
ing the nexus with the human race altogether.
But, in truth, there is no such dilemma. The
choice is not between creation on the one hand
and human parentage (whether with one or two
parents) on the other. There is also the possi-
bility of the substitution of Divine agency for the
human father. It is conceivable that the presence
of this Divine element would entirely exclude
the possibility of contamination from the human
mother. Indeed it is difficult to conceive that the
Divine element could in any way receive con-
tamination. But it is wiser to accept with
reverent thankfulness what has been revealed to
us respecting this mystery than to speculate need-
lessly, and perhaps fruitlessly, about what has not
been revealed.

It has been pointed out already that the beauty,
dignity, and delicacy of the story of the Annun-
ciation are tokens of historic reality ; for the
fictions about similar subjects in pagan, Jewish,
and Christian literature are, in these respects,
so very different. There is yet another mark, of
historic truth to be noted, viz. the extreme
simplicity of the Christology. New Testament
doctrine about the Christ is here found at a very
early stage, earlier even than that in the Epistles
to the Corinthians; for there we have Christ's
pre-existence implied as 'the second man from
heaven' (1 Co 15<"), who 'became poor' when He
became man for us (2 Co 8«, cf. 4^-«) ; and there-
fore much earlier than the more developed Chris-
tology of Colossians (li^^) and Ephesians 1" 41^),
and than that of the writer to the Hebrews (1^), or
that of the Fourth Gospel (1" 31^ IT^). ' The power
of the Most High shall overshadow thee ' reminds
us rather of the manifestations of the Divine pre-
sence in the Old Testament, especially the ' pillar
of cloud' (Ex 13=1 403-1^, 1 K Sio-"), If St. Luke
had invented the story of the Annunciation, would
he not have given us more of Pauline Christology,
and that in its fullest form ? That he has given
us what is so rudimentary is evidence that he
gives a record of what was revealed to Mary at
tiie time, rather than what he himself knew and
believed.

The couplet with which the narrative ends (l^^)
balances that with which it opens (1^8), and it is
one of deep spiritual significance to every believer.
By her absolute submission to the will of God, in
spite of the agony of shame and distress which
this involved, Mary entered into an intimacy of
relationship with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
such as even angels cannot know. And yet it is
precisely here that the humblest Christian may,
by similar obedience, follow her. 'Blessed is the
womb that bare thee,' said one to the Lord, 'and
the breasts which thou didst suck. But he said,
Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word
of God, and keep it' (Lk IV^'-^s).

It was natural that a special day should be set

ANOINTING

apart to commemorate this mystery, but we do
not know when this was first done. The earliest
mention of such a festival is in the Acts of the
Tenth Synod of Toledo (a.d. 656) ; and the next
is in those of the second Synod in Trullo (a.d.
692). But, just as the Purification was origin-
ally a feast in honour of our Lord rather than of
the Virgin Mary, viz. of His presentation in the
Temple and meeting with Simeon and Anna, so also
this festival originally commemorated His miracu-
lous conception rather than the announcement
maile to her. In the Ethiopian Calendar it is not
called 'the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin
Mary,' but 'the Conception of Christ': elsewhere
the later name of the feast has driven out the
original title, not only in the West, but also in the
Eastern Cliurches.

Literature. —Brigffs, The, IWensiah of the GospeU, p. 41 ff.,
New Lightonthe Lifeof Jesus, 1904, p. 160 ff.; Kamsay, Was
Christ born at Bethlehem f ; Sandaj-, art. ' .Jesus Christ ' in
Hastings' DB ii. p. 64;? ff., also Expository Times, April 1903;
Pearson, On the Creed, art. iii. ; Swete, The Apostles' Creed,
p. 41 tf., also Sxpos. Times, 1393; Westcott, The Historic Faith,
p. 59 ff. ; B. Weiss, Lebeii Je^u, ii. § 2 [Eng. tr. i. p. 222 ff.] ;
Loofs, Leitfuden s. Studiiim d. Dogmengeschiohte ; Soltau,
Gehurtsgeschichte Jesu Christi, 1902; J. A. Robinson, Soma
Thoughts on the Incarnation, 1903; Knowling, Ou,r Lord's
Virgin Birth ; Ch. Quart. Iiev.,3vL\y unAUctA^^i; Gore, The
Incarnation, 77 ff., 251 f. ; Garvie, E.rpositor, Feb. 1902. On
the sceptical side : Keiin, Jesus of Kasara, ii. p. 38 ff. ; Ilase,
Geschichte Jesu, § 22 ff. ; O. Holtzmann, Lehen Jesu. cap. iv.
[Eng-. tr. p. 81 ff.] ; P. Lobstein, The Virgin-Birth of Christ,
1903 ; Gheyne, Bible Problems, 1904. A. PLUMMEK.

ANOINTING. — I. In the ancient world, Jewish
and pagan alike, it was customary to refresh guests
at banquets by pouring cool and fragrant ointment
on their heads. Cf. Mart. iii. 12 ; Ps 2.3^, where
Cheyne gives an Egyptian illustration : ' Every rich
man had in his household an anointer, who had to
place a cone of ointment on the head of his master,
where it remained during the feast.' There are
two instances of the usage in the Gospel history :

1. The anointing in the hnnse of Simon the
Pharisee (Lk "jsi-io^^ — Impressed by the fame of
Jesus and desirous of closer acquaintance with
one who was certainly a prophet, perhaps more,*
Simon bade Him to his table, inviting also a party
of his friends. He was a Pharisee of the better
sort, yet he shared the pride of his order and put
a difference betwixt Jesus and the other guests,
withholding from Him the customary courtesies :
the kiss of welcome, the ablution of the feet, the
anointing of the head. In the course of the meal
a woman appeared in the room, wearing her hair
loose, which in Jewish society was the token of a
harlot. t What did she in a Pharisee's house ?
She had come, a sorrowful penitent, in quest of
Jesus ; and she brought an offering, an alabaster
vase of ointment. As He reclined at table, she
stole to His couch and, stooping over His feet,
rained hot tears upon them, wiped them with her
flowing tresses, kissed them, and anointed them
with the ointment. She should have poured it on
His head, but she durst not. J

2. The anointing in the house of Simon the Leper
(Jn 12 1-11 = Mk 14*9 = Mt 266-13). —On His way up
to the last Passover, Jesus stopped at the village
of Bethany, Avhere, a few weeks before. He had
rai.sed Lazarus ; and, in defiance of theSanhedrin's
edict (Jn 115^), He was received with grateful rever-
ence. One of the principal men of the village,
named Simon, made a banquet in His honour.
He had been a leper, and, if he had been healed
by Jesus, it was fitting that his house should be

*.\ccording to the ii.l. 6 n-po(|)7)T7)? in v.^', Simon thought. losns
might be the prophet who should arise and herald the Messiah.
Cf. Jn 12t. Ji 6" ',*«.

i See Lightfoot on .Tn 123.

tOrig. in Maith. Comm. Ser. § 77 : ' Non fuit ansa ad caput
Christi venire sed lacryiuis pedes ejus lavit, quasi vi.x etiam
ipsis pedibus ejus digna'.'

the scene of the banquet.* But it was a public
tribute, and others bore a part in it. Lazarus was
present, and the good housewife Martha managed
the entertainment. And what part did Mary
take ? She entered the room with her hair loose
and an alabaster vase of precious ointment in her
hand, and, approaching the Lord's couch, poured
the ointment over His feet and wiped them with
her hair. See Mary.

There are several points of difference betvreen John's and
Matthew-Mark's accounts of the anointing: (1) Matthew and
Mark say that it happened in the house of Simon the Leper,
and make no mention of Lazarus and his sisters. They simply
say that the ' beautiful work ' was wrought by ' a woman.' {•>)
They seem to put the incident two days(Mt2C2^Mk 14"), whereas
John puts it si.\ days before the Passover (12i). (3) They repre-
sent the nameless woman as pouring the ointment not on the
Lord's feet but on His head, and say nothing of her wiping His
feet with her hair. On the ground of these discrepancies it
was generally maintained by the Fathers that there were two
anointings at Bethany, the incidents recorded by Mutthew-
Mark and John beingdistinct. So Chrysostoni {in Matth. l.\xxi),
who apparently identified the anointing in the house of Simon
the Leper (Mt.-Mk.) with that in the house of Simon the Pharisee
(Lk.). Origen {in Matth. Comm. Ser. § 77) held that there were
in all three anointings : {a) in the house of Simon the Leper
(Mt.-Mk.) ; (i) in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Lk.) ; (c) at
iiethany by Mary (Jn.) ; mentioning also the opinion that there
were four, Matthew and Mark recording distinct incidents.

Nowadays the tendency is rather to ignore the differences
and identity all the narratives, reducing them to one. The
Matthew-Mark narrative is regarded as authentic, the Lukan
and Johannine narratives being adaptations thereof (Strauss,
Ewald, Keim). Even in Origen'sday a similar view prevailed :
' multi quidem existimant de una eademque muliere quatuor
Evangelistas exposuisse.'

It hardly admits of reasonable doubt that there were two
anointings, one in the house of Simon the Pharisee, and the
other by Mary in the house of Simon the Leper at Bethany. t
The discrepancies in the triple account of the latter are not
inexplicable. (1) Matthew-Mark's omission of the names of
Lazarus and his sisters belongs to the larger question of the
Synoptic silence regarding the family at Bethany. (2) The
position of the incident in Matthew-Mark is merely an example
of the freedom wherewith the Synoptic editors were wont to
handle the material of the Evangelic tradition, arranging it
topically rather than chronologically. They have brought the
story into juxtaposition with the betrayal (Mt 26"-i^=Mk
I41C-11), evidently by way of casting light on the traitor's action.
The Lord's rebuke at the feast angered liini, and. burning for
revenge, he M ent and made his barg.iin with the high priests.
Cf. Aug. de. Cons. Ev. ii. § 153. (3) I'he difference regarding the
manner of the anointing is an instance of John's habit of tacitly
correcting his predecessors. His account is historical, and it
would stand so in the Apostolic tradition ; but the Synoptic
editors or, more probably, the catechisers in their oral repetition
of the tradition, wondering, since they did not know who the
woman was, .at the strangeness of her action, substituted ' head '
for 'feet,' and then omitted the unintelligible circumstance of
her wiping His feet with her hair. See Marv.

Literature. — Andrews, Life of our Lord, pp. 281-2S3; Eam-
s.ay. Was Christ Born at Bethlehem ? pp. 91-92 ; Hastings' DB.
articles ' Anointing ' and ' Mary ' ; Expositor, 1st ser. vi. [ISTT]
pp. 214-229 ; Ecce Homo i^ p. 232 ff. ; Bruce, Training of the
Tii-elve ", pp. 289-308 ; Ker, Sermons, 1st ser. p. 16 ff. ; Vinet,
Vital Christianity, p. 294 ff. Reference may also be made to
Vtwny^n, Jems. Sinner Saved (ed. 1765). pp. .5S-C2 ; Herbert,
Marie Magdalene \ Hartley Coleridge's fine sonnet on Lk 7*'.

DAVID SMITH.

II. Besides the two special incidents already
described, some other references to 'anointing'
may be briefly dealt with.

1. In Mt 6" Jesus tells His disciples that when
they fast they are to anoint (dXei^w) the head as
usual. The allusion is to that daily use of oil,
as an application soothing and refreshing to the
skin, which is common in hot countries, and was
regularly practised by the Jews. The meaning of
Jesus is that His disciples, when they feel it right
to fast, should undertake the observance as in the
sight of God, and not ostentatiously parade their
performance of it before the eyes of men. They
should wash and anoint themselves as usual, and
not draw attention by any peculiarities of outward
appearance to a matter lying between themselves
and their heavenly Father.

* Lazarus was not the host, but one of the guests (Jn 12').
The notion that his house was the scene of the banquet has
occasioned speculations about Simon. Theophylact mentions
the opinion that he was Lazarus' father, lately deceased (Ewald).

t So Aug. de Cons. Ev. ii. § 154.

ANSWERS

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

2. In Mk fii^ we read of the Twelve on their
evangehstic mission, that they 'anointed (dXelcpu)
with "oil many that were sick, and healed them.'
The employment of oil as a medicinal agent was
familiar in the time of Christ (cf. Lk lO^*, Ja 51^),
and is doubtless referred to here ; though the
natural virtues of the oil were accompanied in this
case by miraculous powers of healing. In Jn 9«- 1'
Jesus, before working the miracle upon the blind
man, anoints (eTnxpiw) his eyes with clay which He
had made by spitting on the ground. Here, also,
the anointing may have had a medicinal aspect
(see Meyer and Expositor'' s Gr. Test, in Joe. on the
ancient belief that both spittle and clay were
beneficial to the eyes) ; though, of course, it is the
miraculous agency of Jesus that is paramount in
the narrative. In Rev S^^ Jesus says to the Church
of the Laodiceans, ' . . . and anoint thine eyes
with eyesalve, that thou mayest see,' where the
effect of the application of collyrium is used as a
figure of the healing and enlightenment which are
found in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

3. In Mk 148 Jesus says of the gracious act of
Mary of Bethany in anointing Him at the feast,
'She hath anointed (/xi/p/fw fr. ixvpov= 'ointment ' ;
probably akin to nvppa = ' myrrh ') my body afore-
hand for the burying' (cf. Jn 12^). And in Mk UP
we read how Mary Magdalene and the other women
went to the sepulchre to anoint (dXet^w) the dead
body of the Saviour (cf. Lk 2W>\ Jn IIFJ-^O). This
application of ointments and spices (cf. Lk 24^)
was an expression of reverence and affection for
the departed, and may be compared with the
modern custom of surroundinp; the beloved dead
with fragrant and beautiful flowers. These un-
guents were not used for the purpose of embalming
the dead, as among the Egyptians, but were only
outwardly applied, and did not prevent decomposi-
tion (cf. Jn 1133).

4. When Jesus in the synagogue at Nazareth
read from Is 61 the prophetic words, ' The Spirit of
the Lord is upon me, because he anointed (xp^<^) me
to preach good tidings to the poor . . .' (Lk 4i*),
and went on to say, after closing the book, ' To-
day hath this scripture been fulfilled in your ears '
(v.-i). He definitely claimed to be set apart to the
Messianic calling. In the OT anointing was the
symbol of consecration alike in the case of prophet
(1 K 19'6), priest (Lv 8'-), and king (1 S IQi). And
in the case of Jesus, wlio to His people is at once
prophet, priest, and king, a spiritual anointing is
distinctly affirmed by His Evangelists and Apostles
as well as claimed by Himself (cf. Ac 4'^^ 10 8, He
P). The Hebrew word ' Messiah ' (O^F? from nt^f
' to anoint ') means ' the anointed one ' ; and of this
word 'Christ' is the Greek equivalent (xp'CTis,
from xp^w, ' to anoint,' being employed in LXX to
render 'TB^P).

5. In 1 Jn 2'^" the Apostle writes, ' And ye have
an anointing (xpi<r/iia) from the Holy One, and ye
know all things ' (so RV ; AV renders ' unction ').
Again, in v.-' he says, ' And as for you, the anoint-
ing (xpitr/xa) which ye received of him abideth in
you. . . . ' (here AV as well as RV gives ' anoint-
ing'). That the 'Holy One' of this passage is
Christ Himself, and that the 'anointing' He dis-
penses is the bestowal of the Holy Spirit, is held
by nearly all commentators. Being Himself an-
ointed with the Holy Ghost (Ac 10 -8), the Christ
has power to impart the same gift to His disciples.
Indeed, the bestowal of this gift is constantly
represented as His peculiar function (cf. Jn 15-'^
16'- 13-15, Ac 235).

Literature.— 11. B. Swcto, E. P. Gould, A. F. Ilort. and esp.
E. 11. I'lumptreon Mk6": also A. Plummer. and C. Watson on
1 -Jn 220. J c^ Lambert.

ANSWERS. — See Questions and Answers.

** Copyright, 1900, by

ANTIPAS.— See Herod, No. 2.
ANTONIA (Tower of).— See Temple.
ANXIETY.— See Care.
**APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE.—

i. Nam

e and Nature.

ii. Origin and History.

lii. The Apocalypses.

The Ethiopic Enoch.

The Slavonic Enoch.

The Sibvlline Oracles.

The .\ssumptiou of Moses.

Fourth Esdras.

The Syriac Barnch.

The Greek Barnch.

The Psalter of Sfllomon.

The Testaments of the XII Patriarchs.

10.

The Book of Jubilees.

11.

The Ascension of Isaiah.

12.

The Histories of Adam and Eye.

13.

The Apocalypse of Abraham.

14.

The Apocalyiise of Elias.

15.

The Apocalypse of Zephaniah.

16.

Anonymous Apocalypse.

17.

The Prayer of Joseph.

18.

The Book of Eld.ad and Modad.

iv. General Characteristics.

The Vision Form.

Dualism.

Symbolism.

Angelolofry.

The Unknown as subject-matter.

Pseudonymity.

Optimism.

V. Theolog-ical Ideas.

The Doctrine of the two .<Eons.

The Imi)ending Crisis.

The (.'onception of God.

Comple.v Cosmolopy.

Arch-enemy of (iod.

Doctrine of Man.

Doctrine of Sin.

The coming Messiah.

The Kesurrection.

10.

The Judgment.

11.

Punishment of the Wicked.

12.

The Reward of the Righteous.

13.

The Renovation of the World.

14.

Predestination.

vi. Con

tact with the New Testament.

Apocalyptic Forms in the New Testament

Current Phraseology: Son of Man, etc.

Quotations.

Influence of Ideas.

Treatment of Common Questions.

Literature.

i. Name and Nature. — The term ' apocalypse '
(dTTo/cdXui/'ts from a-rroKaXvirTw, to uncover) signifies
in the first place the act of uncovering, and thus
bringing into sight that which was before unseen,
hence ' revelation.' It is predominantly a NT word.
It occurs rather rarely in extra-biblical Greek, is
used only once in the canonical portion of the LXX
(1 S 20»), and thrice in Sirach (ll^^ 222' 42i [41-23]).
In the NT it is used to designate the disclosing or
communicating of knowledge by direct Divine act.
The gospel is an apocalypse to the nations (Lk 23^,
Ro lO'^"--''). St. Paul received it as an apocalypse
(Gal 1^-). The manifestation of Je.«us Christ in
glory is an apocalypse (Gal 2^ 2 Co 12i- ', 2 Th I'',
1 P 1'- 13 413).

An apocalypse is thus primarily the act of revela-
tion ; in the second place it is the subject-matter
revealed ; and in the third place a book or literary
production which gives an account of revelation,
whether real or alleged {e.g. 'The Apocalypse of
St. John the Divine '). Asa matter of history, the
form in which the revelation purports to come is
of the utmost importance in determining the ques-
tion whether a writing should be called an apoca-
lypse or not. In general, the form is like the
drawing of the veil from before a picture, the
result of which action presents to the eye a definite
image. All imparting of Divine truth is revela-
tion ; but it is not all given in the apocalyptic
form, i.e. it does not all come in grand imagery, as
if portrayed on canvas or enacted in scenic repre-

Cliarlea Scribner' a Sons

80 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

sentation. Some revelations come in sub-conscious
convictions. Those who receive them do not feel
called upon to give an account of the way in
which they have received them. In fact they seem
ignorant of the method of communication ; they
only know that they have received knowledge
not previously possessed. Apocalypse and revela-
tion thus, though primarily the same thing, come
to be distiugnislied from each other.

The term ' apocalypse ' is also sometimes used,
with an effort at greater precision, to designate
the pictorial portraiture of the future as fore-
shadowed by the seer. When so employed it
becomes appropriate only as the title of certain pas-
sages ill books otherwise not to be called apoca-
lyi)ses (so IJousset in Ilerzog-Hauck, PliE,s.v., who
euuinerates the following pas.sages: Dn 2'-^'-; Eth.
EnS.J-itl. ;J7-71 ; Ps-Sol 2. 17. 18 ; the Assumption
of Moses ; Slav. En. ; 4 Ezra ; Syr. Bar. ; Sibyl.
Orac. iii. 280 to the end, iii. 30-92, iv., the Jewish
source of i. and ii. ; also certain sections of the
Apoc. John and 2 Th 2^i-; Mt 24 with parallels).

To constitute a writing an apocalypse, it is not
necessary that the author should have actually
seen or experienced what he portrays. It is enough
tliat he write as one who has had a vision and is
describing it. Thus apocalypse becomes a form
of literature precisely in the same manner as an
epistle. Strictly an epistle is simply a letter from
one person, or many persons, to another, or others.
But, as a matter of usage, it has often been
adopted as a form into which men have chosen to
cast their thoughts for the public. The same is
true of tlie dialogue, of fiction, and many other
species of literature. Such forms become favourites
in certain ages, usually after some outstanding
character has made successful use of them. The
dialogue became fashionable when Plato made it
such a telling medium for the teaching of his philo-
sophical system. The epistle was used by Horace,
and later by Seneca. The apocalypse form appears
as a favourite about the beginning of the 2nd
cent. it.c. The most illustrious specimen, and
perhaps the prototype of later apocalyptic litera-
ture, is the Book of Daniel.

ii. OniGiN AND History. — The question has
been mooted as to the earlier antecedents of the
apocalyptic form. Its ultimate source has been
traced variously to Egypt, Greece, Babylonia, and
Persia. In view of the fact, however, that the
Hebrew prophets frequently incorporate visions
into their writings (IsO, Jer 24i-3, Ezk I^t, Is 24-27),
it is scarcely necessary to go outside of Israel to
search for its origins. Nevertheless, the Persians,
the Babylonians, the Egyptians, and the Greeks
had tlieir apocalyptics. And it would be a mistake
to ignore the intluence especially of Persian forms
during the period of the formation of Jewish apoca-
lyptics. This was the very period when Jewish
forms came most directly into touch with Persian.
In any case, nuxch of the material of the Jewish
apocalypse has been adopted and naturalized from
Persia (cf. Bnusset, Die Jiid. Apokalyptik, 1903 ;
Gunkel, Srhopfiuvj u. Chaos, 1895), Apocalyptic
literature in general begins before Christ. Soon
after the Christian era it develops into the two
naturally distinct forms of Christian and neo-
llebraic. Hence we may distinguish three classes
of apocalypses:— (1) The earlier Jewish ones, or
those which were published from n.c. 200 to a.p.100.
"Within this class, however, may be included also
sucii writings as proceed from Jewish sources
purely, though not written until half a century,
more or less, later than the last limit of the period.
(2) Christian apocalyp.ses, including the canonical
book known as the Apocalypse (Hevelation of St.
John), and a series of apocryp'.ial imitations.
These are mostly pseudonymous, but include an

occasional work in which the author does not con-
ceal his name behind that of an apostle or older
prophet {The Shepherd of Hermas). Apocalypses
of this class pass into Patristics and culminate in
Dante's immortal C'omjnefZiff. (3) The neo-Hebraic
apocalypses, beginning with the predominance of
the Talmud (especially the Babylonian) and in-
cluding a series of revelations to the great Eabbis
{The Bevelation of B. Joshna b. Levi, The Alpha-
bets of Ii. Akiba, The Hebrew Elijah Apocalypse,
The Apocalypse of Zerubbabel, The Wars of Kin(j
Messiah, Tlie Bevelations of B. Simon b. Yohai,
The Prayer of B. Simon b. Yohai, and the Persian
Apocalypse of Daniel).

It would be somewhat beside the purpose of this
article to do more than sketch the first of these
three classes of apocalypses. On the other hand,
as Christ emerged in history at a definite period
and in a definite environment, and as in this en-
vironment nothing is more conspicuous and potent
than the early Jewish apocalyptic literature, the
importance of this literature cannot be overesti-
mated. A flood of light is shed by the form and
content of these writings upon His life, teaching,
and work. Happily, considerable attention has
been given in recent years to this as a field of
investigation, and some definite results may be
registered.

iii. The Apocalypses. — Of the earlier Jewish
apocalypse, the canonical Daniel forms the proto-
type. The proper place, however, for a particular
treatment of Daniel is conventionally the sphere
of Old Testament Introduction (see art. • Daniel '
in Hastings' DB vol. i.). Our list will begin with
the Books of Enoch.

1. The Ethiopic Enoch.— The adjective 'Ethiopic'
has been attached to the title of this work because
of another Book of Enoch discovered in a Slavonic
version. Outside the canonical Daniel, this is the
best known of the apocalypses, because of the quo-
tation from it in Jude i'"'-. Tertullian knows it,
believes in its genuineness, and attempts to account
for its transmission through and survival under the
vicissitudes of the Flood. It appears to have been
neglected, however, through the Middle Ages, and
lost until 1773, when two MS copies of an Ethiopic
version of it were brought from Abyssinia by
J. Bruce. A translation of one of these was made
by Lawrence, and published in 1821. But its full
importance and significance came to be realized
only with Dillmann's critical edition of the Ethiopic
text in 1851, which was followed in 1853 by a
thorough German translation and commentary.
A portion of the Greek text was discovered in
1880-7, and edited by H. B. Swete.

Contents. — As it stands to-day, the Book of
Enoch can be subdivided into five main parts with
an introduction and a conclusion, as follows : In-
troductory Discourse, in which the author an-
nounces his parable, and formally asks attention
to the important matters which he is about to
divulge (1-5).

(a) The first section is concerned with Angelology
(6-36), beginning with the report of the fall of two
hundred angels who were enticed by tlie beauty of
the daughters of men, and left heaven in order to
take them for wives. Out of tliese unions sprang
giants 3000 cubits in height. The fallen angels,
moreover, taught men all manner of secrets where-
by they were led into sin. AVhen the giants had
consumed all the possessions of men, they turned
against the men themselves and smote them until
their cry went up to heaven. Ringleaders of the
angels are Azazel and Semjaza (6-9). Through the
intercession of the four archangels, Michael, Uriel,
Raphael, and Gabriel, God is moved to arrest
bloodshed upon earth. He sends Uriel to Noah
to tell him that He has determined to destroy tb-^

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 81

world. He commands Raphael to bind Azazel and
throw him into a pit in the wilderness, where he
shall remain until the day of the great judgment,
and then be cast into the fire. He commands
Gabriel to rouse the giants against each other;
and, finally, he commands Michael to announce to
Semjaza the sentence of punishment, which is,
that the fallen angels shall be kept enchained and
imprisoned under the hills of the earth, waiting
the last judgment, when they shall be cast into
the fire (10). After the destruction of all impiety
upon earth, the righteous shall flourish and live
long, the earth shall yield abundantly, all people
shall pray to God, and all evil shall be banished
from the earth (11). The sentence upon the fallen
angels is communicated to Enoch (12), and he
reveals it to them ; but, at their urgent request,
he composes a petition on their behalf, that they
might obtain forgiveness ; while rehearsing this,
preparatory to presenting it, he falls asleep and is
informed in a dream that their request for forgive-
ness will not be granted, and once more makes
known to the angels their impending doom (13-16).
Enoch tells of a journey in which he learned of the
places where thunders and lightnings originate,
and saw the stream of Hades, the corner-stone and
the pillars of the world, the seven mountains of
precious stones, and the places of punishment of
the disobedient angels, i.e. the stars (17-19). He
gives the names and functions of the six (seven)
archangels (20). He once more visits the place of
punishment of the condemned angels, and the
nether world (21), consisting of four parts (22).
He travels to the West (23-25). From there he
returns to the city of Jerusalem, which is the
centre of the earth (26. 27) ; then he travels to
the East (28-33), to the North (34. 35), and, lastly,
to the South (36).

(h) The second section is Christological, and con-
sists of chs. 37-71, subdivided into three Simili-
tudes. A short introductory discourse (37) is fol-
lowed by the first Similitude, including chs. 38-44.
The appearance of the Messiah, the righteous One,
bi'ings an end of sinners upon earth (38). Enoch
is carried by storm-clouds to the end of heaven,
and there beholds the pre-existing Kingdom of
God, the dwellings of the righteous and the elect,
and of angels and archangels (39. 40). He then
•sees the weighing of men's actions in the balance,
the rejection of sinners, the places prepared for the
righteous, and certain physical mysteries (light-
nings, thunders, winds, hail, mist, clouds, sun and
moon, 41), also the place of Wisdom in heaven (42),
and, finally, some more physical mysteries (43. 44).
The second Similitude includes chs. 45-57. It
begins with the Messianic Judgment (45). Enoch
sees the Son of Man beside the Head of Days (46).
An angel explains the vision (47, the Son of Man
will overthrow and judge the kings and mighty
ones of the ungodly). The task of the pre-existing
Son of Man is outlined (48. 49), and the happy con-
sequences of the judgment for the pious, together
with the punishments of the wicked, and the resur-
rection of those who have died in righteousness
(50. 51). In a vision of six mountains of metal
which pass away, the destruction of the heathen
world by the Messiah is portrayed. The heathen
world endeavours through offerings to propitiate
God, but fails. The angels of punishment go forth
to do their work. The synagogue service may now
be carried on unhindered (52-546). An account of
the coming flood and its occasion is inserted (54'''-
55 '■^), and is followed by the final assault of the
heathen world-power (bb^-^) and the return of the
dispersed Jews (57). The third Similitude com-
prises chs. 58-69, to which chs. 70 and 71 are added
by way of an appendix. It begins with the picture
oi' the blessedness of the righteous in heaven (58) ;
VOL. I. — 6

an account of the mystery of lightning and thunder
follows (59). A vision of Noah, an account of
Leviathan and Behemoth, and various nature-
elements which take part in the Flood are then given
(60). The judgment of the Son of Man over the
angels in heaven, and the sentence of kings by Him,
followed by vain pleas on their part for mercy, are
given next (01-64). Then comes the revelation to
Noah of the fall of the angels, the Flood, his own
preservation, the punishment of the angels, and
the judgment of men by the Son of Man (65-(i9).
Enoch's translation to Paradise, his ascension to
heaven, and his acceptance by the Son of Man, are
then given in the appendix (70, 71).

(c) The third section is Cosmoloffical,ar\d consists
of chs. 72-82. It has been called the ' Book of the
Luminaries of Heaven.' It contains a revelation
given by the angel Uriel on all sorts of astronomi-
cal and geographical matters, among others on the
convulsions that will occur during the period of
the wicked upon earth. The course of the sun is
first described (72), next the course of the moon
(73. 74) ; untoward days (75) ; the winds (76) ; tiie
four quarters of heaven (77) ; further details re-
garding the rising and setting of the sun (78. 79),
changes in the order of things to come in the last
days (80), and the return of Enoch to the earth;
and the committal of these matters to Methusaleh
(81. 82).

((2) The fourth section is a Historical forecast.
Enoch narrates to his son Methusaleh two visions
which he saw before he had taken a wife to him-
self. The first of these (83. 84) came to him as he
was learning to write. It placed before his eyes
the picture of the Deluge. The second vision
(85-90) unfolded before him the whole history of
Israel from the creation of man to the end of time.
The children of Israel appeared in this vision in
the forms of the clean animals (bulls, sheep, lambs,
and goats). Their enemies were in the form of
dogs, foxes, swine, and all manner of birds of prey.
In the conflict between the clean and unclean, the
struggle of Israel against her enemies was por-
trayed. The chosen people were delivered into
the hands of lions, tigers, wolves, and jackals
(the Assyrians and Babylonians) ; then they were
put under the care of seventy shepherds (angels).
(From this fact this section of the book takes the
title of 'Vision of the Seventy Shepherds'). The
shepherds allowed more of the faithful to perish
than was the will of God, but at the critical
moment there appeared a white lamb in their
midst and entered into a fierce combat with the
birds of prey, while a heavenly being gave him
assistance. Then the Lord Himself burst forth
from heaven, the enemies of Israel were over-
thrown and exterminated, the judgment ensued,
and the universal restoration ; and the Messiah
was born as a white bull.

(e) The fifth section (91-105) is a Book of
Exhortations. Enoch commands his son Methu-
saleh to summon to his side all his other sons,
and when they have come he delivers to them
an address on righteousness, which is especially
designed to instruct the righteous of all ages
(91 1-11). In this first discourse is inserted the
prediction of the Ten Weeks (91i2-i7 93). The
remainder of the book (92. 94. 105) is taken up with
final encouragements and messages of hope.

The conclusion of the whole Book of Enoch
(106-108) contains an account of the marvels
destined to accompany the birth of Noah (106. 107),
and a new description of the fiery tribulations
reserved for the wicked and of the blessings that
await those who ' loved eternal heaven better
than their own lives ' (108).

Literary feattirea. — Thus far the Book of Enoch h.is heen
treated as it is extant. A closer inspection reveals the fact that

82 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

it is composite. Criticism is still In a considerable state of flux
as to the cont-ct analysis of it. Charles believes it to consist of
five inimarv documents. Clemen finds in it seven separate
Knoch traditions or k-'.'ends worked toj^etlier by a redactor.
The weii,'lit of probabilitv. however, is rather in favour of three
primitive documents : (i) A IJook of Knoch, consisting? of chs.
!-".(; and 7'2-l(l.5: (2) A IJook ofSimilitudes, includingchs. 3C-tl ;
and V^) a Noachic document, broken up and inserted in various
p:irts within the pri-i'cdiiifr two. The work of redaction appears
to have been <lone after the two jirimarv documents had under-
gone some modification, possibly accidental. The redactor used
the lost Apocalvpso of Noah, alluded to in Jubilees (lO'^ 'il'"),
supplementing' "what he deemed to be lacunn\ The passages in-
serted from the liook of Noah are the following : 54'-0u2 CO.
Cf)'-(ilt=f', and lOG. 107. To these some would add several other
jiussajres.

The ilate of the first of these documents is the first quarter of
the tind cent. is.r. (200 to 175) ; that of the Hook of Similitudes
oilers an as yet unsolved ])roblem whose dilliculty is somewhat
enhanced bv the importance of the issue involved, i.e. the rela-
tion the book sustains to the NT. The fact that this relation
is undoubted and intimate has quickened interest and led to the
])erception of slitrht considerations otherwise easily left out of
view. The weij^ht of these considerations is, moreover, so well
balanced that criticism seems unable to reach a genenal con-
sen.^us on the subject. The views that divide the tield are (1)
that the book was composed in the Maccabffian period (Ewald,
II. r. 144) ; (!') that it was produced between B.C. 'Jo and 04 (l)ill-
maiui, Siell'ert. Charles) ; (3) that it was written during' the days
of llerod (Liicke, Ilausr.ath, Lipsius, Schodde, Schurer, Halden-
sperger, Hecr) ; (4) that it is a product of the 2nd cent., and
written by a Christian who has used an older Jewish ai)ocalypse
as a basis (llotfmann, Weisse, llilgenfeld, Volkmar, Tidernan);
(r>) that though a Jewish apocalypse and possibly written before
the beginning of the Christian era, it was interpolated by a
Christian through the insertion of the ' Son of Man ' passages
(Drummond, Stalker). That the book should have been com-
posed as a Jewish apocalypse and as such adopted the Messianic
title ' Son of Man ' froni the Christian Gospels, is not to be
thouirht of. That it should have been originally a Jewish
apooalypse and modified by a Christian, either with a free
hand or by the mechanical interpolation of the ' Son of Man '
passages, is credible. But a more natural hypothesis is that it
was a pre-Christian work, inclusive of the ' Sou of Man ' passages.

It has be<'n demonstrated by Baldensperger and Dalman that
the title ' Son of Man ' occurs in Jewish rabbinical writings as
the name of the Messiah (Dan Se/bstbeicus^tseiii Jexu^, p. 90 ;
M'on/n of Jcxits, p. 234 f ); and there is therefore nothing in the
occurrence of this phrase to lead to its being considered due to
a Christian author. Upon the whole It is probable that the
book was produced in the 1st cent. B.C. The redaction is diffi-
cult to locate with precision and m.ay be post-Christian.

The originals of the book were undoubtedly Semitic (Hebrew
or Aramaic). The fragment of the Greek version recently dis-
covered shows clear evidences of being the translation of a
Semitic original (the case is argued conclusively by Charles,
Book iif Enoch, pp.21, 22, 325, and M^aXkyy , Journal Aiiat. 1SS7,
pp. •■Sitl^Vih).

K'/i/io,is.—(l) Ethiopic Text: Lawrence (1838), Dillmann
(I ■>.')1), Fleinming ( 'J'exte u. Unieriiuch., Neue Folge, vii. 1, ]902).
(2) Greek Fragments: Bouriant (1892), Lods (1892), Charles
(1S93). Swete (1897).

(3) Triinslationfi. — English: Lawrence(partial, 1821), Schodde
(lNyJ),Charles(lS93).— German: lIott'mann(lS33-]S3S),Uillmann
(lN")3), Flemmingand Eadermacher (1901). — French: Lods (the
Greek Fragments only, 1892).

LiTKis.vTCRK.— (See"Charles, Sonl: of Enoch, pp. 9-21); Lucke,
Einl. iiid. Ofenh.Joh(iH.{\'^h-i): V.v;si\A.Abhandl.ub.d. Eth. B.
Jfi'iiochilSX)); Hoffmann, "(yb.d.Eutstehungszeit d. B. Henoch,
in ZDMtr, 1S.VZ, pp. 87-91; Kiistlin, ' Ub. d. Entstehung.d. B.
Henoch' in Theol. Jahrb. ISOO, i)p. 240-279, 370-:586 ; Geb-
lianlt, 'Die 70 Hirten d. B. Henoch' in Merx' Archiv, vol. ii.
l->72, pp. 1G3-246 ; Wieseler, ' Zur Abfassungszeit d. B. Henoch '
in ZhMG, 1882, pp. 185-195; Lawlor in Joiirn. of Philol. 1897,
pp. lW-225; Clemen, 'Die Zusammensetzung d. B. Henoch,
etc' in .SA', 1898, i)p. 210-227; Stalker, The Christology of Jesus,
1899, A pp. B, pp. 209-294.

2. The Slavonic Enoch. — This is one of the most
rt'ceiit additions to our sroup of apocalypses. Its
existence was not indeed suspected before its dis-
covery. But this was due to the fact that a num-
ber of brioks were attributed to Enoch. In this
very work Enoch is said to have -written 306 ; cf.
L'o" (IS'. And because some of those were extant
in the Etiuopic book no one thought of seeking for
more. Nevertheless, it was no source of surprise
wlicn it was announced that a new Enoch had
been found. Tliis came first as an intimation that
a copy of a Slavonic version of tlie Etliiopic Enoch
was in existence (Kozak in Jahrb. f. Prot. Theol.
1M'.I2). I'rof. Charles started to investigate the
matter, and with the assistance of Mr. Moriill
))rocure(l and examined printed copies of tlie
Slavonic text in question. The lesult was the
publication of the altogether independent and

hitherto unknown p.seudepigraph (1896). Prof.
Charles' title for the book is The Book of the
Secrets of Enoch, but it is likely to be known in
the future by the more convenient title, The
Slavonic Enoch,* which distinguishes it from the
better known and older Ethiopic work.

Contents. — The book may be divided into three
parts, viz. (1) The Ascension of Enoch and his
travelsin the Seven Heavens (1-38). (2) The Eeturn
and Instructions to his children (39-56). (?>) Second
Series of Instructions, including in his audience an
assemblage of 2000 people, and final assumption
(57-68).

(a) Chs. 1-38. The book opens with a short pro-
logue, introducing the personality of Enoch, and
giving the time and place of a dream he saw (1).
Enoch then warns his children of his impending
absence from them for a time (2) ; he is taken by
two angels up to the first heaven (3), where he sees
200 angels who guard the treasuries of the snow,
the dew, and the oil (4-6). He is next taken np
into the second heaven, and beholds and converses
with the fallen angels (7). In the third heaven, the
paradise prepared for the righteous (8. 9), he is led
to the northern region, where he sees the places of
torture (10). From thence he is taken up into the
fourth heaven, the habitation of the sun and moon,
and there sees the phcenixes and chalkadris (chnlky-
dries), mysterious composite beings with heads of
crocodiles and bodies of serpents (11. 12). In the
eastern portion of the fourth heaven he comes to
the gates of the sun (13) ; thence he is led to the
western regions, and hears a song by the phrenixes
and chalkydries (II. 15). He is then taken to the
eastern course, and hears indescribable music by
angels (16. 17). Here his visit to the fourth heaven
ends; he is carried to the fifth heaven, where he
sees the Grigori or Watchers (18). In the sixth
heaven he delays only a short time, and thence
passes to the seventh (19. 20), where the Lord is
seated on a high throne. Here the ministering
angels who have brought him take their departure ;
Enoch falls down and worships the Lord ; he is
stripped of his earthly clothing, anointed, and
robed in suitable apparel ; he is given over to
Vretil, the archangel (patron of literature), to be
instructed (21. 22). Under the guidance of this
archangel he writes 366 books (23). He returns
into the presence of the Lord, and holds direct con-
verse with Him, learning the secrets of creation
(24-29-i), and of the formation of 10,000 angels and
the fall of Satanail (29^-^) ; also of the creation
of man, i.e. Adam and Eve (30), his being placed
in paradise, his fall and judgment (31. 32). God
then declares His purposes for the future (33. 34),
and sends him back to the earth to stay thirty days
longer and teach his children the true knowledge
of God (35-38).

(b) Ch.s. 39-56, Enoch now begins his admoni-
tions and instructions to his children (39); he tells
of the manner in which he was given his visions,
and of how he wrote them down (40) ; of how he
wept for the sins of Adam (41) ; of his visit to the
gates of hell, and the impression produced upon
him (42); of the judgment of the Lord (43); of the
duty of charity (44) ; of the superiority of a contrite
and broken heart to sacrifice as a means of pleas-
ing God (45) ; of God's love of purity in heart and
His rejection of the sacrifices of the impure (46) ;
and commends his writing to them as a permanent
means of knowing God's will (47. 48). He further
instructs them not to swear by heaven or the
earth, and deprecates vengeance (49. 50) ; he urges
them to be generous to the poor, not to hoard up
trea,sures on earth (51), to praise God, and to be at
peace with men (52). He enjoins them not to

* Bous.set quotes tliese two works as I and II Enoch respec-
tively (Die lieliijion dcs Judenthums, 1903).

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 83

trust in his own intercession with God, but to give
heed to his writings and be wise (53) ; and closes
his address with an exhortation to circulate his
writings, announcing at the same time that the
hour for his ascension to heaven has come (54. 55).
(c) Chs. 50-67. Tlie second series of Exhorta-
tions opens with a request by Metliosalem for a
blessing over the houses and children of Enoch
(58); Enoch asks Methosalem to call his brothers
together (57), and gives them his instructions (58),
especially that they should not eat the flesh of
cattle (59), nor kill any man through ' net,'
'weapon,' or 'tongue' (60); but practise right-
eousness, and trust in repentance for the future
(61. 62), and not despise the humble and thus
incur God's curse (63). At this point God calls
Enoch with a loud voice, and 2000 persons come
together to give him their greetings (64); he
delivers his final exhortations to them, which are
to the effect that they should fear and serve the
Lord (65. 66). A thick darkness covers the earth,
and while it lasts Enoch is taken up, but no one
knows how (67). The book concludes with a
summary of Enoch's life and work, and an account
of Methosalem's building an altar upon the spot
where his father was last seen before his ascension.

Literary questions. — The author of the work was an Alex-
andrian .Jew. This is made clear by the affinities of his style
and thought with those of Philo, his use of the LXX, his por-
traiture of phrenixes and chalkadris (ehalkydries), and his
syneretistic cosmogony. The date of composition cannot be
later than a.d. TO. The temple was evidently still standing, and
sacrifice was offered (59-) . But the Ethiopic Enoch was also in
existence (4()5-3, of. also 432- 3 52* 012- *).

The original language was undoubtedly Greek. This is proved
by the explanation of the name Adam, which is made upon
the basis of the Greek form AAAM, each letter representing one
of the cardinal points of the compass (ANATOAU, AYSI2.
AI»lvT(>2, MESH.M15PIA). The book was known and used by
Barnabas, by the author of the Ascension of Isaiah, by the
autlior of tlie Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, hy soma
of the many Sibvls, and by Irena?us.

Editions.— Tha Slavonic text has been published from different
manuscripts, varying more or less from one another, and not as
yet fully collated (Popoff, ISSO).

Translations. — English: Charles and Morfill, The Book of the
Sieerets of Enoch, lS9t;.— German: Bonwetsch, 'Das Slavische
Ilenochbuch' in Abhandl. d. Goit. tfes. d. lf'i«s. (Phil.-hist.
Klasse, Neue Folg. 1-3, 1S96V

LiTBR.VTURE. — llarnack, Gesch. d. Altchrist. Litt. ii. 1, 1S97,
p. .5(U ; Charles in Hastings' DB, 1S9S; Volz, JM. Eschato-
lo(/ie, 1903, pp. 29, 30.

3. The Sibylline Oracles.— The name ' sibyl ' is
of uncertain derivation. Even the spelling of the
word varies in the earliest period. It is, however,
a very ancient one, and occurs as early as in the
works of Ileraclitus. By the Romans a number
(ten) of sibyls were distinguished. The one of
Erythr:e in Ionia is reckoned the oldest. The
sibyl of Cum;Te (Kyme) became the most famous.
Large collections of verses were circulated under
her name during the latter years of the common-
wealth and the early empire. Sibylline verses
became common in Egypt, and there arose a so-
called Jewish sibyl sinmltaneously with the ap-
pearance of the spirit of proselytism among the
Jews. Finally, a Christian sibyl came into ex-
istence in succession to and imitation of the Jewish
one. The productions of the Jewish and Christian
sibyls are for the most part blended into one body.
They constitute a compilation of hexameters in
twelve Books, besides some fragments. Each of
these is evidently independent of the others, and
may have circulated separately.

Contents. — Book I. opens with an account of the
Creation, based upon Genesis. This is followed by
the story of the Fall, the multiplication of man-
kind, the appearance of four successive races down
to the days of the giants, the story of Noah and
the P'lood, a sixth race and the Titans from whom
the transition is made to Christ, and the dispersion
of the Jews. —Book IL predicts a time of plagues
and wickedness, which is succeeded by the tenth

race (the Romans), and a period of peace. After
an interpolation of a group of proverbs, the woes
of the last generations are portrayed, and the
events of the last day of judgment and resurrection
are foretold. Then follows a picture of the punish-
ment of the wicked and the blessedness of the
righteous. — Book III. extols the unity and power
of God, denounces idolatry, proclaims the cuniing
of the Great King, and of his opponent Beliar,
foreshadows the reign of a woman (Cleopatra), and
the subjection of the world to Christ. At this
point the sibyl returns to the origin of man, and
beginning with the Tower of Babel recounts the
story as given in the OT down to Roman days.
She foretells the doom of Rome, and of many
Asiatic cities, as well as of the islands of the
iEgean. A general judgment and millennium
(Messianic Day) closes the book. — Book IV. de-
clares the blessedness of the righteous, sketches
successively the Assyrian and IMedo-Fersian domi-
nations, announcing the Greek conquest, which
will bring woes on Phrygia, A.sia, and Egypt ; one
great king especially will cause calamities to fall
on Sicily and Greece. After the Macedonian will
come a Roman conquest. The impious will s-uffer
many evils, and a general resurrection, judgment
and retribution will follow. — Book V. opens with
a prophecy of the reign of the Roman emperors ;
it then pas.ses in review the calamities impending
on Egypt and Asia Minor ; it breaks out into a
felicitation of the Jews and Judrea, and of the
heavenly Joshua, and once more returns to further
details of judgment, such as the destruction of
SerapLs, Isis, and the Ethiopians. — Book VI. de-
scribes the pre-existence, incarnation, and baptism
of the Son of God, His teaching and miracles,
the miseries in store for the guilty land, and the
glories of the Cross. — Book VII. is an account of
the woes impending upon various lands and cities
of Greece, Asia Miner, and Egypt, in which just
one prediction of the signs of the Messiah is incor-
porated. — Book VIII. is a history of the world
under five monarchies. The fifth of these furnishes
the subject for a prophecy of misery, judgment,
and destruction. From this the sibyl passes to the
denunciation of woes upon Egypt, the islands of
the Mediterranean, and Persia, and closes with a
picture of the Messiah. — Books IX. and X. are in
fragments. — Book XI. is an orderly story of the
world-powers from the time of the Tower of Balel
to the subjection of Egypt under Cleopatra. —
Book XII. pictures the fortunes of the Ctesars,
beginning with Augustus and closing with Alex-
ander Severus. — Book XIII. concerns the times of
the emperors of the 1st cent., beginning with
Maximin. It touches more especially upon their
relations with the Persians and Syrians, closing
with an allegory of a bull, a stag, a lion, and a
£Toat. — Book XIV. is the most obscure of the
Sibylline productions. The writer evidently in-
tends to unfold the fortunes of a long succession
of emperors and conquerors. He gives the initial
letter of the name of each, and suggests other
ways of identification. But his descriptions are
so wide of the historical figures that they cannot
be safely identified. The period portrayed is
generally the late Roman and possibly the early
Byzantine.

Literary questions. — The above division into books was
m.ide in the 6th cent, of the Christian era (during the reign of
Justinian). Whoever made it is also responsible for the collection
of the orac'es from various sources, and the insertion of certain
verses of his own among them. It has been conjectured that
he was a literary monastic and export trnnscribcr of manu-
scripts. Before" his time the verses were circulated in a rude,
undigested mass. The task of unravelling the confusion, which
does not seem to have disturbed him, and of rearranging the
material according to authorship and date of origin, is a very
complex one, and not as vet fully accomplished. This much is
evident, however, that there are four classes of utterances in the

84 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

oracles • (1) those which issue from a Jewish source ; (2) those
which come liom a Christian : (3) those which are of heathen
oriL'in ; and (4) neutral elements. The last ol these adds very
much to tlie dilticultv of the critical proble.n. Ihe heathen
elcu-nts are not vel-y extensive, and attach themselves in
Kcneral to tlie .Jewish. For the rest, the analysis which results
from the labours of Kwald and Ale.'waudrc may be sately adopted
as workable, and is as follows: —

The Slbvllinc Oracles may be grouped into eight parts, each
bv a dilfcrent author and from a ditferent affe, as follows— (.1)
The lV..lof,'ueof Book I. and Hook HI., 97-82S, belong to the age
of I'tolemv I'hvscon (ii.r. 14(1). They were therefore written by
on Al.v^anilriari Jew. They constitute the pith and kernel ot
the whole collection in point of value for the study of mter-
Teslamentul conditions and modes of thought, and for the
times of Jesus. (2) Book IV. was written about a.d. bO Its
author may have been either a Christian or a Jew, with the
probabilitv largely in favour of the former alternative. (d)
hook v., "with the possible exception of the first part, issued
from the 1st cent, a.d., and is a mixture of Jewish and Christian
fra"ments impossible to ilisentangle from each other. (4) Books
V 1 and VII. vto which Ewald adds the first part of Book \ .) date
from the earlv part of the ;}rd century. The author was a
hereticJil Chris'tian. (5) Book VIII., 1-300, is also by a Christian,
but not a heretic, probablv of the middle of the 3rd century.
(6) Book VIII., 361-501, is also bv an orthodox Christian of the
8rd centurv. (") Hook I. (without the Prologue), Book II., and
Book 111." l-?."), come from the middle of the 3rd cent., and are
of Christian origin. (S) Books XI., XII., XIII., and XIV. were
written by a Jew resident in Egypt, who, however, lived in
Christian "times, and is acquainte'd with some Christian prac-
tices. According to this analysis, these oracles cover a period
of more than 400 years in their production, and represent a wide
variety of tvpes o"f thought. ,„ ,

Ed I (ions. —The tirst eight books in the original Greek text
were published in ItAb .it Basel, and subsequently by others up
to Angelo Mai (1S19 and 1S2S, Milan). The first complete edition
Is that of Alexandre (1&41, and again 1S69). Recent critical
editions bv Uzach (IS91), Getfcken (1902), and Heitz (1903).

TtymnliiUoxx.'—Laiin : Sebastian Castalio (1546), Angelo Mai
(1S17).— English : Flover (prose, 1731), M. S. Terry (metrical,
189<))._French : Bouch^-Leclercq in Mevuecle I'llistoire deft
UeligioiiH, vols. vii. 18*5, pp. 236-248; viii. 188.3, pp. 619-6:35;

Ix. 1S84, pp. 220-233 (left incomplete).— German : Friedlieb
(1S.')2), Blass (of III. IV. and V. in Kautzsch's Pseudepigr.
1900).

Literati-re.— (See Englemann, BihUntheca Scripiorum
C/axxicorum, 1880, i. p. 528) ; Bleek, ' tTb. d. Entstehung u.
Zusammensetz. d. Sibvl. Or.' in Theol. ZeiUchr., herausg. v.
Schleiermacher, de Wette, u. Lucke, i. 1819, pp. 120-246; ii.
1820, pp. 172-2.39; Ililgenfeld, 'Die J&dische Sibyllen-Weissa-
gung ' in Z WTIi, 16C0, pp. 313-319 ; also 1871, pp. 30-50 ; Ewald,
Abhandluna iib. Entstehung, Inhalt u. Wert. d. SibyH.
Bucher, IS.'kS; Laroque, 'Sur la date du troisieme Livre Sib.'
in HevueArch&olog., 1869, pp. 269-270 ; Bernhardy, GrundHss
der Griech. Lilt., iii. (ii. 1, pp. 441-453, 1867) ; Buresch, ' Die
Pseudosib. Or.' in Jalirbb. f. Claxx. Phil. 1891, pp. .529-555;
1892, pp. 27.3-308 ; Friedlander, ' La Sibylle Juive ' In REJ, 1894,
pp. 18:1-196; Ilarnack, Gexeh. d. Alichrist. Litt. i. 762, 861-
863 ; ii. 581-589 ; SchOrer, IIJP ii. iii. 271-292.

4. The Assumption of Moses.— There is some
vagueness in the early Patrustic references to the
Assumption of Moses. Syncelhis (ed. Dind. 1. 48)
mentions an Apocalypse of 3Ioses. Clement of
Ah'.xandria (Adnmb. in Epist. Jiid. [ap. Zahn,
Sitpplementum Clementinum, 84]) and Didyinus
(Epist. Ju(Ue Enarratio [in Gallandi, Bib. Patr.
vi. 307]) allude to an Assumptio 3Ioysi. Origen
(di' Princ. 111. ii. 1) refers to an Adsceusio Mosis.
In the Acts of the Nicene Synod (Mansi, Sacror.
Concil. Nova Collectio, ii. 18, 20) there is mention
again of an Assumption of Moses. In other lists
of apocrypha, a Testament (Aiad-nKri) of Moses is
meiuioned (Stichometry of Nicephorus and Synopsis
of pseudo-Athanasius). It has been argued (by
Schiirer. followed by Charles) that these two titles
represent two separate divisions of one and the
same book, or two books fused together in one.
Tiie work Vvas lost during the Middle Ages, and
recovered by Ceriani in an old Latin version in the
Anibrosian Library at Milan in ]8(;L

Contents. — Muses calls to himself Joshua, the
son of Nun, and directs him to preserve his writ-
ings (1). lie then forecasts the apostasy and
di.stre.ssof the twelve tribes of Israel and their divi-
sions into the ten and two (2), their awakening to
ci)nsci(msnessof their sin, their repentance (:})i the
restoration of the two tribes and the preservation
of tlie ten among the Gentiles (t"), their repeated
bai'kslidings (5;, the tyranny of Herod ((i), the pre-
valence of wicked leadei-s over them (7), the oppres-

sion by the Romans (8), the advent of the Levite
Taxo,* who was destined to restore a better state
of things among them (9). At this point the
author inserts a Psalm of Hope and adds a few
concluding words closing the discourse of Moses
(10). Joshua then laments over the course of
events revealed to him, and refuses to be com-
forted (11) ; but Moses urges him to take up his
work, and conquer and destroy the Gentiles (12).
At this point the book breaks off rather abruptly.

Literary qnestions.—The Patristic quotations from the As-
sumption of Moses identify the words of Jude » as from this
book; but as the extant text does not contain the words, it
can only be that it is either (1) wrongly entitled, or (2) that
the quotation is made from the second p.art of it which is
lost (Schurer), or (3) that two separate works entitled respec-
tively The Testament of MosesanA the Assumption (Ascension)
of Moses were fused into one (Charles). The last position is
most convincingly supported by its advocate, and seems the
most probable. The present so-called Assumption of Moses is
then the Testament of Moses, bearing wthin it traces of the
addition to it of the original Assumption of Moses.

The text of the book exists in a single Latin manuscript of the
5th (6th) cent. a.d. This is undoubtedly a translation from a
Greek text. It has been further conjectured that the Greek
itself was a translation of a Hebrew or Aramaic original ; but
though the advocates of each of these languages, as also of the
Greek, strenuously defend each his position, in the absence of
definite data nothing can be dogmatically asserted on the point.
Hilgenfeld and Druminond favour a Greek original; Ewald
argues for a Semitic (either Hebrew or Aramaic) ; "Wieseler and
Langen, for a Hebrew ; Hausrath, Schmidt-Merx, Dillmann,
Thompson, for an Aram.aic.

The author of the work was probably a devout Jew, a
Pharisee, and a mystic who does not share but rather aims to
defeat the purposes of the Zealots (so Charles, but it has been
strenuouslj' maintained that he was a Zealot). The date of the
composition is fixed by the allusion to Herod the Great. At the
earliest, it must be 44, but various dates down to 138 have been
advocated. The design of the author seems to be to teach the
lesson that God has foreseen and foreshadowed all things;
hence Israel should entertain no fear. A deliverer is to come.

Editions. — Ceriani {Monumenta Sacra ei Profana, vol. i.
Fasc. 1, pp. 5.5-64), Hilgenfeld (NT extra Canonem Peceptinn,
1876, pp. 107-135), Schmidt-Merx (Arcrnv,i. ii. 1868, p. Ill tt'.),
Fritzsche (Lib. Apoc. ret. Test. 1871, pp. 700 to 730), Charles
(Assumption of Moses, 1897, pp. 54-101).

Translations. — Greek : Hilgenfeld (attempted restoration
from the Latin, Messias Judceorum, 1869, pp. 435-46S). —
English : Charles, Assumption of Moses (1897). — German :
Volkmar, Mose Prophetieund Himmelfahrt (1867), Clemen in
Kautzsch's Pseudepigr. (1900).

Literature. — Colani, ' L'Assomption de Moise' in Revue de
Thiol. 1868, pp. 65-94; Wieseler, 'Die jungst aufgefundene
Aufnahme Moses,' etc., in Jahrhb.f. deuische Theol. 1868, pp.
622-648 ; Heidenheim, ' Beitrage z. besser. Verstandniss d. As-
censio Mosis' in Vierteljahrschrift f. deutsche u. englische
Theologie, 1874, pp. 216-218; Hilgenfeld, 2 IFT;^, 1886, pp. 132-
139 ; SchOrer, IIJP ii. Hi. 73-83.

5. Fourth Ezra (Second Esdras). — Thispseudepi-
graph has been known from the earliest Christian
days, and widely circulated under the name of
Ezra as his second, third, fourth, or fifth book,
according to the various ways of grouping and
entitling the books that issue from the Restoration
generation. (See explanation of these names by.
Thackeray in Hastings' DB, art. ' Esdras, First
Book of). Fourth Ezra, however, has come to be
generally accepted as the name for it.

Contents. — This is given in seven visions. The
First Vision (o^-S^^) is granted to Ezra in answer
to disturbing doubts arising in his mind. These
concern the origin of sin and suffering in the world
(3^"^^). An angel gives him the answer: God's
ways are inscrutable. The human spirit can com-
prehend but little (41-21). But as he pleads that it
is painful to be left in ignorance on such vital
matters, he is assured of a change of seon to take
place soon. Definite signs will mark the change.
He must fast for seven days, and receive another
revelation at the end of that time (42--519).

The Second Vision (o^^-O^*) is granted in answer

* After unsuccessful attempts by manv others, a satisfactory
explanation of this name has been given bv Burkitt (see
Hastings' DB iii. 44!t>>). Taxo is a copyist's mistake for Taxok
— Taf j)<c. . .\nd this is to be read by Gematria as Eleazar.
riiDj. .= "iTV?,s. Eleazar the father of "seven sons is the great
Levite (2 Mac 6'").

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 85

to the question, Why has God given over His only
chosen people into the hands of the heathen ?
(;52(wo)_ He receives the answer that God loves
His people, and the problem must be regarded as
not solvable for man : nevertheless deliverance is
drawing near ; the generations of men are passing ;
the world has become old ; the signs of the end are
visible (S^i-e^*).

The Third Vision (635-925)^ nke the second, is
given after a period of seven days' fasting, and is
in answer to the question. Why does not Israel
possess the land which belongs to it ? (63'5^3). The
answer is not direct. An evil age must neces-
sarily precede the good that shall be in the future
(-71-16) _ The doom of sinners is grievous but well-
deserved. The Son of God, the Christ, shall
appear in judgment (T^"-"). Few are chosen, but
all the greater is the honour conferred on them
(7*"'-'^). A sevenfold suffering and a sevenfold joy
await men in the intermediate state (7''^'°').
Intercession for the condemned will be of no avail
at the last judgment (7i"--"'), they have deserved
their doom (7i"'-i'''i). God's mercy is consistent
with the sufferings of the condemned (I'^^-S^''^) . At
this point Ezra interposes a prayer and receives an
answer (8-"-^^). The saved shall rejoice at their
own lot, and forget the sufferings of sinners (8^^^).
It is certain that the end of the world is nigh.
The signs are not to be mistaken (8SM)i3). There
are more of the lost than of the saved (9'^-^).

The Fourth Vision (d-'^-lO'"^) is given upon the
Plain of Ardath. It consists of a symbolic picture
of Zion's sorrow, followed by glory. The vision
(9-'-1028) presents a woman in tattered garments,
weeping and wailing because of her lost son. The
explanation by the angel (lO-^-^^) identifies the
woman with Zion, and points out the lesson to the

SGGT.

The Fifth Vision (1060-125i) presents the fourth
world-empire under the figure of an eagle coming
out of the sea, and like the fourth vision falls into
two parts. I.e. the Vision (10*'''-12'') and the inter-
pretation of it by the angel (12'*-*). This is fol-
lowed by a Conclusion in story form. The people
come out to seek for Ezra, they find him in the
plain, and he sends them back into the city (12'"'-^i).

The Sixth Vision (lOi-^*) portrays a man emerg-
ing out of a stormy sea and floating on a cloudless
heaven (13'-*). A countless multitude comes to
wage war against him ; but by a stream of fire
proceeding from his mouth he overcomes his
enemies (18^-i'). Then another host of friendly
men flock around him (13'2-i3). The question is
raised, Is it better to survive to the end of the
world or to die beforehand ? It is answered in
favour of the former alternative (lo^^-*). The ex-
planation of the vision follows. The man in the
cloud is the Son of God, the events are those of the
Messianic age (IS-''-^*).

The Seventh Vision (\4}-^) is given three days
after the sixth, under an oak. This is the familiar
legend of Ezra's restoring the lost Scriptures. But
it begins with a command to keep his present
vision secret (14'-''). A prayer of Ezra follows, in
wliich he beseeches the Lord for the privilege of
rewriting the lost Scriptures (14i'-2«). The prayer
is answered, and Ezra reproduces the lost books
together with seventy others (U^'-^*). The book
concludes with an account of Ezra's decease.

The above does not include chs. 1. 2 and 15. 16,
found in the Latin Version, which is the basis of
the chapter divisions of the book. The Latin
Version has also served as the basis of some
current translations into English (The Variorum
Apocrypha, by C. J. Ball, and in Wace's Holy
Bihle, 'Apocrypha,' by Lupton). These four
chapters are universally regarded as later addi-
tions by a strongly anti-Jewish Christian author,

appended respectively to the beginning and end of
the Latin Version. The other versions do not
contain them. They have been detached and pub-
lished together as 5th Esdras by Fritzsche {Lib.
Apocr. Vet. Test. ' Liber Esdrse Quintus,' pp. 640-
658).

Literary question^i. — The book is a unity, and compara-
tively free from interpolations and editorial tampering-. The
author was a devout man for whom problems of theodicy
especially had a considerable fascination, but he is also inter-
ested in the broader and more constant questions which recur
in the religious sphere with every generation. He naturally
looks into his own age, and finds no sign of a restoration to
righteousness and recognition of God in the forces that work
there. He accordingly plants his hopes in the world to come.

Kabisch has indeed analyzed the work into four different pro-
ductions fused together into unity by clumsy redactors {Das
Vierte Buch Esra, 18S9), and his theory has been substantially
accepted by de Faye, but his observations would lead rather to
the composition of the book from pre-existing sources than to
the bringing together of independent books of documents by a
redactor. The impression of unity is too strong to be destroyed
by such considerations as Kabisch alleges.

The date of the book cannot be earlier than the fall of Jeru-
salem, as that event is distinctly alluded to (3^ lO^s !;>«). The
Temple is destroyed and the service in abeyance (lO^i). A still
later chronological starting-point is given in an allusion to the
death of Titus (11^') i the author even expects the death of
Domitian (122. 28) _ jt is safe, therefore, to set down the year 90
as approximately the time of composition.

Editions. — The book exists in Latin, Syriac, Ethiopic,
Arabic (2), and Armenian versions. The original was in Greek.
This is made evident by the characteristic differences of the ver-
sions. They are all easily accounted for by an original Greek.
The Latin text was first edited critically by Volkmar (1S6:3);
also by Fritzsche (Lib. Apocr. Vet. Test. 1S71). The Syriac was
published in Ceriani's Monumenta Sacra, i. Fasc. 2 (1S66) ;
also in photolithographic reproduction, under the title Trans-
latio Syro-Pescitto Veieris Testamenti, etc. (18T6-1SS3) ;
again by K. Bensly, with an introd. by M. R. Jsxvnes {Tesris avd
Studies, Camb. iii. 2, 1S95). The Kthiopic was published by
Lawrence (1820), the Arabic by Gildemeister (18TT), the Arme-
nian by the Mechitharists in Venice (1806).

Translations. — English." Bissell (Lange's Commentary,
1880), Lupton (Wace's ' A])ocrvpha,' 1SS&).— German: Volkmar
(1863), Ewald {Abhandl. d. Gott. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. xi. 1862-
1S63), ZOckler ( A'g/. Kom. 1891). A translation into Greek was
made and published by Hilgenfeld {Messias Judmorum , 1869).

Literature. — Corrodi, Krit. Gesch. d. Chillasmus, 17S1,
vol. i. pp. 179-230; Gudschmid, 'Die Apoc. des Esra,' etc., in
ZWTh, 1860 ; Volkmar, Handhuch d. Einleit. in die Apokr,
1S93; Wieseler, 'Das Vierte b. Ezra' in SK, 1870, pp. 263-
304 : Kabisch, Das Vierte B. Ezra. 1889 ; Schieffer, Die re-
Uginsen und ethischen Anschauungen des IV Ezra Bitches,
1901; Clemen in SK, 1898, pp. 237-24G ; Schiirer, Gjy iii.
•232 ff. [I/JP II. iii. 93 ff.].

6. The Syriac Baruch. — Baruch is mentioned
as Jeremiah's companion and helper during the try-
ing days which ended in the destruction of Jeru-
salem and the deportations under Jehoiakim and
Zedekiah (Jer 3212- is 30. 45). The fact that he wrote
under Jeremiah's direction seems to have stimu-
lated the tendency to publish alleged prophecies
and revelations in his name. The first of these
was the book that passed into the group of OT
Apocrypha. One of Ceriani's many contributions
to apocalyptics was the discovery, translation into
Latin (1866), and later publication of a Syriac text
of a Book of Baruch {Monumenta Sacra, v. 1871,
pp. 11-18).

Contents. — The book is divided into two main
parts, i.e. the Apocalypse proper (chs. 1-77) and the
Letter to the Nine Tribes and a Half (chs. 78-87).

Part I. may again be subdivided into seven sec-
tions. (1) The first section (1-12) begins with the
announcement of the impending fall of Jeru.salem,
and the captivity of Jiidah ; next comes the por-
traiture of the advancing Chald?eans, the hiding of
the treasures of the Temple, and the destruction
of the walls by angels, so that the Chaldaeans might
not claim the glory of the capture of the city.
The next day the city is occupied by the enemy
(6-8), Baruch stays amid the ruins of the city,
while Jeremiah, by Divine command, accompanies
the exiles to Babylon (9-12). — (2) The second
section (13-20) contains a vision given to Baruch
while standing on Mount Zion. Ke is a.ssured that
the calamity just fallen on the chosen people has

86 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

been inflicted in mercy (13) ; he complains that
good men are no better than others, but is answered
that sin in one who possesses the Law is worthy of
beiiiK punished (14. 15). He expresses other inis-
eivin"s wliich are answered. He is then promised
a new revelation (l»;-20).— (3) The third section
(21-34) opens with Baruch's appearance at the end
of seven days in the place appointed. Here he
expresses his thoughts in the form of a prayer (21) ;
he is shown that his knowledge is imperfect, that
the time is coming when God's judgment will
mature (2-2-25) ; he wishes to know of the distresses
of the last days (2(i), and is given a revelation
concerning the order of the times. The tribula-
tion will come in twelve stages (27) ; the whole
earth will be affected, but those in the chosen
land will escape ; the Messiah will appear, first to
bring blessings to the righteous on the earth (28.
20), "and then, as He returns to His glory, to raise
from the dead both the righteous and the un-
righteous, and consign them respectively to happi-
ness and perdition (30). Baruch then summons
the elders of the people, and announces to them
that the ruined Zion shall be rebuilt and destroyed
aiiain, and finally restored in glory to last for ever
(c;i_;]4)._(4) The fourth section (35-40) gives a
vision which Baruch saw as he slept amid the ruins
of the Holy Place. On one side there appeared
a great forest in a valley surrounded with moun-
tains ; on the other side a vine with a gentle
spring streaming from beneath its roots. But the
spring grew into a mighty river, and overwhelmed
tlie forest, together with the mountains round
about. A solitary cedar was left. The stream
first addressed words of denunciation against the
cedar, and then annihilated it. In the place of
forest and mountains the vine grew, and the valley
was filled with blossoms (35-;5(")- The interpreta-
tion of the vision is given as requested by Baruch.
The kingdoms which have oppressed Zion shall be
overwhelmed by the Messiah. The cedar is the
last king of the last kingdom ; he shall be slain by
the Messiah, who shall then begin His eternal
reign (38-40). Baruch is commanded to warn the
people and prepare himself for further visions (41-
43), which he accordingly does (44-40). — (5) The
fifth section (47-52) also opens with a prayer of
Baruch's offered seven days later (47-48-*). In
answer Baruch receives a new revelation regarding
the distress of the last days (48-^-50)^ ^nd of the re-
surrection both of the evil and the good, together
with their punishment and reward (49-52). — (O)The
sixth section (53-70) is again in the form of a vision.
A cloud ascends from the sea, and pours forth upon
tlie earth black and white (dark and bright) waters.
Lightning illumines it, and twelve streams are put
in subjection under it (53). Baruch prays that it
may be explained to him (54), and the angel Ramael
is sent to him to interpret the vision (55). Tlie
cloud pouring forth tlie waters represents mankind
in its historical unfolding ; the dark waters stand
for evil ages, the bright for good. The course of
the world from Adam to the Exile is thus sym-
bolized. The twelve periods are identified with
the bright and dark streams (50-<;8). The twelfth
is tiie age of the rebuilding of Jerusalem and of
the restoration of the Temple service. These
twelve are followed by a last black striiam, which
.'Stands for the tribulation of the Messianic ago.
Then shall the Messiah take charge of the few
saved ones (00-71). The lightning isthe Messiah,
and His eternal beneficent reign (72-74). Baruch
thanks God, and is infornifd that he will shortly
be taken from the earth, though not by death (75.
70).— (7) The seventh section tells how Baruch
called the people together, told them of his im-
liending departure, wrote two letters, one to the
exiles in Babylon and the other to the nine and a

half tribes in the regions beyond, and how he sent
the first by messengers and entrusted the second
to an eagle (77).

Fart II. This part of the book is taken up with
the letter to the nine tribes and a half (78-87). In
it Baruch recalls to the minds of the tribes God's
mercy, and assures them that their sufferings are
intended for their good (78-81). God has shown
Baruch in visions the meaning of their experiences
and the doom of their enemies (82-84) ; they should
therefore be undismayed, and expect speedy de-
liverance, for the end is near (85), The letter then
ends with formal instructions (80. 87).

Literary queitions. — The extant text In Syriac is from an
orig-inul Greek. This is shown by the use of such forms as
Godolias Sedekias, etc., which could only h.ave been made
from the Greek. The word for ' splendour '' in 3' is manifestly
a translation of Koo-fios. But if the Syriac was made from a Greek
text, was this Greek the original language of the book ? The
answer demanded by the facts seems to be negative. Tliere
are traces of a Hebrew original behind the Greek. The most
distinct of these is the occurrence of Hebrew idioms surviv-
ing through the two translations. Moreover, the quotations
agree in all cases with the Hebrew text as distinguished from
the LXX, Avhich must have been used had the original been in
Greek. Certain obscurities, too, can be cleared up by retrans-
lation into Hebrew. (For the full argument see Charles, The
AjJoc. of Baruch, pp. xliii-liii.)

The relation of this apocalypse to 4 Ezra is very striking.
Both books seem to be the products of the same environment.
They deal with the same questions and in similar fashion.
Their resemblances are indeed so marked that they have been
denominated 'the twin apocalj^pses.'

The author of Baruch was evidently a Jew. The date when
he wrote is determined partly from his relation to the author
of 4 Ezra. There are other data in the case. Papias quotes one
sentence from it, though attributing the expression to Jesus.
Thislixes the terminuHnd quern as a.d. 130. The (et-mivvx a
quo is an allusion to Eth. Enoch b&-- ^^, hence n.c. 160. Charles,
however, following Kabisch, believes that it was put together
out of five or six independent writings, composed between a.d.
50 and 90, some time about the year 100.

Editions.— The Syriac Text: "Ceriani {Monumenta Sacra, v.
fasc, 11, ISTl ; also in photolithographic reproduction of the
entire MS of the Syriac UT, 1ST6).

TravJilations. — Latin: Ceriani (186G); Fritzsche, Zi&. .4pocr.
ISGl.— English : Charles, The Apocalypxe of Baruch, 1896.—
German: Rothstein m 'Ka.ntz^ch's Pxeudepigr. 1900.

LiTEKATURE. — Langcu, de A])ocalypsi Baruch, 1S67 ; Kenan,
'L'Apocalvpse de Baruch ' in </o!trn«i? des Saimnis, 18T7, pp.
2-22-281 ; Kneucker, Das Buch Bur. 18T9 ; Hilgenfeld, Z WTh,
ISSS, pp. 257-2T8 ; Kabisch, 'DieQuellen B.iruchs' in Jahrh. f.
Prot. Theol. 1892, pp. 66-107 ; Clemen, SK, 1898, pp. 227-237.

7. The Greek Baruch. — A hint as to the exist-
ence of another book bearing the name Baruch was
long known to exist in a passage of Origen {de
Princ. II. iii. 0), in which he alludes to Baruch's
account of the Seven Heavens. No such account is
to be found either in the OT apocryphon or in the
Syriac apocalypse bearing the name of Baruch.
But it was not until 1890 that the book alluded to
by Origen was discovered and published in Texts
and Studies (Camb. vol. v. 1, pp. 84-94).

Contents. — The book opens with Baruch's lamen-
tation and prayer over the fallen kingdom of Judah.
Forthwith an angel visits him and promises to show
him wonderful secrets (1). The promise is fulfilled.
He is taken up into the first heaven, where he sees
creatures with the faces of bulls, the horns of stags,
the feet of goats, and the haunches of lambs ; he
then inquires as to the dimensions of this heaven,
and is given some astounding figures (2). In the
second heaven he sees men with the look of dogs
and the feet of deer. They are those who have
counselled the building of the tower [of Babel] (3).
In the third heaven he sees a dragon which livts
on the bodies of the wicked ; it is Hades. He
further learns that the tree which caused Adam's
fall was the vine, and therefore the abuse of the
fruit of the vine has ever since been the source of
fearful evils to men (4). He is told the nature of
Hades (5), and is shown the Phcenix, which pro-
tects the earth from the burning rays of the sun ((!).
The approach of this monster terrifies him (7). He
learns that the renewing of the crown of the sun is
necessary, because the view of the sins of men daily

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 87

dims and weakens this luminary ; it must be
cleansed and refreshed at the end of each day (8).
The chariot of the moon and the explanation of its
stages, together with the reason for its shining
only at night, are then made known to Baruch ('.»).
In the fourth heaven he comes into view of a vast
plain and body of water which is the source of the
'dew of heaven ' (10). The gates of the fifth heaven
are closed as he and his guide come to them ; but
upon being opened they admit the archangel
Michael, who receives the prayers and good works
of the righteous and presents them before God
(11, 12). The guardian angels of the unrighteous
petition to be released from their hated work, but
are told to wait (13). Michael departs, but returns
again bringing oil, which he gives to the angels
that had brought to him the virtues of men (1-4. 15).
He addresses the angels who had brought no good
works (1(5). The gate closes, and the prophet and
angel retura to the earth.

Literary queidlonH. — Thus far there are two recensions of
this apocalypse Icnown, the Greek and the Slavonic. I5ut
neither of them is believed to be the orig-inal. Their relations
to one another are those of a more and a less condensed version
of the same story. That the oriirinal must have been fuller and
larg'eris clear from Oris^en's intimation that it gave an account
of seven heavens, whereas the Greek text before us stops with
the iifth heaven, and the Slavonic knows of only two.

The relation of the book to the Syriac Baruch is probably ex-
plained by referring to 7t)^- * of that work. Here God promises
to give Baruch, after the lapse of forty days, a further revelation
regarding the world of material elements (the cycle of the earth,
the summits of the mountains, the depths of the valleys and of
the seas, and the number of the rivers). The fulfilment of this
promise is not recorded in what follows, and the Greek apo-
calypse was composed to show not only that it was fulfilled,
but also in what way.

This dependence on the Syriac Baruch on the one side and
the allusion of Origen to the work on the other, fix the date of
its com|)osition as between lOi) and 175 a.d. It was written as
a .Jewish apocalypse, but shows traces of interpolation by
Cliristlans (cf ch. 4, 'The Vine').

Editions. — Greek Text : James ( TVcris and Studies, Ca,\i\h.
1S9T, v. 1, pp. S4-94).

Trantilationfi. — English : .James (as above) ; the Slavonic text,
pub. by Novakovitch, is given in English translation by Morfill
in the same volume with the edition of the Greek text by James.
— German : Bonwetsch (Ndchrichten voti d. Konig. Gexell.
d. Wiss. zu Gott., Phil. Klasse, 1S96, pp. 94-101) ; Ryssel in
Kautzsch's Pseudepigr. 1900.

LiTKBATURE. — This is limited almost altogether to the intro-
ductions accompanying the editions and translations. Of these,
however, that by Prof. James is quite ample and thorough.

8. The Psalter of Solomon.— The Psalter of
Solomon is placed in the S'tichomett'y of Nice-
phorus among the Antilegomena of the OT, and
not among the Apocryplia ; so also in pseudo-
Athanasius' Synopsis 8. Scripturce. It is a collec-
tion of lyrics, each one independent of every other.
Only the last two of these (the 17th and 18th),
strictly speaking, fall into the group of apocalyptic
writings. They were known and referred to as the
'Odes of Solomon' as early as the Pistis Sophia
(200 to 250 A.D.), and frequently later than that
date.

Contents. — Ps 17 is in general a prophecy of the
restoration of the glory to the desolated throne of
David. It opens with an expression of trust in the
Lord, the Eternal King of Lsrael, addressed directly
to Ilim (1-4). The Lord (still addre.ssed in the
second person) has chosen David to be king over
Israel, and promised him and his seed perpetual
dominion ; but sinners have risen up against Israel
and have desolated the throne of David (5-8) ; yet
the Lord will cast these down and visit them ac-
cording to their sins (0-12). They have done
wickedly and acted proudly (1.3-17) ; the righteous
fled before them and wandered in desert places
(18-20) ; the sins of the wicked have abounded
(21, 22) ; the Lord is to raise the son of David, Ilis
Servant, purge Jerusalem, cast down the unright-
eous and lawless nation, gather together His people,
an<l induce all the tribes of men (20-86). lie will not
put confidence in human weapons of warfare, but

in the Lord ; and the Lord will bless him, will
strengthen and give him dominion (.37-44). He •
shall rule righteously and wisely (45-49). Blessed
are they who shall live in his day (50. 51).

Ps 18 is on the Messianic Age. It begins with
an ascription of praise to the Lord for His favour to '
Israel and His love to the seed of Abraham (1-5).
It foreshadows a blessed day in which God shall
purge Israel and raise His Messiah (6) ; it declares
the blessedness of those who shall live in the days
of the Anointed (7-10) and closes with a doxologj'
for the constancy and perpetuity of the heavenly
luminary (11-14).

Literary queniions. — Though the Psalter of Solomon is a col-
lection of independent c()n)i)Ositions. these apparently issue
from the same historical conditions and are perv.ided by the
same spirit and tone. They nowhere claim to be Solomon's
composition. This claim was made for them by later copyists.
In general, the conditions under which they were written are
those of the period of thirty years between TO and 40 B.C. Pom-
pey is alluded to as ' the migiity striker ' who comes ' from the
ends of the earth ' (S'"). Certain princes of the land go forth to
meet him and welcome him (h'*). These are Aristobnlus ii.
and Hyrcanus u. The Gentiles tread Jerusalem under foot
(•J20 c,23. 24j. ijut jje who has conquered it and inflicted severe
sulTerings on it is finally overtaken and suifers a shameful death
in Egypt {■i'^->- '■"). All this points directly to the Koniau con-
quest under Pompey.

Some older critics read the allusions above indicated as having
reference to Herod and his days (Movers, Keim) ; Ewald saw in
them Antiochus Epiphanes and liis times ; but tiiese identifica-
tions are manifestly far-fetched. The consensus of critics is
now against them. But there are exceptions, such as Franken-
berg, who advocates the age of Antiochus.

The original language of the P.salter was Hebrew. The radical
difference between the type of Messianism held up in IT and IS
and the eschatology of the rest of the collection points to a
separate authorship of these two psalms. But apart from this,
and the antecedent probability that lyrics of this class are apt to
be independent contributions, there are no clear grounds for
ascribing particular psalms to different authors. Theauthor(or
authors) belonged to the Pharisaic sect.

^f/i7io?!s.— Hilgenfeld, ZWTh, 1&C8; Geiger, Der Psalter
Salomos, ISTl ; Fritzsche, L.if/ri Apocr. Gr. 1S71, pp. 5G9, 589 ;
Pick, ' The Psalter of Solomon ' in L'reib. Pev., 1SS3, pp. 77C-S12;
Kyle and James. The Psalms of the Pharisees, ]&91 ; O. von
Gebhardt, Die Psalmen Salomos, 189.5 ; Swete, Tlie Psahnx of
Solon}on,with, the Greek Lragmeiits of the Book of Enoch,^^:^.

Translations. — English: Bissell in l.ange's tbMi. 'Apocrypha,'
18S0; Pick (above cited), Pyle and James (above cited). —
German : Kittel in Kautzsch's Pseudepigr. 1900.

Literature. —Ewald, G VL iv., p. .S9'2 f. ; Movers in Wetzer
u. Weite's Kirchenteoe.^ i. p. 340; Keim, Gekch.von Jesu-v.
Nasara, i. p. 248 ; Carriere, de I'f^alterio Salomonis, 1870 ;
Kaulen in Wetzer u. Welte-, i. p. lOCO f. ; O. Holtzmann in
St.nde's G TV; Jacquier, ' Les Psaunies de Salomon ' in L'-uni-
rer.'^ite Cathulique, Nouv. Serie, xii. 1893, pp. 94-131, '261-275;
Fraukenberg, Die Datirung d. Ps. Salomonis, 1896.

9. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

— This production was well known to the ancient
Patristic writers. It is quoted by Irenseus (Fragm.
17, ed. Harvey, ii. 487), Origen (Horn, in Jos. 15^),
and Tertullian {adv. Marc. v. 1). It is named in
the Synopsis of Pseudo-Athanasius and in the
Stichometrij of Nicephorus. In the 13th cent.
Bishop Grosseteste made a translation of it into
Latin. It has been very frequently translated
both in ancient and in modern times.

Contents. — The book extends the idea of Gn 40 to
the sons of Jacob. Just as the father had called
his sons together before his death and told them
his last thoughts, so each of the sons is made to
summon his own children to his deathbed and to
give them a retrospective and a prospective view.
Each, however, centres his dLscourse in a dominant
idea or topic. {\) Henhen, on ThoKghts. This Testa-
ment begins with the confession by Peuben of his
sin and the penance he performed therefor (1).
Man has seven spirits given him to perform his work
in the world, i.e. life, sight, hearing, smell, taste,
speech, reproduction (2) ; an eighth is added to
these; but Beliar has intermingled with these seven
misleading spirits, i.e. fornication, gluttony, strife,
vanity, arrogance, lying, and injustice ; sleep is a
counterfeit eighth (3). Beware of fornication (4).
Women have always been seducers. They misled
the Grigori, 'watchers' (5). Give heed to Levi,

88 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

for he shall know the Law (6 and 7).— (2) Simeon,
on Envy. This also opens with a contession, but
the sin confessed is envy (1.2). The patriarch
warns his children against this sin (.3), commends
Joseph, and urges them to imitate him (•4-8).—
OJ) Levi, on the. Friesthood and Arrogance. This
is the distinctively apocalyptic Testament. After
Introducing himself, the patriarch recounts the
revelation given him of the seven heavens (1-4) ;
then tells of being ushered into the presence of the
Lord, who gave him the command to destroy the
Rhechemites (5). Contrary to the desire of his
fatlier, he executed the command (G. 7). He saw
a second vision, in which he was invested with
the priesthood and received instructions from his
grandfather Isaac (8. 9). He foreshadows the cor-
ruption of the priesthood by his family (11. 12),
instructs them in tlieir duties and again warns
against corruption (18. 14) ; foretells the destruc-
tion of the Temple, and indicates from the Book of
I'juoch that the Captivity will last seventy years
(10-17) ; he announces the Messiah, His rejection
and the dispersion of Israel, and closes with an
exhortation to choose well (18. 19). — (4) Judah, on
Fortitude, Avarice, and Fornication. After intro-
ducing himself, Judah gives a glowing account of
his physical strength and agility, with many illus-
trative incidents (1-9). He tells of how he chose
Tamar as the wife of his son Er, of the wickedness
of his sons and their death, and of his own relations
with Tamar (10-12). Ascribing his fall to drunken-
ness and covetousness, he warns his children against
these vices, as well as against fornication (13-17) ;
lie foresees from the Books of Knoch the wickedness
into wiiich they shall fall in the last days, and
warns tl)em (18-21) ; he urges them to love Levi,
and predicts with sorrow their apostasies from the
Lord and the wars and commotions until the time
of Messias (22-24). This shall be followed by the
resurrection of the patriarchs (2-5). — (-5) Issachar,
on Simplicity. Beginning with the circumstances
of liis birth, this patriarch gives an account of his
early life and marriage (1-3), and points out his
simplicity and singleness of mind as virtues to be
imitated (4-7). — ((>) Zebulun, on Compassion and
Mercy. After naming himself and the prosperous
circumstances in which he was born, he claims not
to have sinned except in thought. Only in the
affair of Joseph, which he describes at length, he
had conspired with his brothers, but with sorrow
and compassion for Joseph (1-5). He was the first
to construct a boat and go fishing. He used the
lish he caught in feeding the needy (6. 7). He
urges his children to be compassionate (8) and
united in action (9. 10).— (7) Dan, on Anger and
Lying. This patriarch also begins with a confes-
sion. He had planned to slay Joseph out of envy,
but the Lord had withheld the opportunity (1).
He warns his children against the spirit of lying
and anger (2-4) ; he predicts evil days in the
future, »f which he had learned from the Books
of Knoch (5), and exhorts them to stand firm in
ri-hteousness («. 7).— (8) Naphtali, on Natural
dfxnlness. This Testament opens with an account
of the mother of the imtriarch, Bilhah (1). It pro-
ceeils with a description of his lleetness of foot,
which gives occasion for a speech on the fitness of
I lie body to the character of the soul (2). He ex-
horts his children not to force the order of nature
(3. 4), and tells of a vision he saw when forty years
of age. It was on the Mount of Olives, to the east
of Jerusalem. The sun and moon stood still ;
Jacob ciilled his sons to go and seize them. Levi
took hold of the sun, Judah of the moon; they
were lifted up. A bull with two horns on its head
and two wings on its back made its appearance.
They tried to capture it. and Joseph succeeded.
Finally, a holy writing appeared telling of the

captivity of Israel (5). Seven months later be
saw another vision. Jacob and his sons were
standing by the Sea of Jamnia. A vessel full of
dried fish appeared ; but it had no rudder or sails.
They embarked, and a storm arose. They were
threatened with destruction ; Levi prayed, and,
though the vessel was wrecked, they were saved
upon pieces of the wreckage (6). Naphtali told
his visions to his father, who saw in them a token
that Joseph was living (7). With the prediction of
the Messiah (8. 9) the Testament closes. — (9) Gad,
on Hatred. After the customarj' account of him-
self. Gad (1) confesses that he hated Joseph and
brought about his sale to the Ishmaelites (2. .3).
He warns his children against hatred, points out
its evil, and urges them to cherish and exercise
love (4-8). — (10) Asher, on the 7 wo Aspects of Vice
and Virtue. This patriarch begins with a por-
traiture of the two ways open before men, de-
scribing each carefully (1. 2). He commends sim-
plicity of heart and devotion to virtue (3), gives
reasons (4), and again commends the path of virtue
(5, 6), closing with warnings and predictions (7. 8).
— (11) Joseph, on Chastity. Joseph begins with
the contrasts between his many-sided suffering
and God's many-sided help and deliverance (1).
He then proceeds to narrate the circumstances of
his servitude in Egypt (2), his temptation (3-7),
his imprisonment (8. 9), and exhorts to brotherly
love(lO) and the fear of God (11). He further goes
back to tell the story once more of the circum-
stances of the temptation (12-15), and concludes
with an exhortation to honour Levi and Judah,
predicting that from them should arise the Lamb
of God (17-20). — (12) Benjamin, on a Fnre Mind.
Benjamin begins by telling of his birth (1) ; then of
the meeting with Joseph in Egypt (2). This leads
to the exaltation of Joseph as the perfect man,
who should be imitated (3. 4). A pure mind will
be recognized by the wicked (5). Beliar himself
cannot mislead the pure-minded (6). There is a
sevenfold evil in wickedness, and a sevenfold pun-
ishment is to be measured out to those who practise
it (7). Elee wickedness, he urges, and concludes
with the prediction of corruption among his de-
scendants (8. 9), and of the resurrection and the
judgment which will follow.

Literary queHion^.— The book is extant in a Greek text, also
in a complete Armenian and frag^mentary Syriac and Aramaic
versions. The Latin version, frequently reprinted from the
16th century onwards, is Grosseteste's. An ancient Latin
translation is not known to exist. A Slavonic version of un-
certain origin is also published by Tichonravolf (Deitkm. d.
aliruss. Apocr. Litt., St. Petorsb. ISCS).

The original of the work was either Greek or Hebrew. Grabe
(Spicileg. Pair. 2, 1714, 129-144) argued for the Hebrew. All
other critics have favoured Greek until Prof. Charles' revival of
Grabe's contention. Charles reasons mainly from the language
(cf. also Gaster, ' The Heb. Text of One of the Twelve Testa-
ments of the Patriarchs ' in PSBA, Dec. 1S9.3).

As it stands, the book presents the anomal}' of a work in-
tensely Jewish upon the whole, but containing passages of quite
as intensely Christian colour. To explain the anomaly, it must
be assumed either that a Christian of late date adopted the
mask of a Jew of an earlier period, or that the work was origin-
ally that of a Jew, and the Christian passages are later interpola-
tions. The former of these alternatives is practically excluded
by the type of Judaism running through the work as a whole.
This is not such as one would assume for the sake of literary
effect. Accordingly the tendency of all later writers has been
towards the view that the main part of the Testaments was
composed in the 1st cent. b.c. H is found, however, that the
author incorporated into this work parts of an apocalyptic com-
position of the century preceding (B.C. 200-100). The whole was
later interpolated by a Christian, or rather a number of Chris-
tians, at least one of whom held Docetic views. These in teriiola-
tions were made during the first three centuries of the Christian
era.

Editions.— GT&he {Spicileg. Pair. 1714\ Fabricius {Cod.
Pxeudepigr. 1713), Gallandi (Bib. Vet. Pat. i. 1788), Migne
{Patrol. Grcee.), Sinker {Test. XII Pair. 1SG9 ; Sinker also
published an Appendix containing collating of readings and
bibliographical notes, 1879).

LiTBRATuuE.— Tran.slations exist in English. French, German,
Dutch, Bohemian. and Icelandic — Knglish: S\Tikev(Ante- Mcene
ChrintianLibravy, vol. xxii. 1S71).— French: Migue, Diction-

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 89

naire de.<! Apociyphen, i. 1856. — German : Anonymous, Aechie
Apdkryphisclie Bitcher (Tubing. ISTo) ; Schnapp and Kautzsch
in Kauuscli's Paeudepiyr. WOO ; Nitzsch, Comm. Crit. de Tent.
XII Patr. 1810; lieuss, Gench. d. Hell. Schrift. XT, 267;
Kayser, ' Die Test, der XII Patr.' in Beitr. z. d. Theol. Wis-
senschafien, herausff. v. Keuss und C'unitz, 1S51 ; Vorstmann,
Disquitiitio de Tent. Patr. 1S57 ; Hilgenleld, ZWTh, 1859, p.
395 ff., 1871, p. 302 ff. ; van Ilengel, ' De Testanienten der twaalf
Patriarchien op nieuw ter sprake gebr.igt ' in Hodgeleerde Blj-
dragen, ISGO; Geiger, Jud. Zeit. f. Wis^.u. Leben, 1869, pj).
116-135. 1871, 1-23-125; Preiib. Itev. ISSO; Schnapp, Tent, der
Z wolf Patr. 1SS4.

10. The Book of Jubilees. — This boolc was
known and often alluded to by the ancient and
mediaeval ecclesiastical writers up to the days of
Theodoras Metochita (a.d. 1o32). It was called
'Jubilees' ('The Book of Jubilees'), or 'Little
Genesis ' {Parva Genesis, AewToy^vea-is). Some time
after the middle of the 14th cent, it disappeared,
and was known only through the references to it
of the earlier writers. Its recovery in modern
times was accomplished by the African missionary
Krapf in ISi-l. Krapf found an Ethiopic version
of it in Abyssinia, which he sent to Europe. Here
it came into the hands of Dillmann, and was by
him translated and published first in German and
afterwards in Ethiopia.

Contents. — The general plan of this book follows
so closely that of the canonical Genesis that it will
suffice to designate some of its distinctive features
only. The book gives a haggadistic version of the
history contained in Genesis, including also Excxlus
as far as ch. 14. The main events are identical in
all essential points, but very many additions and
embellishments are introduced. First of all, the
whole of time is represented as subdivided into
jubilee periods, these into sabbatical periods, and
these into years. This, it is said, was the original
plan of God, and the knowledge of it was com-
municated to Moses by revelation. The account
of the manner and time of the revelation is given
in ch. 1, in which, further, the anrjelus interprcs
(who is in this case the Angel of the Presence)
furnishes an outlook into the future and foretells
the apostasy of Israel and her restoration to God.
In the rest of the book the feasts and ob.servances
of the Mosaic ritual are transferred to the days of
Noah and Abraham, and in general the events of
this earlier period are treated with much freedom
and illustrated by amplification and tradition. In
the account of the Creation, an addition is made
with reference to the creation of the angels. The
luminaries created on the fourth day are said to
be for Sabbaths and festivals. Eve was created
during the second week. Therefore the command
' that their defilement is to be seven days for a
male child and fourteen days for a female.' Adam
is said to have been set to keep the garden from
the incursions of the beasts of the field. Before
the Fall animals could speak. It was between the
63rd and 70th year of Adam's life that Cain was
born ; between the 70th and 77th that Abel was
born ; between the 77th and 84th that Awan his
only daughter was born. Adam and Eve had nine
other sons (making twelve children altogether).
The names of the wives of antediluvians are gener-
ally given. Enoch's wife was Edna, the daughter
of Daniel. The corruption of mankind which led to
the Flood is said to have spread through the whole
creation, so that even animals were made subject to
it, for which reason they perished in the waters.
The JVephilim, who sprang from the union of the
sons of God with the daughters of men, were set at
enmity with one another^ and 'slew each man his
neiglibour.' After the Flood, Noah offered a sacri-
fice which is described as in every particular con-
forming to the Levitical law. The feast of the
first-fruits was observed by Noah. The feast of
the New Moon also had its origin at this time.
The year consists of 13 months, each of 28 days, or

altogether 364 days. After the Flood, Mastema
(Satan) led men to sin through the building of the
Tower of Babel and the worship of graven images.
Abraham did not fall into this sin. He tried to
convert his father from idolatry, and failing to do
so he burned the house of idols, in which his
brother Haran perished, and then was called to
leave his native land. When Abraham had estab-
lished himself in the Land of Canaan, and Iishmael
and Isaac were born, after II agar and Ishniael had
been sent away, Mastema appeared before God
to move him to try Abraham by demanding the
offering of his son Isaac, Nine other events in
Abraham's life were trials, thus making the com-
plete number ten. Before his death, Abraham
addressed his son Isaac, advising and warning him
against idolatry. When he was about to die, he
called Jacob his grandson and, taking his fingers,
closed his own eyes with them and stretched him-
self on his bed. Jacob fell asleep with his fingers
on his grandfather's eyes. When he awoke, he
found that Abraham was cold and dead. The
affair of Jacob's obtaining Esau's blessing from
his father is narrated so as to eliminate^ direct
falsehood. When Isaac asks, 'Who art thou?'
Jacob answers simply, 'I am thy son.' The story
of the massacre of the Shechemites by Simeon and
Levi is also softened, so as to justify the deed.
'I'he relations of Jacob and Esau are presented in a
light entirely unfavourable to Esau, who is made
to act the part of a cowardly and cunning traitor.
In the story of Joseph, the elements of envy and
cruelty on the part of his brethren are left out.
The account of Jacob's death is given without his
final addresses to his sons. It is simply said that
he blessed his sons. The death of Joseph gives
occasion for the mention of a new king who ruled
over Egypt after Memkeron, thus innmating the
end of the Shepherd dynasty. In the account
of Moses' early life, Hebrew maidens are repre-
sented as serving Pharaoh's daughter. 'Ilie last
chapter is occupied altogether with the Sabbath
law, which is given with great precision and
rigidity.

literary questions. — The book is preserved as a whole in an
Kthiopic version. A fragment, containing about one-third of it,
is also found in Latin, probably made from a Greek copy. In
addition to these, some smaller Syriac and Greek fragments
are known to e.xist. The original was evidentally in a Semitic
language, but whether Hebrew or Aramaic is not absolutely
certain. Hebrew was more usually the language of such apoca-
lyptic books. Jerome, moreover, alludes to the ' Little Genesis '
as a book in Hebrew. But neither of these considerations is
quite decisive. In using the term 'Hebrew," Jerome did not
always keep in mind the distinction between that language and
Aramaic. He followed the IS'T habit of calling Aramaic Hebrew
(Jn ly'^). In favour of an Aramaic original, the use of the form
Mastema as the name of Satan may be adduced. Nantema is
the Aphel form from ecu" ' to accuse ' and cct" is Aramaic for

jab'. Further, it is said that when Abraham left Mesopotamia

he took with him the books of his father (12^8), 'and they were
written in Hebrew,' which would be uncalled for if the account
itself was in Hebrew.

The date of the book is approxiinately fixed by its relation to
Kth. Enoch on one side, and the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs on the other. The Ethiopic Enoch is undoubtedly
known and tised by the author of Jubilees (cf. Jub 21 = Enoch
3: Jub 7= Enoch 7; Jub 10= Enoch Ui*^ ; Jub 2 = Enoch
6016-21). On the other hand, in all jirobability, the author of
tlie Testaments had used Jubilees (JubSO. 33="Test. Eeub.1.3 ;
Jub 32= Test. Lev. S ; Jub 32 = Test. Lev. 5 : Jub34 = Test. Jud.
3-4 ; Jub 23= Test. Zeb. 9). Its chronological jilace is therefore
after the end of the 2nd cent. B.C. and betore the end of the 1st
cent. A.D.

The author has been held to be an Essene (Jellinek), a
Hellenist (Frankel), or a Saddncee ; but there are strong reasons
airainst any of these views. He was more probably a Pharisee
(Dillmann, Riinseh, Drummond).

Editions. — Dillmann, Kxifale. sive Liher Jnlnlcronim , 1859 ;
Ceriani, Monumenta Sacra, i. fasc. 1, 1861 ; Charles, Anecdota
Ovon. viii., 1895.

Translations. — English: Schodde in Biblioth. iSa era, 1885-
1887 : Charles in JQR. 1893, pp. 703-708, 1894, pp. 184-217 and
710-74.5, 1895. pp. 297-328.— German : Dillmann (as above) ;
Itiinsch, Dai Buck der Juhilaen, 1874; Littinann in Kautzsch's
Pseu'lepigr. 190it. A translation into Hebrew was made and
published with notes by Kubiu (Vienna, 1870).

90 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

LiTEUATUKE.— Jellinok, Uh. d. Buck. d. Juh. u. dan Noah-
Biuih. 18S5 ; Beer. d. Biieh. d. Juh. u. nein VerhdUnins z. d.
MidraHohim, IsM; Friiiikflin Mo»(it.s.schrifff. Oexch. u. Wiss.
d. Jiid. lb5G; llilf;cnfcl(l, ZWTh, 1S74, j)].. 435-441.

11. The Ascension of Isaiah.— The ancients
allude to non-canonical literature associated with
the name of Isaiali under four different titles.
( )risen speaks of tlie Mnrturdom of Isaiah ; Epi-
phanius names an Anahatikon, and Jerome an
Ascension ; in the list of canonical and kindred
books published by Montfaucon (given by AVest-
cott, Canon of the New Testament, App. 1), xvii),
a Vision (Spa'an) of Isaiah is included. Of these,
the Vision is again named by Euthymius Ziga-
bfiuis in the lltli cent., and a Testament of Heze-
kiah is spoken of by Georgius Cedrenus in the V2\h
century. Whatever the facts may have been as to
the identity of these writings or their relations to
one another, notlnng was definitely known of them
until 1819, wiien Archbishop Lawrence accidentally
found an Ascension of Isaiah in a second-hand
bookstore in London. It was an Ethiopic text,
and Lawrence published it with a translation and
notes. Upon tliis, together with two other MSS.,
later brought to light, Diilmann based his edition
of the I*;thiopic Ascension of Isaiah in 1877.

Contents. — The work consists of two parts.

Part I. (1-5). In the 2(ith year of Hezekiah,
Isaiah pretlicts that Manasseh would be led by
Satan to apostatize. Hezekiah wishes to slay his
son, but is prevented by the prophet (1). After
the death of Hezekiah, Manasseh does give him-
self up to the service of Satan and practises all
manner of wickedness. Isaiah takes refuge in the
desert (2). Balkira, a Samaritan, accuses the pro-
piiet of uttering threats against Jerusalem and
raising himself above Moses in authority, where-
upon Manasseh, possessed by Satan, causes the
capture of Isaiah (oi-^'^). The reason for this is
the wrath of Satan, roused by Isaiah's disclosures
regarding the coming of Christ from the seventh
heaven, regarding His death. His resurrection. His
.ascension. His second coming, the sending of the
twelve disciples, the persecutions of the Church,
the advent of Antichrist, and his destruction
(31M2-). Manasseh causes Isaiah to be sawn
asunder, and the prophet endures the martyrdom
w itli steadfast cahnness in spite of the derision of
Halkira and Satan (5).

Part II. (6-11). In the twentieth year of Heze-
kiah, Isaiali saw a vision which he narrated to the
king and council of prominent men ((5) : an angel
took him through the firmament and through
the six lower heavens into the seventh. Here he
saw the departed patriarchs — Adam, Abel, and
Enoch — and God Himself. He learned that Christ
should come into the earth ; and having received
this information, he was led by the same angel
hark into the firmament (7-10). In the firina-
meiit he saw the future birth, life, suffering,
death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus into
the .seventh heaven. The angel left him, and
Isaiah's soul returned into his earthly body. It
was because of this vision, which he had related to
Hezekiah, that Manasseh caused Isaiah to be put
to death (11),

I.it,r,irij iiueHtiona.—'Vhe signs of the compositeness of the
liDiik iiri' to.i plain to require critical deinon.stration. The ques-
tion U hini|iiy wIk-Ukt it consists of two, three, or four inde-
iHn<l<'nt wrlnncs. Tlie most olnious yiartition is into two The
\ I.-Imm of I.saiah is complete in itself iiiul distinct from the
Maitvrdom. hven its heiiitr put after the Martyrdom, which it
wouM precede in historlcjil secjuence. Is an evidence of inde-
pendence. Hut these two main ^i-ctions have been eniarfred by
the oilditlonof a preface and two minor passajres in theseconii
part. Thus the analysis Is: (1) the Martvrdom of Isaiali (1-5
fxc. 1 and :i'^-,'>M. (2) The Vision of Isaiah (0-11. exc. IP-s^)'
(:0.\n inlnHliiction iiv a later hand (1). (4) Additions by a
later Clirlstlan writer (:f'-i-.V, and 11»"). This is Dillniann's
aimlysis, and has been (.'eiierally accepted.

The liates of these two sections are also widely apart. The

Vision belongs to the class and period of Christian apocalypses
which culminate in Uante's Divina Commedia. It was probably
produced in the 2nd cent. a.d. The Martyrdom is the embodi-
ment of an ancient tradition regarding the death of the prophet,
and was probably composed just before the Christian era.

^</»</oM«.— Ethiopic Text:' Lawrence (1819), Diilmann (1ST7).

Tranxlations. — Latin (with both the above). A Greek trans-
lation of a late Patristic origin has been published by von
(iebhardt (Z WTh, 1878, pp. 330-353).— English : Luth. 'Qnar.
Iter,. 1S7S, p. 513 If. — French : Migne in Victionnaire de.-i Apo-
crypliex, i., 1858; Basset, Leu Apocryphe.t Jithiopienn, iii.,
1S!»4. — German: Jolowicz (based on Lawrence's text, 1854);
Clemen in Kautszch's Pseudepigr. 1900.

LiTEitATUKE. — Gesenius, Com. uh. Jenaja, 1821 ; Stokes in
Smith and Wace's Did. of Chrlat. Biogr. ; Ilarnaek, Gexch. d.
(iltehr. Litt. i. p. 854 f., ii. pp. .513-579, 714 ff. ; Arraitage Itob-
inson in Hastings' DB ii. 499 ; Charles, Ascension of Isaiah.

12. The Histories of Adam and Eve. — This work
appears under two main forms, almost as distinct
as two works: one in Greek and one in Latin.
The Greek is entitled Narrative and Citizenship of
Adam and Eve (Ai-qyiia-is). It was published by
Tischendorf in 1866 (Apocal. Apocr. pp. 1-23) under
the misleading title of 'The Apocalypse of Moses.'
The Latin version is entitled Vita Ada; et Evce,
and was published by W. Meyer {AbhandJ. d.
Milnchen. Akad. Phil.-Hist. Klasse xiv. 3, 1878,
pp. 185-250). A third slightly varying form exists
in Slavonic, and a fourth in Armenian. Both of
these are from the Greek narrative.

Contents. — The story opens with an account of the
deeds of Adam and Eve immediately following the
expulsion from the garden of Eden. Adam and
Eve seek for food, experience difficulties in obtain-
ing it, and perform penance in order to secure God's
mercy (1-8). Satan once more tempts Eve (9-11),
and narrates at the request of Adam the circum-
stances of his own fall (12-17). Then follows an
account of the birth of Cain and Abel, and Adam
is taught how to cultivate the soil (18-22). Eve
dreams of Abel's death, which presently occurs ;
but Seth and other children are born to Adam and
Eve (23. 24). Adam informs Seth of a vision given
him through the archangel Michael, after he and
Eve had been cast out of Eden. It was a chariot
similar to the wind, but with wheels of fire. The
Lord sat upon it, and many thousand angels stood
on His right hand and on His left. Adam addrei-sed
a prayer to the Lord, and the Lord assured him
that those who should know and serve Himself
would not fail from the seed of Adam. Adam en-
joins Seth to receive this knowledge and keep it
(25-29). At the age of 930, Adam falls sick, and,
calling his sons together, once more tells them of
the circumstances of the Fall (30-34). He then
sends Eve and Seth to the vicinity of Paradise in
order that, putting dust upon their heads, they
might plead for him and receive some of the oil of
life to anoint him (35. 36), On the way they are
met by the Serpent, which bites Seth, but is per-
suaded by Eve to let him go (37-39). They reach
the gates of Paradise, present their petition, but,
instead of the oil for which they had asked, they
received the promise of a blessing in the distant
future (40-42). They return to Adam, and report
their experiences (43. 44). Adam then dies and is
buried (45-51).

The Diegesis gives a parallel account of the Fall
by Eve (15-30), of Adam's last will and death (30,
31), of the intercession of the entire angel host
in behalf of forgiveness for Adam (33-36), of the
acceptance of the prayer (37), of the burial of
Adam by the angel (38-42), and of Eve's death and
burial (42, 43),

Literary questions.— This book (or couplet of books) is found
in three recensions, Greek, Latin, and Slavonic, It is based on
a Jewish original (Tischendorf, Conybeare, Spitta, Hainack,
Fuchs). Others, however, do not believe in the Jewish original
(Schiirer, Gelzer).

The date of the composition is uncertain. The author was a
Jew. [llort, however, finds traces of Christian influence, and
relegates the :\dam story to iiost-("hristian times.]

Lditions. — Greek Text : Tischendorf, Apocalypses Apjocry

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 91

/)/«B, 1SC6; Wilh. Meyer, Vita Adce et Ei'ce. — En<rlish trans-
lations: in Schatt' and Wince's Ante- Nioene Christian Library,
vol. xxii.; Conybeare in JQR vii. 1895, pp. 21G-235. — German :
LittevHur-hlatt. d. Orients, ISoO, pp. 705 If., 732 ff.; Kuchs
in Kautszsch's Pneudepiffr. 1900.

LiTEKATrp.E. — liort, art. ' Adam Books' in Smith and Wace's
Diet, of ChriU. Biofj. ; Gelzor, Julius Africaiius, ii. 1, ISSo.

13. The Apocalypse of Abraham. — This is a
work preserved only in a Slavonic translation. It
was published in that language (1863), but only
made known more widely through a German trans-
lation by Bonwetsch (1897). It tells of how Abra-
ham took offence at the idolatry of his father, how
he despised both the wooden image Barisat and
the stone statue Marumath, and was on that ground
made the subject of a special visit on the part of
the angel Jaoel, who taught him to offer sacrifice,
and then took him into heaven on the wings of a
dove. Here Abraham received many revelations.
This work shonld not be mistaken for the Testa-
ment of Abraham, edited by James in the Cam-
bridge Texts and Studies (ii. 2, 18U2).

14. The Apocalypse of Eliis. — Mention of this
work occurs in Origen's Com. on Mt 27^ (ed. de la
Bue, iii. 916; ed. Loinmatzsch, v. 20). Here it is
said to be the source from which St. Paul quotes
1 Co 29 'Eye hath not seen.' etc. Cf. also Epi-
phanius, liter. 42 [Dindorf, ii. 398] ; and Jerome,
Epist. 57 ad Pammachium. Fragments of this
writing have been recovered in a Coptic manu-
script brought from Akhmim. Some of these frag-
ments were taken to Paris and some to Berlin.
Those in the former place have been edited and
published by Bouriant ; those in Berlin by Stein-
dorff {Texte ?(. Unters., Neue Folge, ii. .3a). This
editor thinks that the original was a Jewi.sh apoca-
lypse interpolated by a later Christian writer.

15. The Apocalypse of Zephaniah. — This was a
larger work than the preceding, and was known to
Clement of Alexandria ( Stmni. v. 11. 77). Among
the Akhmim fragments published by Bouriant and
Steindorff there are portions of this apocalypse
also, but they are not extensive enough to serve
as a basis of any trustworthy judgment as to its
origin and nature. The extracts recovered do not,
however, contain Christian interpolations.

16. All Ano.iy.nous Apocalypse. — The Akhmim
fragments contain, in addition to tlie above, por-
tions of a purely Jewish apocalypse, which cannot
be identified or associated with any special name.
The author, speaking in the first person, names
Elias among other saints whom he has seen in
heaven (14). The fragments are published along
with Steindorff's above-named edition of the Akh-
mim manuscripts.

17. The Prayer of Joseph.— Origen (ed. de la Bue,
iv. 84; Loinmatzsch, i. 147) calls tliis 'a writing
not to be despised, current among the Hebrews.'
Notliing, however, besides Origen's quotations from
it, is known of the contents of the work.

18. The Book of Eldad and Mo i ad.— These
names [EV 3Iedad] occur in Nu ll-c--"-*. A book
bearing this name is mentioned in Hennas' Shep-
herd ( Vis. ii. 3), but nothing more is known of it
with certainty.

iv. Genkkal Charactekistics. — The general
characteristics of apocalyptic literature may not
all be found in ideal viviilness in any single pro-
duction of the class. Nevertheless, in so-called
apocalypses, most of the following traits are pre-
dominant, and, with the majority of them, all
appear in some degree of clearness.

1. The Vision Form. — This is what gives the
name to the class, and, although not an indispens-
able feature, is quite determinative. The authors
put themselves in the place of seers, and tiirow
upon the canvas large, vivid, lifelike portraitures.
The imagery is in many cases fantastic and unreal
as compared with the actual world, but it is strik-

ing and clearly drawn. Conflicts and struggles,
judicial assizes, conversations and debates, as well
as cosmographical delineations, are placed before
the eyes of the seer, and by him described more or
less in detail.

2. Dualism. — The distinction between the world
of sense and the world of Divine or spiritual reali-
ties is always prominently in the mind. The other
world is, however, conceived as only imperceptible
to the bodily senses, not as different in kind. A
dualism as between matter and spirit underlies the
philosophy of the apocalypse, but is necessarily
ignored in the presentation of the realities of the
spiritual. These are put before the bodily senses
as if a simple heightening of the powers of the
senses would bring them into view.

3. Symbolism. — 'ihe visions portrayed abound in
conventional symbolical figures. Mixed organisms,
partaking of the parts and characteristics of differ-
ent creatures (beasts), frequently recur. Gener-
ally the different parts that enter into these mixed
figures represent different abstract principles, and
the mixed figure as a whole stands for combina-
tions of powers. Mystic and symbolic numbers,
too, constantly appear (seven heavens, seven arch-
angels, ten shepherds). Sometimes this symbolism
is explained in minute terms, but sometimes it is
left for the seer to unravel. Sometimes the pur-
pose of the use of such symbolism seems to be
simply to harmonize the form of presentation to
the mysterious nature of the subject-matter ; but
at other times it is evidently designed to conceal
the exact import of the revelation from the un-
initiated, and to keep it a secret within an esoteric
circle. The method of interpretation known as
Gematria is to this end frequently resorted to.

4. Amjehilociy. — A system of mediators between
the two worlds is pictured as establishing their
connexion. In comparison with the angelology of
the OT (with the exception of Daniel), this media-
torial hierarchy is complex and definite. It is,
moreover, subdivided into two branches, the good
and the evil, which are at enmity with one ain-lLer.
In some apocalypses one particular angel is ci^ni-
missioned to the task of acting as the companion
and friendly interpreter of the seer (ant/ehis intcr-
pres). To him the seer appeals in his ignorance of
the meaning of the mystic visions, and from him
he receives needed explanations. Here, too, a
difference must be noted between the apocalypses
and the early prophets (cf. Am 7-9), who see
visions, but speak directly with the Almighty in
person.

5. The Unknoicn as subject-matter. — The subject-
matter revealed concerns one of two spheres, viz.,
either the inscrutable mechanism of the other
world, or the purposes of God regarding the present
world : (a) Under the first head are portrayed the
characteristics, deeds, and destinies of angels, both
good and evil, the secret forces and courses of the
great nature-powers and elements, and the mode
of the Creation. (6) Under the second head natur-
ally two divisions are distinguishable, the historical
and the eschatological. Such great landmarks in
the history of the world as the entrance of sin, the
fortunes of the first human pair, the Flood, the
destinies of Israel, are given as known and decreed
of God. The whole eschatology, including the
final judgment, the Messianic Age, the fate of
mankind, the resurrection of the dead, and the de-
struction of the world, are of the utmost interest
to the apocalyptist. In fact, so prominent is this
part of the world of mystery in the apocalypses,
that some authorities have yielded to the tempta-
tion of making it the sole test of an apocalypse.
Apocalyptic is, according to this view, synoiiymous
with eschatological. (So Liicke, and, among more
recent scholars, Bousset.)

92 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

6. Pseudonymity. — The author of an apocalypse
generally assumes the name of a very ancient
person, preferably of some one wlio is represented
in the canonical books as having enjoyed direct
comuiunication with the spiritual world. Enoch,
Moses, and Elijah stand out as those who passed
from this world to the other in a preternatural
manner, and therefore were favoured even while
here with apocalyptic glimpses of the other. Others,
because of their exceptional holiness and nearness
to God, are easily put into the .same place of favour.
Such are Isaiah, Ezra, Baruch, and Daniel. The
name of Ezekiel, however, quite singularly does
not seem to have drawn any of these writings to
itself. Jeremiah's began to be used, but did not
become very popular. That of Solomon was
attached to a body of psalms for quite obvious
reasons. The Sibyl was probably drafted into the
service in order to gain the confidence of heathen
readers through the use of tiie voice of a trusted pro-
phetess of their own. It was intended to propagate
Jewish doctrines among the Gentiles (Schiirer).
This pseudonymity is accompanied by a not alto-
gether accidental tendency to tamper with the
apocalypses. More than any other class of writ-
ings they siiow signs of having been edited and
modified. Many of them are manifestly collec-

^ tioiisor compilations of smaller productions. Others
abound in interpolations and additions designed
to embellish, clarify, and expand their portraitures.

7. Optimism. — 'Fhe design of the whole class is
predominantly that of encouraging and comfort-
ing the chosen people under persecution. Some,
of course, are more or less sectarian in their ten-
dency, i.e. they address their words of encourage-
ment and hope to a particular section of the
people, wiio are regarded as faithful or righteous
jyir cxrcllencc. The majority are meant to teach
and comfort the whole nation.

V. Thkological Ideas. — The root of the apoca-
lyptic theology is the sense of need. Though it
may not be strictly accurate to call the apoca-
lypses 'tracts for hard times,' it is quite true that
they issue from a faith which looks to God for
deliverance from evil days. The eye is turned
into the future for the good which the God of the
Covenant has promised to Israel. The darker the
outlook, the brighter the hope which breaks
through it and sees ultimate victory. The rally-
ing point of thought is hei-e furnished by the
conception of the 'Day of Jahweh' in the pro-
phets of the earlier period. But this hope for the
future is impatient. It cannot await the working
i)( the slow moral forces gradually evolving the
consummation. It rather sees the Golden Age
bursting forth in a sudden and supernatural mani-
festation of God's power and favour to His chosen
people. Accordingly, the cardinal doctrines of the
apocalyptic theology nmst begin with the contrast
of the ages.

1. The doctrine of the two ^ons (4 Ezr T"^). —
This is developed from the older idea of the 'latter
days' (2'?;t nnq<) which the earlier prophets always
held up as a source of comfort and encouragement
wiienever they were moved to denounce the exist-
nig evils of their day. A great day of Jehovah
would bring about the righting of all that was
wrung with the world. In the apocalvpses, all
tiiat precedes the critical day is summed up under
the conception of the present age (ali^v ovtos, ^'!
■■^.':') ; the future, with its ideally good conditions,
IS the coming age (a/cJv 6 ju^XXu,., ifjx^ixtvos, ^^'>
^p). The notewortliy feature about the concep-
tion of the n-ons is that e;icii is a coherent unity,
and lias a character of its own. The present a^e
IS unpropiiioua, evil (4 Ezr 71^) ; the future wili be
go id. The past is the atre of the woild-kingdom,
portrayed under the .symbolic fii^ure of beasts ; the

future, the age of the Divine reign ; it has a human
aspect. All this is put forth as a source of com-
fort and encouragement to the faithful. The
duration of the evil age is variously computed.
Enoch makes it 10,000 years (Eth. Enoch I61 IS^s
216) . in ti]g Assumption of Moses it is 5000; at
any rate, it is definite and near its end. It is
soon to pass away. The question is even pertinent
whether those living shall continue to the end of
it. This question, however, is not answered (4 Ezr
437 550f. 620, Syr. Bar 449).

2. The impending Crisis. — The passing of the old
will be accompanied by great changes in nature.
The order of things will be reversed. The moon
will alter her course, and not appear at her ap-
pointed times ; the stars shall wander from their
orbits and be concealed (Eth. Enoch 80'-"). Trees
will flow with blood, and .stones will cry out (Syr.
Bar 27). In the heavens, dread signs of porten-
tous significance will appear (Sib. Or 3'°6-8i6)_
Fountains will dry up, the earth will refuse to
yield; the heavens will be turned into brass ; the
rains will fail, and springs of waters will be dried
up. Among men, wai-s and rumours of wars will
prevail (Eth. Enoch 99^, 4 Ezr 90, and private
feuds and recklessness of the life of men will be
the rule (Eth. Enoch 1002; gj^,, Or Sgss-ia-^ gyr.
Bar 4832 70^). Women will cease to be fruitful,
and miscarriages will occur (4 Ezr 5^ G^i). These
are the dpxn (hdlviov of Mt 24**, Mk i;^*.

3. The CVmception of God is more definitely
anthropomorphic than in the earlier period. He
is pictured by the apocalyptists as seated on the
highest heaven, and surrounded by a host of
attendants. In the Slavonic Enoch, in the Ascen-
sion of Isaiah, in the Greek Baruch, and in general
in all the apocalypses, God is regarded as a
monarch with an army to fight His battles, and
a retinue of servants to execute His orders.
Much of this is naturally a part of the drapery
of the vision, but it all tends to accentuate the
gulf which separates God from man. Especially
where the anthropomorphism is conscious of its
own inadequacy, and is combined with descrip-
tions of the tearfulness of God's person, the idea of
transcendency is accentuated, and begins to domi-
nate the apocalyptists' thought of Gcd.

4. The cosmology is a corollary of the transcen-
dence of God. The distance between heavui. His
dwelling-place, and earth, the abode of man, is
enlarged and filled with six stages, making alto-
gether seven heavens. These are minutely de-
scribed in the Slavonic Enoch, the Ascension of
Isaiah, the Greek Baruch (cf. also Test. Lev. 2
and 3). The substance of which these heavens are
made is light, or rather luminous matter (Eth. En
148-20) _ 'I'ljg language is not metaphorical. This
light becomes fuller and more intense as one
approaches the throne of God Himself. With God
are to be found in this sphere the forces and
persons that wage His warfare and serve to carry
out His plans. Besides the hierarchy of angels
(already spoken of), there are here the abodes of
the sun, moon, stars, and nature-powers ; also the
Messiah, ready to be manifested at the proper
time.

5. An arch-enemy called Beliar, Mastema, Aza-
zel (Satan), at every point undertakes to thwart
the purposes of God. It was he who tempted
and misled Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden
{Life of Adam and Eve). As he takes on himself
a body and appears on earth in order to defeat
the Messiah, he is Antichrist. In this capacity he
is sometimes represented as taking the form of a
king (Antiochus Epiphanes, Nero, Caligula) and
sometimes that of a false prophet (Sib. Or o^^ff).

6. .iVfflrt.— There is a definite realization of the
unity of the human race. Sin, need, and death

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 93

are looked upon as affecting all men. They have
one cause for all. The world was created for the
sake of man (4 Ezr 8^*, Syr. Bar 14i8). Similarly,
the plans of God have in view the welfare of men
as such. The blessings of the Messianic Age come
to men in general, although with varying degrees
of fulness (Sib. Or :]^'^- "e^ff.). But the distinction
between those who please God by obeying His law
and those who do not is never lost sight of. Israel
is His chosen people, and He has given il the Law ;
but the Israelite who transgresses the Law is
punished, whereas the Gentile who observes the
Sabbath shall be holy and blessed like 'us,' says
the author of Jubilees.

7. Sin. — All misery among men is the result of
sin, and the fall of the first pair in the Garden of
¥Aen is the cause of it. This is predominantly the
lesson of the Life of Adam and Eve ; but it is also
clearly put in 4 Ezra and in the Syriac Baruch
(Tennant, The Sources of the Doctrine of the Fall
and Original Sin., 1905).

8. The coming Messiah. — The central develop-
ment of apocalyptic literature is the figure of the
Messiah ; but it is nowhere outlined so clearly as
in the Ethiopic Enoch. He is here designated as
the Son of Man ; He is also called the Ilighteous
One, the Elect One, the Elect of Righteousne.ss
and the Faithfid One, and the Anointed One.
He is not a mere human being ; He has His
home in heaven with the Ancient of Days (89"
46'). Enoch sees Him as pre-existing. This pre-
existence is also implied in the declaration that
His name was named by the Creator of spirits
before the creation of the sun and stars (48^), that
He was chosen and concealed before the foundation
of the world (48" 02''). He will become manifest
in the day of consummation, taking His seat
beside the Lord of the Spirits, and all creatures
shall fall down before Him (ol^- ■* (511 GS^). Other
portraitures are to be found in 4 Ezr l:]-^ ('One in
the form of a man'), and in the Psalms of Solomon
(17 and 18).

9. The liesnrrection. — The doctrine of Dn 12- is
that ' many of them that sleep in the dust of the
earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and
some to shame and everlasting contempt.' In the
Eth. Phioch (511) tiijg jg broadened into a universal
resurrection, the object of which is defined as
judgment for the deeds done in the body (Eth.
Enoch 22). This idea is also taught elsewhere
(4 Ezr 7'^^ 5« H^s, Syr. Bar 42^ 5U-, Test. Benj.
10, almost in the words of Dn 12^, Life of Adam,
41. 10. 1.3. 28. 51).

10. The Judgment. — This undoubtedly developed
from the prophetic conception of the Day of Jahweh.
It is to be distinguished from the judgment which
takes place during the course of the present age.
It is called the Great Judgment (fxeydXij Kpl<ns,FAh.
Enoch 106- 12 25^ 453- ^ 48^ 50* 58'^ 60^ 656- w 67io, Jub
510 3211, Eth. En 9V, Test, of Levi 3, Assump.
Mos ]i8); Eternal Judgment (Slav. Enoch 7* 40i-,
4 Ezr 770-73, Syr. Bar 20* 57^ 598 837 85'2ff-, Life of
Adam, 39). It consists in a spectacular revelation of
the wickedness of God's opponents, and their con-
demnation and punishment for their enmity to
Him. The subjects of the judgment are both
heavenly and earthly powers. Satan and Anti-
christ (if these two be looked at as different), the
fallen angels, the world-powers, and wicked men
are all included. The judgment will be upon the
ground of books in which either the names or the
deeds of men have been inscribed according to
their good or evil. Sometimes the deeds are
represented as being weighed in the scales. Each
person judged must stand upon his own merits.
Intercession in his behalf by another is of no avail.
The judge is God Himself. He appears as the
Ancient of Days (one having a Head of Days),

with white hair and beard. He is seated on a
glorious throne, and surrounded with myriads of
angels (Eth. En 1*- », Sib. Or 39* 9^ Slav. En
20', Test. Levi 4, Assump. Mos 12^). In some
representations it is the Messiah who acts as the
judge (uniformly in the Book of Similitudes, Eth.
Enoch 37-71, with the exception of 47^). His
sphere of judgment, however, includes the fallen
angels and demons, not men. For the most part,
the Messiah appears either before or after the
judgment (4 Ezr 7'*5, before ; Eth. Enoch 90, after).
Again, Messiah is associated with God and acts
as the judge while God executes sentence (Eth.
En 62).

11. llie Punishment of the Wicked. — The most
manifest effect of the judgment is the overthrow
of God's enemies and the infliction of fit penalties
upon them. Of these enemies, three classes may
be distinguished : {a) Spirits, including Satan and
fallen angels (Test. Benj. 3, Sib. Or o''^, Test. Sim.
6, Zeb. 9). {b) Heathen world-powers, looked at
either in the abstract or as special individual kings
(4 Ezr 11. 123, Sib. Or 3350-3eo, pg-Sol \T^-\ Eth.
En 51* 52' 537), (c) Sinners in general. But
special mention is made of Israelites who trans-
gressed the law (Syr. Bar 85'^ 54-2). Satan
(Beliar) is cast into the fire (Test. Jud. 25), though
he rules in hell with his angels (Eth. En 53^ 56').
The fallen angels pass at the judgment into a
permanent condition of damnation. The giants
who sprang from the union of the angels with
the daughters of men are also confined in eternal
torment. The heathen who have opposed God
and oppressed Israel are destroyed. Destruction
(dTTtiXeta), however, is not conceived as equivalent
to annihilation, but as involving existence in a
wretched state.

12. Tlie Beward of the Eighteous. — The works
of the pious are preserved as in a treasury in
heaven (4 Ezr V S^s, Syr. Bar 1412 24'). When
tliey are raised from the dead, it is in order that
they may come into eternal life (Ps-Sol 3'^). This
they are said to inherit (Eth. En 37* 40^, Ps-Sol
99 14ii.s^_ Eternal life is sometimes looked at
as simply a prolonged bodily life (Eth. En 5^
]0n. "62'*, Jub 2327 -"29); but sometimes it appears
as a superior kind of life in another world (4 Ezr
8^3, Syr. Bar 2122, Test. Lev. 18).

13. The Benovation of the World. — This is the
natural corollary of the idea that the world as at
present constituted has been corrupted by rebellion
against God and sin, and therefore cannot stand.
Deutero-Isaiah (65'7 66-2) foreshadows the advent of
' a new heaven and a new earth.' The same world-
reconstruction is held in prospect by the apoca-
lyptists. The Ethiopic Enoch (91'6f-) announces
that ' the first heaven will vanish and pass away,
and a new heaven will appear.' The present order
of the material heavens will last only until the new
eternal creation is brought into existence (Eth. En
72'). Time distinctions will cease when the new
creation is accomplished (Jub 50^).

14. Predestination. — In the sense of the deter-
mination of the destiny of individuals beforehand,
as elect or non-elect, the idea of predestination
does not clearly appear in the apocalyptic litera-
ture. In the sense, however, that all the experi-
ences of God's people are known and have always
been known by Him, and do not come to pass
without His consent, the doctrine is constant as the
undertone of thought. All the events unfolded in
the eschatological pictures are certain to come to
pass because God wills that they should. Cer-
tainty of blessedness for the righteous is not de-
pendent upon their own piety, but upon God's
having foreordained it (Assump. Mos 12*). Tlie
age is as a whole fixed and measured (Book of
Jubilees). When its course has run, it comes to

94 APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

APOCRYPHA

an end (4 Ezr 439 774). a certain number of
righteous must be gathered in. Only when this
takes place can the consummation occur. It was
this doctrine that made the whole apocalyptic
theory a practical effective scheme, because it
enabled it to impart the assurance of the realiza-
tion of that good in the future which was missed
in the present.

VI. Contact with the New Testament. —
The significance of apocalyptic literature for the
NT is very large. In general, apocalyptic furnishes
the atmosphere of the NT. Its form, its language,
and its material are extensively used.* In par-
ticular, this is true of the following main lines:—

1. The apocalyptic form is used as such in the
literary composition of the NT. In the Apocalypse
of John this becomes the form of the whole book.
In other places it is introduced as a part of produc-
tions of a dilYerent literary type (cf. Mt 24 and
parallels). Whether these passages were origin-
ally separate works and the Gospel writers in-
corporated them, or whether they make up integral
parts of the plans of the Gospels, is a question for
historical criticism to deal with. In their inter-
pretation no satisfactory results will be reached if
their formal affinity to the apocalypses be ignored.
In 2 Th 2-'-i- the case is clear. The Apostle evi-
dently weaves an apocalyptic passage of his own
construction into his Epistle. A firm base of
operations is thus furnished for the interpretation
of the apocalyptic portions of the NT. These must
be read as the apocalypses in general are read.

2. Some outstanding phrases in the NT termi-
nology deserve special mention. The expression
'Son of Man' occurs first in Daniel (7'^). Erom
here, if the now predominant pre-Christian dating
of the Book of Similitudes (Eth. En 37-71) be
correct, it is adopted into that work, and this
usage serves as the bridge of connexion between
Uaniel and Jesus, who treats this term constantly
as His own title. Closely associated with this
title is the phrase 'Head of Days' (Eth. I':n 47^
48-"''), as applied to God. Other phrases of this
class are the ' Day of Judgment,' the ' Great Day
of Judgment' (Eth. En l!)i22i-ii).

3. Quotations from apocalyptic books are not
very common in the MT. The most familiar is
that in Jude i«- from Eth. En l^. Jude^ is also a
(|U(3t;Uion from the Assumption of Moses (Charles,
Testament of Moses). The book is not named here,
and the quotation is identified by ancient writers
to whom this apocalypse was familiar. But coin-
cidences of phraseology, suggesting quotations
either of one from the other or of both from a com-
mon source, are quite frequent (cf. Charles, Book
of Enoch, pp. 42-49 ; Apocalypse of Baruch, pp.
Ixxyi-lxxix ; Book of the Secrets 'of Enoch, pp.
xxii, xxiii ; Assumption of Moses, pp. 113; also
Sinker, Testamenta XII Patriarcharum, pp. 209-
210). Some of these parallelisms must be ascribed
to the nature of the thought expressed, which
perhaps would not admit, or at least would not
easily lend it.self to very different phraseology ;
but in a large number the coincidence can occur
only where literary affiliation of some kind exists.

4. The most important point of contact, however,
is tiiat iu subject-matter. And here it is no mere
jtoint of contact that we have to note, but a large
and free adoption of the forms worked out by the
apocalyptisLs. To undertake a list, would be to
repeat the summary given above of the apocalyptic
theology. The simplest way to describe the rela-
tion is to say that Jesus and the writers of the NT
found the forms of thought made use of in apo-

'This does not mean, however, that there are not in the
fiindniiifnl.il matters sharp contrasts betwcii the NT and the
a|>i>o.ilv|.ses. 'I'hn .New Testjiuient is the Nev, Testaiueut Its
originullty is beyond questiuu.

calyptic literature convenient vehicles, and have
cast the gospel of God's redemptive love into these
as into moulds. The Messianism of the apo-
calyptists has thus become unfolded into the
Christology of the NT. The theocratic judgment
has passed into the universal ethical discrimination
between individuals according to the deeds done in
the body. Other doctrines, such as angelology and
demonology, have likewise been used as the vehicles
of great eternal verities.

5. Solutions of some questions which St. Paul
faced are proposed in some of the apocalypses
(notably 4 Ezr and Syr. Bar). These ai-e often as
different as they can possibly be. Whether they
are meant to be a secret form of attack on Chris-
tianity or simply independent ways of approaching
the same subjects, they are of the utmost import-
ance. In the first case, they throw light on the
growth of Christian belief and the manner of
the polemic waged against it. In the latter, they
illustrate the nature of the setting in which the
gosjjel found itself as soon as preached.

LtTEEATURE. — Besidcs the special works (referred to above) on
the individual apocalypses, the followin}r comjireheDsive works
may be consulted: — Gfriirer, Das Jdlirhundert d. Ilei Is, ISSS;
Hilgenfeld, Jiid. Apokal. 1857. anA Messias Judwurum, 1869;
T>\-amu\on(\.T lie Je^l'ish Messiah. 1877; Sinend, 'Jud. Apok.'iu
ZATW.Xi^ib. pp. 2'22-'2.50; Deane, Pseudepigrajiha. 1891; Thom-
son, Books whicli Influenced Our Lord and His Ai/ostles,\%^\;
(\e Faye,Les Apoca/ypses t/>ij>e.s,lS92; Bousset, Der Antichrist
[Eng. tr. by Keane, 1896], and the same author's op'enharung
Johannis, 1896, Die Rel. d. Judentums, 1903, and Ji'id. Apokal.
190:i; Charles, Exchiitologii, llehrexo, jewi.'ih,{ind Chri.'itian,
1899 ; Schiirer, GJV^. 1S9S. iii.; M. S. Terry. Biblical Apoca-
lyjitics. 1898 ; Wellhausen, Skiszen u. Vorarbeiien, 1899 ; Volz,
JUd. Eschatolodie, 1903 ; Baldensj)er?er, DieMessianisah-Apo-
k(tl)jptischen IFoffnungen des Judtniti'ms, 190.3 [this is the 3rd
ed. of his SeWstbewusstsein Jesu^. ISSSJ ; H. A. A. Kennedy,
The E.'icUatology of Paul, 1904 ; Muirhead, The EscliaUdogy of
Jesus, 1904 ; articles by Charles in llastin<;s' DB and in Encyc.
Bihlica ; Porter, Messages of the Apocaluptical Writers. 1905.

' A. C. ZENOS.

APOCRYPHA.— This term is here used for those
Jewish writings included in the Gr., Lat., and Eng.
Bibles to which the title is commonly applied, i.e.
the Biblical Apocrypha. For the literary history
and characteristics of the Apocrypha see Hastings'
DB, vol. i. s.v. ' Apocrypha.' The relation of the
Apocrypha to Christ and Christianity, which is
the subject of this article, comes especially under
four heads — the Messianic idea, the doctrine of
Wisdom, the anticipation of Christian doctrines
other than that of the Person or mission of Christ,
the use of the Apocrypha in the Christian Church.

I. The Messianic Idea. — While this idea is
luxuriantly developed in Apocalyptic literature, it
is singularly neglected in most of the Apocrypha.
The stream of prophecy which ran clear and strong
in the OT became turbid and obscure in those
degenerate successors of the prophets, the Apoca-
lyptic visionaries. But it was in the line of the
prophetic schools of teaching that the Messianic
idea was cherished. Accordingly the treatment of
the later stage of that teaching as erratic and un-
authoritative, not fit for inclusion in the Canon,
involved the result that the remaining more sober
literature, which was recognized as nearer to the
standard of Scripture, and in Egypt included in the
later canon (at all events as in one collection of
sacred books), was for the most part associated
with tho.se schools in which the Messianic hope
was not cultivated. Therefore it is not just to
say that this hope had faded away or suffered
temporary obscurity during the period when the
Apocrypha was written, the truth being that it
was then more vigorous than ever in certain circles.
But these circles were not those of our Old Testa-
ment Apocrypha. Thus the question is literary
rather than historical. It concerns the editing of
certain books, not the actual life and thought of
Israel.

This will be evident if we compare the Book of

APOCRYPHA

Daniel with 1 Maccabees. These two books deal
witli the same period. Yet the former, although
it does not know a personal Messiah, is the very
fount and spring of the Messianic conception of
the golden age in subsequent Apocalypses. On
the other hand, 1 Maccabees ignores the Messianic
hope, at all events in its usually accepted form.

Only two passages in this book can be pointed to as sugg-est-
ing the Messianic idea, and they will not l)ear the strain that is
sometimes put upon them. The first is 1 Mac 25" ' David for
being merciful inherited the throne of a kingdom for ever and
ever.' We have here that very elementary form of the Messianic
idea, if we may so call it, the permanence of David's throne.
But it is evident that David as the founder of the royal line, not
the Mes.siah, is here referred to, and that the permanence of the
throne is for the succession of his descendants, not for any one
person. Not only is this the most reasonable interpretation of
Uie passage, but it rests on OT promises to that effect, where
the family of David and not the personal Messiah is intended
(C(7. 2 S 7i:*- '6, cf. Ps 13212). of this passage, however, as of the
earlier Scriptures on which it rests, we may say that the idea
contained in it is realized by the permanent reign of David's
great Son, and in a much larger and higher way than had been
anticipated. The other passage is 1 Mac 4*>- J6 ' And there
came into their mind a good counsel, that they should pull it
[i.e. the sanctuary] down, lest it should be a reproach to them,
because the Gentiles had defiled it : and they pulled down the
altar, and laid up the stones in the mountain of the house in a
con\ enient place, until there should come a prf.phet to give an
answer concerning them.' This is not even a reference to ' the
prophet' of whom we read in Jn l'-^. It n merely a case of
waiting for some prophet to come and say when the temple was
to be rebuilt, with no definite assurance that one specifically
anticipated prophet was thus destined to arise.

Nevertheless, though we cannot point to any
Messianic propliecy in 1 Mac, some of tlie Psalms
attributed to this period indicate a prevalence of
ideas that belong to the same circle of thought.
Passionate patriotism fired by martyrdom and
crowned witli temporary success naturally painted
great hopes for tlie nation. The reason why these
were not connected with a coming ]\Ie.ssiah may be
twofold. (1) For a time it seemed likely tliat the
Maccabees themselves were realizing those hopes,
that tills remarkalile family of jiatriots was re;illy
re.'^toring the glory of Israel. (2) Since these men
were of tlie priestly line, the splendour of their
achievements eclipsed for the time being the
national dreams of the house of David.

The reaction of tlie later Hasidim, out of whom
the Pharisaic party emerged, against the Avorldly
metliods of the Hasmona^an family and tiieir identi-
fication of the mission of Israel with military
prowess, released the more spiritual religious hopes,
and so prepared for a revival of Alessianic ideas.
This new movement, which saw the true good of
the nation to lie in her religion and looked for her
lielp from God, did not altogether coincide with
the hope of a i)ersonal Christ, for God Himself was
the Supreme King whose coming was to be ex-
pected by His people.

The book of Judith is a romance issuing from
the Pharisaic reactionary party ; but it is devoid
of all specilic Messianic ideas. In this case the
human saviour of Israel is a woman.

Of the three other popular tales, two, The Hifs-
torij of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, contain
nothing bearing on the Messianic idea ; but the
latter part of Tubit maj' be accounted Messianic in
the general sense as giving a picture of the Golden
Age of the future. Jerusalem is to be scourged for
lier children's works, but slie is to give praise to
the everlasting King that 'afterwards his taber-
nacle may be builded' in her 'again with joy.'
Many nations are to come from far to the name
of the Lord God with gifts in their hands. All
generations shall praise her with great joy. The
city is to be built and paved with precious stones.
' And all her streets shall say Hallelujah ; and
they shall praise him, saying, Blessed be God,
which hath exalted it for ever' (To 13«-i»). In all
tiiis there is no mention of the son of David or any
human king and deliverer. (In the Hebrew varia-

tion of the text of this chapter as rendered by
Neubauer, we read of ' the coming of the Re-
deemer and the building of Ariel,' i.e. Jerusalem ;
but evidentlj' this Redeemer is Jahweh). We
must go outside our Apocrypha to the Psalms of
Solomon for the Pharisaic revival of the Messiah
of tlie line of David.

Apocalyptic literature lends itself more readily
to Messianic ideas, and these find full expression
in tlie Book of Enoch, where — in the 'Similitudes'
— the descriptions of the Messiah who appears in
clouds as the Son of Man are assigned by Dr.
Charles to the pre-Christian Jewish composition.

2 Esdras, also a Jewish Apocalyptic work, calls
for closer examination, since it is contained in our
Apocrypha, althougli its late date diminishes its
value in the history of the development of tiiought.
The Christian additions (chapters («) 1. 2; (b) 15. 16)
do not call for attention here ; they could only come
into the study of the development of Christian
thought if they were in any way contributions to
that subject ; but the warnings of the supplanting
of Israel by the Gentiles in (n), and the judgment
of the nations in (b), cannot be regai'ded in that
light. The original work (chapters 3-14) affords
significant evidence of the melancholy condition
into which Jewish Messianic hopes had sunk
during the gloomy interval between the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem and the rise of Bar-Cochba, tlie
reign of Domitian (a.d. 81-96) being its generally
accepted date (see Hastings' DB, vol. i. p. 765).
Unlike the other Apocryphal writings, since it
does not illustrate the transition from the OT to
the NT, it is serviceable only in the study of post-
Christian Judaism. Its Christian interpolations
do not materially hinder us from discovering the
original text. The jMessianic jiassages are in
chapters 7. 12. and 13. The insertion of the name
'Jesus' in 7-** (not found in the Oriental versions)
by a Christian hand is not sufficient reason for dis-
crediting the Jewish chiiracter of tlie composition.
The picture of the Messiah is quite un-Christian.
It is startling to read that he is to die (7'-"-') ; but
(1) this is after reigning 400 years, and (2) witiiout
a subsequent resurrection. The first point indi-
cates the visionary ideas of the Apocalyptic Avriter,
not the known fact of our Lord's brief life on earth,
and the second is in conflict with the great pro-
minence which the early Christians gave to our
Lord's resurrection. A Messiah who lived for 400
years and then died, and so ended his Messiah-
ship, could not be Jesus Christ. Accordingly the
Syriac reads '30' in.stead of '400,' evidently a
Christian emendation. Undoubtedly this is a
Jewish conception, and its mournful chiiracter,
so unlike the triumphant tone of Enoch, is in
keeping witli the gloomy character of the book,
and a reflection of the deep melancholy that took
possession of the minds of earnest, patriotic Jews
after the fearful scenes of the siege of Jerusalem
and the overwhelming of their hopes in a deluge
of blood. The reference to the death of the
Messiah is not found in the Arabic or the Ar-
menian versions ; but it is easy to see how it came
to be omitted, while there is no likelihood that it
would be inserted later, either by a Jew, to whom
the idea would be unwelcome, or by a Christian,
.since the resurrection is not also mentioned. A
noteworthy fact is that the Messiah is addressed
by God as ' My son.' The Ethiopic of 7-^, instead
of 'My son Jesus' reads 'My Messiah,' and the
Armenian, ' the anointed of God.' But the refer-
ence to sonship occurs elsewhere frequently, e.g.
' My son Christ,' or ' Mj^ anointed son' (7''^; see
also 13^^- ^* ^- 14^, in most versions, but not in
Arm. : see Dr. Sanday, art. ' Son of God ' in
Hastings' DB, vol. iv. p. 571). Since, as Dr.
Sanday remarks in the article just referred to.

APOCRYPHA

the strongly Messianic passage in Ts-Sol 1723-61 lias
not the title ' 8on,' hut clearly borrows from Ps 2
in v.-", it is a likely inference that 2 Esdras is here
based on that Psahn. Compare the words of the
higli priest in Mt 26'*^

In chs. 12 and 13 tlie writer names Daniel, and
manifestly bases his elaboration of the Messianic
picture on the Book of Daniel. The Messiah
appears as a lion rising up out of a wood and
roaring. A certain i)rc-c.\istencc is implied in the
assertion that tiie Most High had kept iiim (12^^) ;
tiie Latin lias only 'for the end,' l)ut the Syriac
reads ' for the endof days, who sliail sjjring up out
of tlie seed of David.' He will come to uplmaid and
destroy tlie guilty poo])le, but he will have mercy
on a remnant and deliver them. Similar ideas
are repeated in ch. 13, but in a different form. A
man comes from the midst of the sea. This is
milike Daniel (7^' '^), where the four beasts come up
from tlio sea, but tlie ' one like unto a son of man '
from the clouds. The Most High has kept him for
a great season (v.-"), another reference to pre-ex-
isiciue. Similarly later on we read, 'Like as one
can neither seek out nor know what is in the
depths of the sea, even so can no man upon earth
see my Son, or those that be with him, but in the
time of his day ' (v.''-). He exists, but hidden till
the time when God will reve.al him. When he
comes and is revealed, ' it will be as a man a.scend-
ing.' ' When all the nations hear his voice ' they
will draw together to tight against him. But he
will stand on the top of Mount Zlon, and there he
will taunt the nations to their face and destroy them
without any effort on his part, the instrument
of destruction being the Law, which is compared
to tire. Then in addition to the saved remnant
of the Jews already referred to, the lost ten tribes
will be brought back from their exile beyond the
Eupiirates, whither they had gone by a miracu-
lous passage through the river, and whence they
will return by a similar miraculous staying of
'the springs of the river' again. Thus we have
the idea of a restoration of all Israel under the
Messiah, but Avith no further extension of the
happy future so as to include other nations, as in
tlie Cliristian Apocalyptic conceptions ; on the
contrary, those nations will I e humiliated and
cliagrined at the spectacle of the glorihcation of
the former victims of their oppression. On the
whole we must conclude with Paul Volz (Jiidische
Esrhntologic, p. 202) that 2 Ezra adopts the
traditional liope of the Messiah, but does not see
in it the chief ground of assurance for the future.
Ik- is hailed as God's son, but he appears to have
only a temporary existence. He does not bring
deliverance from sin ; nor is he to come for judg-
ment. His death is the end of his mission.

ii. The Doctuine of Wisdom. — Unlike the
Proi)hetic and Apocalyptic literature which con-
fessedly anticipated a great future, and so fur-
nished a hoi.e whiih Christianity subsequently
claimed to fuliil, the Hebrew Wisdom writings
profess to give absolute truth, and betray no
consciousness of further develo[iments. Neverthe-
less the Church was quick to seize on them as
teaching the essential Divinity of Chri.st. The
historical metliod of more recent times .sees in them
the germs of ideas on tiiis .subject which were
sulisequeiitly developed by Christian theologians
ot the Alexandrian .school. For the doctrine of
AN is.loiu in liie OT .see DB, art. 'Wisdom.' That
<l(>ctrine in the Aoocrynha is in direct succession
fnmi the I{i)Jchm(th teaching of J'roAerbs.

1. Sirach.— In tlie Palestinian school represented
by Siracli it is dilli.ult to see much, if any, ad-
vance on I'roverhs. The idea of Wisdom itself is
essentially tiie same, aii<l the gnomic form of v;rit-
ing continues an identity of method.

{a) Literary Form. — There is no attempt at meta-
physical analysis or philo.sophical argumentation.
This Jewish philosophy is not elucidated by reason-
ing, or based on logical grounds. It is reganled
as intuitive in origin and the treatment of it is
didactic. Thus we have nothing like a philo-
sophical or ethical treatise. Much of the writing
is directly hortatory, and where the third person
is used we have descriptions and reflections,
accounts of the nature and function of wisdom,
and illustrations of its operations in life and
histoiy.

[h) Unity of Wisdom. — In Sirach, as in Pr.,
Wisdom is described from two points of view :
as found in God and His administration of the
world, and as attainable by man in his own char-
acter and life. But it is not that God's wisdom is
merely the model or the source of our wisdom.
Wisdom throughout, though seen in such ditterent
relations, is taken as essentially one entity. It is
wisdom, absolute wisdom, that God u.ses in the
administration of the universe, and that man also
is exhorted to pursue. This realism in dealing
with an abstract notion is the first step towards
personification.

(c) Personification. — As in Proverbs, wisdom is
here personitied. Wisdom is supposed to act, c.fj.
' How exceeding harsh is she to the unlearned '
(6-"). In a fine passage she celebrates her own
praises, glorying in the midst of her people,
saying—

' I came forth from the mouth of the Most High,
And covered the earth as a mist.
I dwelt in liigh places.
And my throne is in the pillar of the cloud ' (243- 4) ;

and, further, after a rich description of the scenes
of nature that she influences —
' In three things I was beautified,
And stood up beautiful before the Lord and men,' etc. (251).

But there is nothing in this personification beyond
a free use of tlie Oriental imagination. No doubt
to this vivid imagination such writing presents
wisdom as in some way a concrete entity, and
more, as a gracious, queenly presence. But all
along there are expressions which admit the
imaginary character of the whole picture. For
instance, the opening passage, de.scribing how
Wisdom stood up in the congregation of the Most
High to celebrate her own praises, would lose all
its force of ajjpeal if it were taken in prosaic
literalness. It is just because this is no actual
person posing for admiration, but a truth set forth
before us, that the whole picture appears to be
sublime, and serves its purpose in leading to a high
appreciation of wisdom. Then wisdom is identi-
fled with understanding : ' Whoso is wise, cleave
thou unto him ' (6^'') . . . ' If thou seest a man of
understanding, get thee betimes unto him' (v.^«).
Thus cultivation of friendship with a man of
wisdom or understanding is part of the pursuit of
wisdom itself. Even Pliilo's much more explicit
personification of the Logos does not mean that lie
held the Logos to be an actual person in our sense
of the term. Here all we can say of the subject
is that the allegorizing is very vivid, so vivid as
to be on the verge of the mythopceic, but still in
the original intention of the writer not meant to
be more than the glorification of a great quality
found primarily in God, impressed on nature, and
commended to mankind as a highly desirable
attainment.

The difficulty of the question lies in the fact that the Oriental
mind would not clearly face this question of personality. The
imagination would so vividly realize the allegorical picture
that the idea would seem to assume form and body, condensing
to an apparently concrete and even personal presence, so that
it would be regarded for the time being as a person, and yet in
the course of the meditation this would melt again into an
abstraction, and in the less imaginative passages be regarded

APOCRYPHA

97-

in its original charact-er purely as a mode of thought or action.
To apply to the product of such a process the logic of the West,
or to attempt to bring it into harmony, say, with Locke's theory
of ideas, is unreasonable. The atmosphere does not allow of so
hard a definition of personality as that which may be either
affirmed or denied.

(d) Source. — Wisdom originates in God. She
'came forth from the mouth of the Most High'
(24^). ' Wisdom was created together with the faith-
ful in the womb' (1'^). She exclaims, ' He created
nie from the beginning, before the world' (24'').
As with Pr 8-, tlie Arian controversy has given
a factitious importance to this sentence. Wisdom
is identified with Christ ; and thus the Arian
doctrine that Christ is a creature, tliat He was
created, not begotten by God and not eternal,
appears to have clear support. It is probable
that Sirach is dependent on Proverbs, and the
rendering of LXX (eKTiffe) is doubtful.* But the
much debated point is of little real importance ;
indeed, it is of no valuet ill we grant tliat Wisdom
in ProverVjs and Sirach is (I) personal, and (2)
identical with Christ. The denial of (I) in the
previovis paragraph carries with it the exclusion of
(2). Nevertlieless, apart from the Arian concep-
tion, we still have the idea of the creation of
wisdom to account for. This, however, is but a
consequence of the allegorical personification in
conjunction with the tliought tliat wisdom pro-
ceeds from God. That has a twofold signihcation,
corresponding to the two aspects of wisdom First,
God is the source of His own wisdom. He has
not to learn ; all His plans and purposes spring
from His own mind. Secondly, mankind learns
wisdom from God ; it is His gift to His children.
Wisdom is with all flesh according to Gods

'gi/t'iV).

(c) Characteristics. — There is an intellectual
element in wisdom, which is the highest exercise
of the mind. The opposite of wisdom is folly, a
stupid and brutish thing. The Divine side of wis-
dom most clearly exhibits this character. Wisdom
created by God is with God, and therefore is seen
in His presence and works. Nevertlieless, Sirach
makes very little reference to the manifestation
of wisdom in Nature or Providence. The whole
stress is on this Divine gift as an object of
aspiration for mankind. Wisdom is seen as the
best of all human possessions. The sublimity of
wisdom is set forth in order to fire the enthusiasm
of men to have their lives enriched witli the
Divine grace. This is just the same as in Pro-
verbs. So also are two further characteristics of
Hebrew wisdom. First, it is moral. It is con-
cerned with tlie practical reason, not the specula-
tive. Its realm is ethics, not metaphysics. It is
not a philosophy for solving the riddle of the
universe; it is a guide to conduct. The ethics is
not discussed theoretically ; there is no theory ot
etliics. The aim of the book is practical, and the
treatment of wisdom is didactic and hortatory.
Sirach even discourages speculation, in directing
the attention solely to conduct —

' Seek not things that are too hard for thee.
And search not out things that are above thy strength.
The things that have been commanded thee, think there-
upon ;
For thou hast no need of the things that are secret' (321-22).

Second, it is religious. Wisdom here, as in Pro-
verbs, is identified with the fear of the Lord. The
way to attain wisdom is to keep the Law—

' If thou desire wisdom, keep the commandments.
And the Lord shall give her unto thee freely ' (l^S).

*The Hebrew of Proverbs (njij) is rendered in RV as well as
AV ' possessed. ' Still RVm has ' formed,' in agreement with
Bertheau, Zbckler, Hitzig, and Ewald, and Delitzsch has the
similar word ' produced ' ; moreover, Syr. and Targ. agree with
the LXX. In Pr i^ niQ is rendered ' get,' and certainly there it
can only have that meaning.
VOL. I. — 7

Like Proverbs, Siracli contains a quantity of
shrewd worldly wisdom, and it is eminently
prudential in aim ; but it is the better self that
is considered, and the higher interests, rather
than wealth and pleasure, that are studied. In
this way the whole book is concerned with the.
exposition of the nature and merits of wisdom.

2. Baruch. — The eloquent celebration of the
praises of wisdom in this book, which probably
dates from the 1st cent. a.u. (see DB, art.
'Baruch'), is on similar lines to Sirach. Wisdom
is like choice treasure, to be sought out from far.
But since she is above the clouds or beyond the
sea, no man can be expected to reach so far.i
There is only One who can do this. ' He that
knoweth all things knoweth her ' (3^-). Here the
idea is difi'erent from that of Sirach. Wisdom
is not created by God, but is found by Him, as
though an independent pre-existence — ' He found
her out with His understanding' {lb.}. But the
personification is thinner and more pallid than in
Sirach. There is no real dualism. The language
is little more than a metaphorical expression of
the idea that God has the wisdom wliicli is above
human reach. Still it goes on into a sort of
myth, for Wisdom thus discovered by God hidden
in some remote region afterwards appears on
earth and becomes conversant with men (3^").
Here we have a curious parallel to the Johannine
conception of the Word originally with God and
then becoming incarnate and dwelling with men.
But Baruch has no conception of incarnation, and
the idea has no place in the Hebrew personification
of wisdom.

3. Wisdom. — (a) The nature of Wisdom. — Al-'
though, as an Alexandrian work in touch with
Greek philosophy, the Bk. of Wisdom carries the
doctrine of Hukhmah a stage forward in the direc-
tion of Philo, it is essentially Jewish, and its idea
of wisdom is fundamentally the same as that of
Proverbs and Sirach, but with additions, some of
which may be attributed to Hellenic influences.
The essential Hebrew elements, however, remain.
While a movement of intellect, wisdom is practical^
moral, and religious. We are no more in the
regions of metaphysics or even abstract ethical
speculation than in the Palestinian literature.
Thus we read —

' For her true beginning is desire of discipline ;
And the care for discipline is love of her ' (617).

(b) Personification. — The personification of Wis-
dom, though still very shadowy, is a little more
accentuated than in Sirach. Wisdom is described
as 'a spirit' (1®), and as such seems to be identi-
fied with 'the spirit of God' (v.'). In answer to
Solomon's prayer God gave him 'a spirit of wis-
dom' (7^). 'She is a breath of the power of God'
(7^), She sits as God's 'assessor' (Drummond) by
His side on His throne (%*). When, however,
various functions, such as Creation and Providence,
seem to be ascribed to her, this cannot be as to a
personal agent, because they are also ascribed to
God {e.g. 9'* '■'). It must be, therefore, that God is
thought of as doing these things by means of His
wisdom.

(c) Attributes. — A string of 21 attributes, in
thoroughly Greek style, is ascribed to the spirit
of Wisdom (7"'^"). Among other things, she is said
to be ' only begotten ' (fiovoyeves, the very word
used of Christ in Jn 1'^- 1* 3i«- ^« and 1 Jn 4^, though
RV of Wisdom renders it here 'alone in kind,'
having ' sole born ' in the margin). Further, wis-
dom is described as ' a clear effluence of the glory
of the Almighty ' and an ' ettulgence (dTrai^vao-^o,
whence He 1^) from everlasting light' (7^'" ■''). She
is free from all defilement, beneficent, beautiful.

(d) Functions. — Divine functions are ascribed to
Wisdom, since it is by His wisdom that God per-

APOCRYPHA

forms tliem. (1) Creation. She is 'the artificer
of all thin<;s' (7"), ' an artificer of tlie things tiiat
are' (8®). (2) Providence. The function of wisdom
in providence is nuuh dwelt on. Wisdom is re-
garded as a sort of guardian angel watching over
men and directing the course of history. Patri-
archal history from Adam downward is described
as thus under tlie charge of wisdom. (3) Revela-
tion. The picture of Wisdom as the effulgence
from everlasting light points to this. She is also
described as ' an unspotted mirror of the working
of God, and an image {dKuiy, cf. 2 Cor 4^ Col 1^') of
His goodness' (7-") ; in attaining to wisdom we come
to know the ways of (iod.

(c) Wisdom as a human acquisition. — While
wisdom is described in its relation to God as co-
extensive with the infinite range of the Divine
activities, it is also represented from another point
of view as a treasure which mankind is invited to
seek. The difficulty of acquiring wisdom suggested
in Barucli is not found here. On the contrary, we
read that —

'Easily is she beheld of them that love her,
And found of them that seek her ' (612).

Moreover, there is no limitation of Jewish ex-
clusiveness in the privilege of enjoying this great-
est of God's gifts, ' for wisdom is a spirit that
lovetli man ' (1^). When a little later we read that
'tlie spirit of the Lord hath filled the world'
{t})v olKovixivTjv, 'the inhabited earth,' KVm), the
breadth of Hellenism seen throughout the Alex-
andrian movement, first Jewish, later Christian,
is here apparent. While Wisdom is identified with
tlie Law in the Palestinian work Sirach, here all
true enlightenment, pagan as well as Jewish, must
be included in this far-reaching wisdom. At the
same time, this widespread wisdom is very dillerent
from Greek philosophy. The practical, ethical
element which is essential to the Hebrew Hokhmah
is always its chief constituent. Moreover, the
homelier conception of wisdom as an exalted
prudence serviceable in Avorldly affairs, which is
often apparent in Proverbs and Sirach, is also to
be found in the Bk. of Wisdom.

(/) Anticijiatums of Chi-istology. — With this con-
ception of wisdom we cannot claim the identity
of terms (a-Kavyaatia, eUwv, \6yos) which are here
applied to wisdom and in the NT to Jesus Christ
as an indication of any clear anticipation of Chris-
tian truth. It is rather the other way. St. Paul
and the author of Hebrews knew Wisdom, and
made use of expressions in the book for their own
purposes, giving to them a richer Ciiristian mean-
ing. Nor can it be alloAved that the use of the
word X670S as closely associated with wisdom is
any real anticipation of the \6yos doctrine of Philo.
In Wis 9^ we read —

' O God of the fatliers, and Lord who keepest thy mercy,
Who niudest all things by thy word' (i ^oiia-as t« t«>t« h

This is evidently an allusion to the Creation story
in Gn 1, so that we must understand \6yos in the
sense of ' word' (i?ji, in the familiar OT expression
' tiie word of the Lord'). But Philo uses X670S in
the Stoic sense of ' reason.' It may be conjectured
tliat the transition to this meaning has begun in
Wis., because the line immediately following that
just q'loted IS, 'and by tiiy wisdom thou formedst
man ( Wis 9-). Thus X670J is treated as i)arallel to
wis.lom. In any case X670S is a rational word, not
a mere utterance of the voice, but a word with
thought, reason in it. Still, tlie author elsewhere
uses the term in the sense of ' A/o-d ' as the implied
reference to Gn 1 indicates that he does here.* It

m^i^ ^P','^ occure Ifi times in Wisdom (viz. i9. lu 22 n. 20 69. n

liKMt.on that a nH'ans ' wor.l.' Of the 2 ren.ainii.^r .-ases one is
Uiat now under consuUTul.on ; the other is 22-' And while our

would be nearer the mark to say that Jn iMs an
echo of Wis 9^ Still there is much more in the
prologue to the Fourth Gospel than can be derived
in any way from this simple statement, and a great
deal of that reminds us more of Pliilo than of
Wisdom. The conclusion would seem to be that
in John as in Wisdom X070S is used in the common
Biblical sense of 'word'; but that there are also
associations with Philo, the author of the Fourth
Gospel ascribing to the Xd7os as ' word ' some of the
attributes which Philo had ascribed to his Xo'7os as
'reason.' Accordingly the prologue to the Fourtii
Gospel may be said to combine reminiscences both
of Wisdom and of Philo, together with its own
original Christian ideas.

iii. Anticipation of Christian Doctrines.
— Anticipations of the Christ idea, either as Mes-
siah or as Wisdom, have been dealt with in the
previous .sections. It remains to be seen for what
other Christian doctrines preparation is made in
the Apocrypha.

1. The Doctrine of God. — This subject is treated
very fully in DB, Extra Vol. art. 'Development
of Doctrine,' pp. 276-28L All that is called for
here is to indicate those phases of the doctrine
that approacii the Christian idea. 1 Maccabees is
remarkable for its omission of any direct reference
to God. But although (according to the best text)
the name of God does not appear. He is thought of
under the euphemism 'heaven' (e.g. 1 Mac 3"*).
Therefore we must take the omission of the sacred
name as an indication of the reverence that feared
to mention it, which was characteristic of a later
Judaism. This went with the growing conception
of the Divine transcendence which was not an
anticipation of Christianity, but the reverse, and
against Avhich Christianity was a reaction. Still it
prepared for Christianity by emphasizing the need
of some intermediary poAver to bring man into
contact with God, a mediating Christ. While no
hint of anything of the kind is dropped in the
historical part of the Apocrypha, the soil is here
prepared for it by the very barrenness of religion in
lack of it. The popular tales in the Apocrypha con-
tribute nothing material to the conception of God.
The fierce patriotism of Judith falls back on the
ancient appropriation of Jehovah for Israel ; but
this can scarcely be reckoned a theological narrow-
ing, since the thought is not turned to any question
concerning the nature of God. In the Wisdom
literature, however, we may look for some develop-
ment of the doctrine. Negatively Ave see this in
the avoidance of the anthropomorphism that fear-
lessly asserted itself in the OT. Not only is there
no approach to a theophany in human form, but
the human features often poetically ascribed to
God in the older literature do not appear. This,
again, goes Avith the groAving feeling of Divine
transcendence, Avhich is alien to Cliristianity. But
it is also an indication of a spiritual conception
that may be taken as anticipatory of the spiritual
idea of (iod in the NT. In Sirach, God is not so
much too remote, but rather too great for men to
understand His nature —

' When yc glorify the Lord, exalt him as much as ye can;
For even yet will he exceed ' (Sir 4330).

God is addressed as ' Father and Master of my life'
('23'), and ' Father and God of my life' (v."), Avhich
implies the Divine fatherhood of the individual, a
doctrine only just reached in the latest OT teach-
ing. Moreover, the goodness of God extends to all
mankind (18'^). In Wisdom, under the influence of
Hellenic thought, the idealizing process is pushed
further. God' is the 'eternal light' (Wis 7"'^), so
that wisdom Avhich irradiates the Avorld is the

heart beateth, reason is a spark.' Here it is human reason that
is referred to. In every case where \iyo; is predicated of God
the sense is ' word.' See especially 12» 1822,

APOCRYPHA

effluence from this central fountain of light. On
the other hand, there is a narrowing of the idea
of creation under the influence of the Greek notion
of pre-existent matter. God creates the world out
of ' formless matter ' (11'"), and creation is descrihed
as being 'impressed,' like -wax by the seal (19^).
The motive of creation was love, and God hates
nothing that He has made, loving all things tliat
are (11-'*). Nevertheless, it is said in another place
that God only loves him who dwells with wisdom
(7^). The seeming inconsistency may be reconciled
if we understand that here we have the more special
personal affection of Divine friendship.

2. The Fall and Original Sin. — While Gn 3 con-
tains the narrative of the fall of Adam, (1) it does
not attribute this to the devil, not identifying the
serpent with Satan, but treating it simply as the
most subtle of beasts ; and (2) it does not affirm that
either sin or death visits the wliole race in conse-
quence of this primary offence and its doom. But
botli of these ideas appear in Christianity ; and the
latter is contained in the writings of St. Paul,
who does not give it as part of the new teaching,
but assumes that it is already an accepted belief.
St. Paul simply appeals to it as a basis for his
analogous teaching concerning Christ. Thus he
writes, ' as through the one man's disobedience the
many were made sinners' (Ro 5'"), and similarly
with the second part of the doctrine, ^ as in Adam
all die' (1 Co 15--). Therefore these ideas must
have grown up apart from the OT. Now we
find them in the Apocr. Wisdom literature, both
I'alestinian and Alexandrian, e.g. the Palestinian
teaching —

' From a woman was the hesyinningr of sin ;
And because of her we all die' (Sir 252^) —

an easy inference from Gn 3, but never made in
the OT. Then there is the Alexandrian teaching,
' By the envy of the devil, death entered into the
world ' (Wis 2-*).

Oratz reprards this as a Christian interpolation ; but Dr. Drum-
mond shows that his three reasons for this view do not appear
to have much force. (1) Gratz objects that the clause disturbs
the connexion of the passage, but it balances the previous
Statement —

' God created man for incorruption,
And made him an imaj^e of his own proper being'' (v. 23) ;
for thus v.'p liave the antithesis which is one of the common
forms of Hebrew poetry. (2) For Gratz to assert that it has
for hun 'absolutely no sense,' is a criticism that would apply
to it equally whoever wrote it. (3) The fact that it is without
parallel in other Jewish writingfs must not be taken as con-
demnmg it. The idea is familiar in Christian literature ; yet
there is nothing specifically Christian about it, since it simply
results from an application of the doctrine of a devil to the
Genesis narrative, with the exercise of some imafrination as to
the Evil Spirit's motive. Moreover, Milton's adoption of the
idea of envy as that motive in Paradise Lost, shows that, to a
great poet at all events, the expression is not without a reason-
able meaning. The author of Wisdom is a sufficiently brilliant
writer to have struck out these ideas and made the inferences
without any antecedent example. Diihne considers the passage
to be allegorical, because the notion of 'an evil principle in
opposition to the Divine is foreign to pure Alexandrianism.'
Accordingly he applies Philo's interpretation of Gn 3 to it, and
understands the word hiajSoAo; to stand for the serpent as an
image of carnal pleasure. But why should not the writer
mention the serpent if he meant it'? Since o hiajloXo; appears
in the LXX for ' the Satan,' it is impossible that a Jew who was
familiar with that version would use the word in .an entirely
original way for a reptile. The story of fallen angels was not
unfamiliar to Jewish Apocalvptic literature (see Drummond,
Phi/o Judatus, p. 195 f.). That, however, Wisdom does not
teach the total depravity of the race, we may infer from its
singling out the inhabitants of Canaan as deserving to be
extirpated because of their innate vice. ' Their nature by birth
was evil ' (12iu) ; ' they were a seed accursed from the begin-
ning '(v. H). Here a doctrine of heredity is implied; but it is
applied only to the Canaanites, who are regarded as of an in-
veterately and hopelessly evil stock. It is to be inferred that
other peoples are not so bad.

The late date of 2 Esdras removes it out of the
category of anticipations of Christianity. Still, as
a Jewish work it witnesses to Jewish thoughts
which have their roots in an earlier period. Now
this book distinctly teaches tlie doctrine of original

sin. The angel Uriel undertakes to teach Esdras
' wherefore the heart is wicked ' (2 Es 4^). In an
earlier passage the sin of the race was traced to
Adam (3^'). The pessimism of the book is espe-
cially gloomy in regard to this subject. Esdras
declares that ' it had been better that the earth
had not given thee Adam, or else, when it had
given him, to have restrained him from sinning'
(7^^). Though it was Adam who sinned, the evil
did not fall on him alone, but on all of us who
come from him (v.^*).

3. Redemption. — There is nothing approaching
the Christian doctrine of redemption in the Apoc-
rypha. The NT teachers had to go back beyond
all this literature to Is 53 for the seed thoughts of
their specific teaching on this subject. In the
Messianic ideas, as far as these appear in the
Apocrypha, which we have seen is but meagrely,
there are the two thoughts of God redeeming His
people, and the Christ coming as a personal re-
demption. There is no anticipation of the doctrine
of the cross. The sombre prediction of the death
of tlie Christ in 2 Es. (later than the Christian
gospel, as it is) contains no hint that this is either
sacrificial or redemptive. The goodness and mercy
of God in delivering His people are frequently cele-
brated ; but with no specific doctrine of salvation.
The Hokhmah teaching would suggest that escape
from sin is to be had through tiie acquisition of
wisdom, Avhich is rooted in the fear of the Lord.
It was wisdom that brought the first man out of
his fall (Wis 10'). Tobit has the great OT teach-
ing of God's forgiveness for His penitent people
wiiom He scourges for their iniquity, but to whom
He will show mercy. If they turn to Him ^\itll
all their heart and soul to do truth before Him,
He will turn to them (To 13^- "). Sinners must
turn and do righteousness if they would receive
His restoring grace. The Patristic idea that the
' blessed . . . wood . . . through which conieth
righteousness' (Wis 14^ cf. Ac 5**, 1 P 2-^) is the
cross, ignores the context, which plainly shows that
the reference is to Noah's Ark (see v.**).

4. Liberalizing of religion.— \n several respects
the Apocrypha shows advance beyond the narrower
exclusiveness of Judaism. The historical situation
in 1 Mac. did not encourage this movement. When
the Jews were struggling for freedom of life and
worship against the forcible intrusion of pagan-
ism, they were not in a condition for missionary
enthusiasm. Judith breathes a spirit of fiercest
Jewish patriotism. But Tobit in his prayer of
rejoicing declares that many nations shall come
from far to the name of the Lord God with gifts in
their hands (To 13"). That this is not the re-
luctant homage of subject peoples is shown by the
sequel, where we read about 'generations of genera-
tions ' praising God with songs of rejoicing. Still
all this is ministering to the glory of Jerusalem.
Israel is exalted in the honour shown to her
God. The Palestinian Hokhmah literature is not
free from Jewish narrowness. In Sirach, God
is prayed to send His fear on all nations. But
this is to be by lifting up His hand against them,
so that they may see His mighty power. Still
some gracious end even in this stern treatment of
the heathen may be desired, since the prayer pro-
ceeds, ' And let tliem know thee, as we also have
known thee' (Sir 36^). God is asked to hear the
prayer of His suppliants [Israel], in order that all
on the earth may know that He is the Lord, tlie
eternal God (v.^'). This may not mean more
than the acknowledgment of God for His glory
and for the reflexion of that on His privileged
people. On the other hand, the importance at-
tached to wisdom has a widening tendency ; for
this is an internal grace, not an external privi-
lege. But the identification of wisdom in Sirach

100

APOCRYPHA

with interest in the Law (.SOM tends to limit this
grace itself and confine it to Israel.

When we turn to the Alexandrian teaching of
the Book of Wisdom we exj>ect a wider outlook.
Here also the national privileges of Israel are
accentuated. God gave oaths and covenants of
good promises to tlie nation's ancestors (12-' 18").
Moreover, ' the righteous ' are to judge the
nations and have rule over the people (3^). But
since the domain of wisdom is world-wide and
' the spirit of God filleth the world' (P), it miglit
he supposed that the world at large would benefit
by that gracious presence. Princes of peoples are
invited to honour wisdom that they may reign for
ever ((>-'), an invitation necessarily applying to the
Gentile world. It is stated in a general way that
' the ways of them which are on the earth ' [more
than Israel] were corrected by wisdom (9'^). There
is a magnificent universalism in the great saying
that God loves all things that are, and abhors none
of the things tiiat He has made (11-^). God's in-
corruptible spirit is in all things (12') ; there is no
other God that careth for all (v.^^) ; His sove-
reignty over all leads Him to forbear all (v."').
But further than this the book does not go. It
contains no explicit promise of redemption or of
the blessings of the future for the world outside
Israel, though it would be no illegitimate inference
from these large ideas concerning the presence and
activity and graciousness of God the Avhole world
over to conclude that such good things were not
to be confined to Israel. On the other hand, not
only weie the Canaanites a helplessly evil race,
but the more recent oppressors of Israel, whose
gross idolatry is scornfully ])ortrayed at large,
after the manner of Deutero-Isaiah, are described
jis ' prisoners of darkness . . . exiled from the
eternal providence' (17-). For other heathen
people allowance is made on account of their
Ignorance. ' For these men there is but small
blame : for they too, peradventure, do but go
astray' (13«).

5. Resurrection and IiuTnortality. — W^ith regard
to no other subject is advance from the OT stand-
point t«nvards that of the NT more apparent in the
Apocrypha. The distinction between Palestinian
and Alexandrian conceptions is here very marked,
the Palestinian writings promising resurrection, the
Alexandrian making no reference to a resurrection,
but adopting the Greek idea of the immortality of
the soul. The more conservative books of the
former school, Tobit, Sirach, and 1 Mac, contain no
reference to the resurrection or the future life in any
form, retaining only the old gloomy Hebrew notion
of Sheol, which, on the other hand, in these writings
is not Gehenna, not a place of punishment. ' There
are no chastisements in Sheol ' (Sir 41*, Heb. mar.,
and LXX).* According to Tobit, Sheol is an
' eternal place ' (3«) where life is extinct. ' All the
rewards of faithfulness enumerated by the dying
MatUthias (1 Mac 25--<") are limited to this life'
(Charles, Esclmt. p. 219). In Judith eternal punish-
ment is tlireatened to the enemies of Israel (16'^) ;
but nothing is said about a future life for Gotl's
miople. 2 Mac, an epitome of the five books of
Jason of Cyrene (2-''), contains a clear doctrine of
resurrection to eternal life (7"), which is denied
to tlie non-Israelite (v.") ; this is a bodily resur-
rection (7"- "• =^), and it will be enjoyed in'the fel-
lowNliip of brethren similarly privileged (v.-''). In
2 i:s<inus we have ' the day of judgment ' (12*»). A
first resurrection may be suggested by the refer-
ence to ' tiiose that will be with him' in the day
of God's Son ^13'-). The end will come when the

• Dr. Charles points out that the referince to Gehenna in Sir
,17 IS un.loutitfdly forrtii>t, since it is contrary to the whole out-
look of tlie writer as to the future, and is not sui)porteil bv the
lifb., Syr., and best MaS of the Elhiopiu {Eschatulujy, p. i04).

number of those like Ezra is complete (4^''). Till
then tlie spirits of tlie wicked shall wander about
in torment while God's servants will be at rest
(!'•'). These spirits of the wicked will be tor-
mented in seven ways (vv.®'-^''), and after the final
judgment even more grievously (v.**'*). On the
other hand, those who have kept the ways of the
Most High shall have joy in seven ways, accord-
ing to their seven orders, during the intermeiliate
period, and after the judgment receive glory (v."^),
when ' their face shall shine as the sun,' and * they
shall be made like unto the light of the stars,
being henceforth incorruptible' (v."^).

In Wisdom there is no idea of resurrection. The
body is the temporary earthly burden (9'^) of a
pre-existent soul (S-"). Immortality is for the
soul, but not by nature or necessity. It is attained
through wisdom (8'^- '"). Still it was God's design
that man should enjoy it, for He ' created man
for incorruption ' (2-^). ' The souls of the right-
eous are in the hand of God ' (3'), at peace, with
a hope full of immortality. 'The righteous live
for ever ' (v.'^). The wicked have no hope in their
death. They will be dashed speechless to the
ground ; and yet their fate does not seem to be
annihilation, for ' they shall lie utterly waste, and
they shall be in anguish ' (4''-*). But there is no
definite statement of eternal punishment.

iv. Use of the Apockypha in the Gospels
AND THE Church. — Our Apocr., which consists of
Jewish writings contained in the Vulg. but not
found in the Hebrew OT, rests primarily on the
LXX, and that was the version of the OT com-
monly used by the Greek-speaking Jews in the
times of the Apostles, and subsequently by the
Christians. Being thus the Scriptures in the
hands of the NT writers, the LXX introduced
the Apocr. to them together with the books of our
OT. But most of the NT writers knew the Hebrew
Bible. This is evident in the case of St. Paul, St.
John, and St. Matthew. The only certain excep-
tion is the author of Hebrews, to whom probably
we should add St. Luke ; and it is reasonable to
suppose that these two men, being the most
scholarly NT writers, were not unacquainted with
the limits of the Palestinian Canon. No NT writer
names any book of the Apocr., nor is there any
direct quotation from one of these books in the
NT. Phrases from some of them indicate, how-
ever, that these books were used by the writers
in whom they occur, although there is no evidence
that they regarded them as authoritative. On
the other hand, 2 Esdras borrows from the NT,
especially from the Ai)ocalypse. 2 Es 8'* is an echo
of Mt 20^'*. The only books of our Apocr. to which
reference can be manifestly traced in the NT
are the works of Wisdom literature. Wisdom and
Sirach, especially the former ; and the NT writers
who most evidently make allusion to phrases in
those books are St. Paul, St. James, and the
author of Hebrews. Since these writers .are be-
yond the scope of this Dictionary, the inquirer
is referred to DB articles, ' Wisdom,' ' Sirach,'
' Apocrypha,' and those on the various NT books.

Coming to the special subject of the present
volume, we note that Jesus Christ never names
or distinctly cites any of the books of the Apocr.,
nor are any of them mentioned or directly quoted
by any oi the Evangelists. Nevertheless there
seem to be several reminiscences of Wisdom and
Sirach, if not direct allusions to those books in the
Gospels.

yi\s 37 has been connected with Mt 13*3 ; but the Gospel
phrase can be better derived from Dn 123, for in both cases the
same verb is used — ixXa.u.-i,ovo-i[v], while in Wis. the verb is
a.vxKuu.'^ouinv. Wis 3'^ 'They shall judaje {zpivou(nv)ihe nations'
may be alluded to in Mt 1928 'judging (xptvoyn;) the twelve
tribes of Israel ' ; and, if so, the change is in accordance with our
Lord's modifications of Jewish Messianic expectations, showing

APOCRYPHA

APOSTLES

101

that the judgment which the Jews reserved for Gentiles was to
come upon Israel. Possibly Wis 4'* is alluded to in Mt 719. But
Wis 91 (» noi-/,(ra.i IOC. To-vrx it Xiyu reu) may be more than antici-
pation of Jn 13 ; it may have suggested the idea in the Gospel,
though the entire!}' different language (TavT« hi' mItou iyiviro)
with reference to the function of the Logos in creation excludes
the notion of actual quotation. Wis 155 ' when he is required
(a.rra.iTr,et.;) to render back the soul (tJj? ■^ux-^s) which was lent
him' is suggested by Lk 1220 • this night is thy soul (r->,y 4"^Z'^i<'
irov) required (irrKimuiriv) of thee.' Perhaps ' the darkness that
should afterwards receive them ' (Wis 1721) suggested our Lord's
image of ' outer darkness ' (Mt S^-) as the fate of the lost ; but
the idea is too general to make any connexion evident. On
the other hand, Mt 12-*i- *- should not be cited as a reference to
Wis 4I6 ; nor Lk 12«. 48 for Wis 6« ; nor Jn 7" for Wis 612 ; nor
Mt 25S4 for Wis 08 ; nor Mt 44 for Wis ]626. The last instance is
a declared quotation from the OT, and the other cases are too
vague to allow of any identification.

Sir 215 'They that \ove(ayxriiiri;)hhnw\\l keep (rtipviiroviriv)
his ways ' may well have suggested the language in Jn 1423
' If a man love (aj/«T«) me he will keep (Tyipy.a-n) my word.'
Sir 44 'Turn not away (ui: arixrTpi-^y,;) thy face from a poor
man ' suggests to us Mt 542 ' From him that would borrow of
thee, turn not thou away (/ijj aireirTpx^ri;).' Sir 714 ' Repeat
not thy words in thy prayer ' suggests Mt &, but here the
Greek is very different ; Sir 1014 ' The Lord cast down the
thrones of rulers, and set the meek in their stead,' is probably
the source of Lk 1^2, which is nearer to it than to Job 511 or Ps
1476, especially in the use of the word ' thrones.' Possibly Sir
1119 suggested Lk 1219 ; Sir 121 has been associated with Mt 76,
it is more likely to have suggested Didache 1 ; Sir 1921 is too
general and obvious to have suggested Mt 2129, which is more
definite and specific ; Sir 2111 ' He that keepeth the law be-
cometh master of the interest thereof ' is a fine anticipation of
Jn 71" ; Sir 239 anticipates our Lord's rebuke of swearing (Mt
533. 34)^ but is less specific ; the metaphor of the vine in Jn ISif-
is not to be referred to Sir 24i7, it is more likely to have been
suggested bj' Is Si"'-, if by any passage ; Mt 614 seems to be a
reference to Sir 282 • Forgive thy neighbour the hurt that he
hath done thee ; and then thy sins shall be pardoned when
thou prayest.' The association of Mt 619 with Sir 2912, proposed
by Daubney, is very doubtful ; equally vague is that of Mt 1627
with Sir 3224 < He that trusteth in the Lord shall suffer no loss.'
In both of these cases the slight resemblances are probably
purely accidental. Lk li7b tmirTpi'^xi xxphia; trxTipav It<
Tucva evidently comes from Sir 4810 i^,irTpi-^xi xxphixv Tx-rpo!
vpo; v'litv. The peculiarity of thought and phrase is too striking
for an accidental coincidence. But that it is a reminiscence and
not a direct quotation is clear froui the three changes of words
for which no reason can be assigned since the sense remains
the same, viz. singular for plural ; Tpii for It/ ; viov for tixvo,.
The following clause in the parallelism is entirely different in
the two texts, so that either the conclusion was quite forgotten
or a new conclusion was deliberately formed. In Luke we have
' and the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just,' while
the clause in Sir. is 'and to restore the tribes of Jacob.' The
expression 'the wisdom of the just' in Luke seems to be a
reference to the title of Sirach, which was probably originally
simply ' Wisdom.' In codex B this is called 20'I'IA 2EIPAX ;
and in the Syriac, NTO n31 xnODn. Similarly at the end of
the Hebrew text it is described as 'the wisdom of Simeon ben
Jeshua ben Eleazar ben Sira.' On the other hand, St. Luke
has not the LXX word for wisdom («•<>?/«), his phrase being h
^povYiiru iixx!m. The conclusion to be drawn from these data
seems to be that both Wisdom and Sirach were known to Mat.,
Luke, John, or to collectors of Logia of Jesus earlier than those
Gospels, that Sirach especially was used by the author of the
Maqnificat, and that our Lord seems to have made use of both
books, Sirach more probably than Wisdom.

While the special .subjects of tliis Dictionary do
not call for a study of the Apocr. in later times,
a topic exhaustively treated in DB, vol, i. pp. 120-
123, a brief resume of its history in the Church
may be here added. The presence of the books
which we designate Apocryphal in the LXX
mixed up with the OT Scriptures of the narrower
Heb. Canon would naturally tend to float them
among the Greek-speaking Churches. Several of
them are cited as Scripture by Irenreus and
Clement of Alexandria in the Greek Church, and
by Tertullian and Cyprian in the Latin Cliurch.
While Melito of Sardis held to the Hebrew Canon,
Origen championed the more comprehensive Greek
Canon. A century later, Cyril of Jerusalem con-
demned this wider Canon, holding to the Heb.
22 books ; and his position was confirmed by the
Synod of Laodicea (c. 360 A.D.). Epiphanius and
especially Athanasius introduced the intermediate
course, a recognition of several of the Apocr., not,
however, as in the Canon, but as good and useful.
Since then, while from time to time scholars have
declared the Apocryphal books to be non-canonical,
the Eastein Church has used them, and they are

in the Bible of the Greek Church. In the West,
tlie AjDocr. obtained accei^tance as part of the Old
Latin Version, which was based on the LXX, and
as such formed part of Jerome's revision. But
when Jerome translated the OT afresh from the
Hebrew, seeing that the Apocr. was not there, he
advised its rejection from the Canon. Still, he
allowed it an intermediate position ; and, in spite
of its translator's opinion to the contrary, the
books of the Apocr. took their place in the
Vulgate as integral parts of Scripture. At the
Council of Trent the Vulgate being pronounced
infallibly inspired, the Apocr. was canonized with
the rest of thjit version, and therefore it is now
regarded as Scripture in the Roman Catholic
Church. Among Protestants it has either taken
an intermediate position, or has been rejected
as not being Scripture. Luther placed it between
the OT and the NT with the title ' Apocrypha,'
and a statement that it was ' not equal to the
Sacred Scriptures,' but nevertheless 'useful and
good to read.' The Ileformed Church is more
severe ; in the Ziirich Bible the Apocryphal books
come after the NT as ' not numbered among the
canonical books,' and without a word of com-
mendation. Coverdale translated the Apocr. and
placed it between the OT and the NT with a
statement that the books were in the Vulgate
but not in the Hebrew. It has a similar position
in subsequent revisions, including AV (1611), where
it is marked ' Apocrypha.' But from 1629 onwards
editions of the AV began to appear without it.

Literature. — Swete, OT m Greek ; RV of Apocrypha ; Com-
mentaries by Wace (Uoly Bible ivith Coin. , Murray), Fritzsche,
andGnmm(Kurzf/efasstes Exegetisches Uandbiich zuden Apocr.
etc.); Bissell (Lange-Schaff) ; DB articles, 'Apocrypha,' 'De-
velopment of Doctrine,' also articles on the several books of
Apocr. ; Drummond, Jetcish Messiah and Pkilo Judmiis ;
Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah ; Deane, llie
Book of Wisdom ; Charles, Eschatology ; Paul Volz, Jiidische
Eschaiologie ; Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums ; Schiirer,
G,/]"^. The DB articles referred to contain lists of books, which
therefore need not be repeated here. W. F. AdENEY.

APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.-

RYPHAL).

-See Gospels (Apoc-

APOSTLES.—

Introduction.

1. The first disciples.

2. IJeginning of our Lord's Galilean ministry.

3. Choice of the Twelve.

4. Training of the Apostles.

Literature.

Introduction.— It is proposed to treat in this
article the chief facts relating to that group of our
Lord's personal disciples known to us by the name
of 'apostles.' The sole authorities on the subject
are tlie four Gospels and the first chapter of the
Acts. The remaining books of the NT furnish no
information as to the relations between Jesus and
His Apostles during His ministry on earth ; and
nothing that is found in the Apocryphal Gospels
can be regarded as historical.

The assumption so often made that the Synoptics possess a
greater trustworthiness than the Fourth Gospel is baseless,
and its baselessness cannot be better seen than in the case of the
Apostles. The Apostles of the Fourth Gospel are the Apostles
of the first three. Their character, prejudices, limitations,
ambitions, views, sympathies are the same in the four Gospels.
How can this harmony be explained unless all our authorities
draw from the life ? But more than this. The Fourth Gospel
contains information regarding the Twelve peculiar to itself
which, properly weighed, enables us to understand much that
is otherwise perplexing in the first three. How can this famili-
arity with the Apostles be accounted for if the writer was not
himself one of them? What is the alternative hypothesis?
Tliat the writer of the Fourth Gospel, with the first tliree before
him, was able to form so true and complete an apprehension of
the intelligence, moral condition, modes of thought, and lan-
guage of the Twelve as to be able to create situations where he
represents them as speaking and acting with perfect verisimili-
tude, while all the time he was simply drawing on his imagina-
tion. The author of the Fourth Gospel was a man of genius,
but his genius was religious, not intellectual or imaginative.

102

APOSTLES

The achievement attributed to him was wholly beyond his
powers or the powers of any man who has ever lived. The
disciples of the Fourth Gospel are the disciples of the first three ;
their jKirlraits are firm, exact, striking, because the writer knew
them personally.

"When the attention of a reader is called to the
nunieious occasion.s on wliioh the Apostles tigure
in the (iospcls, he niiglit feel disposed to contend
that the Apostles are so prominent in the Gospels
becanso tliey are their ultimate authors. But this
supi)osition, however injienious, is unsubstantial,
(heat as i« the phice lilled by the Apostles in the
tio.sp(."ls, tiiey are never magnified ; it is Jesus
alone who is magnilied. The many references
made to the Apostles correspond exactly to the
position they held ; tiie Gospels are so much occu-
pied with tliem only because Jesus Himself was
constantly occupied with tiiein, not the least of the
tasks of His life being to teach and train them to
uiulerstand His mind and heart, and to transmit
to ot liers a correct representation of what He was
and .said and did.

The Gospel of St. Mark has been characterized as pre-eminently
the Gospel of the disciples. But this language does injustice
to the rest ot the Gospels, which are equally Gospels of the dis-
ciples. A judicious reader sees at once that the Apostles hold
substantially the same place in all the Gospels. There is nothing
to pro\e that one of the Evangelists took a deeper interest in the
Twelve than any of the rest.

1. The first discij)les. — It is clear from the Gospels
that several of the Apostles had been on the most
intinuite terms with our Lord before He selected
them to become Apostles. In fact the most promi-
nent among them passed tiirough two stages of
relationship to our Lord before they were chosen
as Apostles. Tiiey were first called to become dis-
ciples in the most general sense of the term, and
tiiereafter they were summoned to leave their
usual occupations and to become the personal com-
panions of Jesus. It is tiierefore desirable to learn
the connexion in whicii the most distinguished of
them stood to Jesus before their formal appoint-
ment to tiie apostolate.

After tiie Temptation our Lord returned to
Bethany in Penta. Whether this happened by
arrangement betweeen Himself and His forerunner
we camiot tell, but nothing was more natural than
for Him to go thither. The Baptist could best
fulfil his duty if He were by his side. On two
occasions John, lixing a steadfast gaze on our Lord,
said in the liearing of some of his disciples, ' Be-
hold the Lamb of God ' (Jn l-"- ^). The remark-
able expression doubtless suggested to his hearers
that this was the Messiah. Two of them sought
an interview with our Lord, and ere they quitted
the house were convinced tiiat they had found the
Messiaii. Not a word is related of the considera-
tions which brought them to this conclusion, but
the explanation is to be found partly in the testi-
mony of tlie Baptist, partly and pre-eminently in
tlie impression produced on them by tlie personality
of Jesus. Tiiere was that in His character, aims,
and language which distinguished Him from all
other men. Hence Andrew and John, the two
discioles in question, had no doubt that the Messiah
stood before them (v.-»i). It is not quite clear
wiietlHT each started to find liis brotiier; but
Andrew at anyrate, brought his brother Simon to
Jesus, lu'ading Ins character and discerning its
p()ssi )i iti,..s, Jesus bestowed on him the name by
which he IS now known to the >vorld : the name
i eter (y. -). Our Lord, for reasons unknown to us,
had determined to set out for Galilee, accomi.anied
■y Ills new disciples. On starting. He called IMiilip
to follow i im, and the instant obedience rendered
suggests that Lhilin had already believed that
Jesu.s was t he Messiali, probably through his friends
fe Imv-citizens Andrew and i'eter. On the
way Ihilip encountered his friend Nathanael,

who lived in the village of Cana, at no great dis-
tance from his own home at Bethsaida, and informed
him of the discovery of the Messiah, in the person
of Jesus of Nazareth. Nathanael hesitated, but
he came and saw .and heard, and the knowledge
which Jesus displayed of his character and of his
inmost life convinced him that He was indeed what
Philip had declared Him to be (v.*^"^*).' How many
of these disciples accompanied Jesus to Cana and
witnessed His hrst miracle (2^*'^-) is not certain;
possibly the majority, if not all. The same un-
certainty arises in connexion with the journey to
Jerusalem at the Passover. We do not know mIio
witnessed the expulsion of the tratiickers from the
temple, heard the mysterious words spoken regard-
ing the destruction of tlie temple, or saw the many
miracles which He performed in the capital (v.^^"),
baptized at His command when He laboured in
Jud.Tea in the vicinity of the Baptist, and accom-
panied Him through Sam.aria on His return to
Galilee (4'*f-)- It would seem as if thereafter the
disciples returned to their usual occupations, and
our Lord retired for a little from public life.

2. Beginning of our Lord's Gcdilwan ministrij. —
After a short interval our Lord resumed His
labours, and continued them without interruption
until His death. The Baptist had just been im-
prisoned (Mk 1'^ and ||), and He seemed to regard his
imprisonment as a call to attempt more than He
had yet done. So long as the Baptist laboured,
the work done by Jesus does not seem to have
differed much from his. Now that he was in
prison, our Lord proceeded to develop a ministry
of His own. This new type of ministry was
marked by a change of residence from Nazjireth to
Capernaum (Mt 4'^). He wished to influence as
many of the inhabitants of Galilee as He could,
and there was no better centre from which to
approach them than Capernaum. The town was
large, and was near many others of the same char-
acter. It lay on several great roads, and was
therefore easily reached from all quarters. The
people were genuinely Jewish, antl not given to
Gentile tastes or customs. No more suitable posi-
tion from which to command Galilee could have
been chosen. It was soon after He .settled in
Capernaum that He renewed His summons to four
of the men whom He had already chosen as His
disci[)les. Walking along the shore of the Sea of
Galilee, He saw the brothers Simon and Andrew,
who were fishermen, engaged in casting their net.
In words the significance of which they could not
fail to discern, He commanded them to follow Him
and become fishers of men. Proceeding a little
farther, He found James with his brother John
repairing their nets, and addressed to them the
same command. They, like Peter and Andrew,
instantly obeyed (Mk l'"--"). It is clear that our
Lord had a definite aim in calling these four dis-
ciples. The duty to which He now invited them
was an advance on their former relationship.
They were to be no longer fishermen. They must
exchange their former calling for a new one. And
the nature of that new calling was not wholly
obscure. The allusion to the occupation whicli
they were bidden to leave illustrated the character
of the labours to which they were invited. They
were to capture men instead of fish. Not one of
the four could fail to perceive that they were to
be employed continuously in the service of Jesus.
The call would fill them with the less surprise
because they had already served an apprenticeship
to Jesus, when they baptized in obedience to His
commands. It need not be inferred that Jesus
intended to send the four immediately on a special
mission. No particular time is specified in His
command ; and though St. Luke (5'") marks the
capture of men as beginning Avith the moment

APOSTLES

103

of tlie call, this can only mean that their new
career began as soon as they obeyetl the call ad-
dressed to them. Only one other call of the same
kind is related in the Gospels, that of Levi or
Matthew (Mk 2^8, Mt 9''). It, too, occurred in
Cajjernaum. To the four tishernien a tax-gatherer
was added. Capernaum was the seat of a custom-
house, and the collector of customs, I^evi by name,
was called precisely as the two pairs of brothers
had been. What previous acquaintance existed
between Matthew and our Lord, what special
qualities commended him Ave cannot tell ; but the
instant obedience he rendered to so extraordinaiy
a command, and the feast which he gave in our
Lord's honour as he bade farewell to his fellow-
oHicials, suggest that they had known one another
for some time. The interval which separated the
call of Matthew from the call of the tour cannot
be ascertained, but as it is unlikely that he was a
disciple of the Baptist, and as it is probable that
he was not brought into contact with our Lord till
He settled in Capernaum, some little time must
have elapsed between his first knowledge of our
Lord and his call. He could hardly have been
with Jesus from the outset of His career in Galilee.

3. Choice of tha Txodve. — It might have been
supposed that our Lord would continue as He had
begun, and suunnon disciple after disciple to His
side until He had obtained the number He I'equired
for His purpose. But t!iis was notto be. He had
determined to make a formal selection of a definite
number from the body of His disci])les (Mk 3'*, Lk
6'^). The importance of the step He was about to
take is shown by the fact that lie spent the pre-
ceding night in prayer (Lk 6'-), doubtless seeking to
learn His Father's will regarding the intention He
had formed and the mode in which it was to be
accomplished. One of the critical hours of His life
was before Him. The nature of the selection He
was about to make was of supreme consequence. A
serious mistake would be followed by calamitous
results. No wonder then that He sought specific
guidance. He may even have gone over the names
of all whom He judged competent, and have made
His final choice.

The Gospels have not preserved any statement
]iy our Lord Himself fis to His aim in selecting a
special group of disciples. That aim can be judged
of only Ijy the issue, for it is certain that what the
Apostles |;r()ved to be, was what Jesus designed
tliey should become. An account, indeed, is found
in St. Mark's Gospel (3'^), according to which the
purpose of our Lord in choosing them was that they
might be \\\X\\ Him and that He might send them
forth to announce the approach of tlie Kingdom of
God, endowed with the power to heal and to exor-
cize. That this is a correct description so far as it
goes cannot be doubted, but it cannot be said to
embrace the full scope of our Lord's purpose. It
delines His inmiediate ratiier than His ultimate
end. Its horizon is that of the first journey on
which the Apostles were sent, not that world-wide
commission afterwards committed to them. Hence
when we speak of tiie reasons whicii induced our
Lord to select the Twelve, we must look to the
work actually entrusted to them. That Avork
cannot be better described than by the words used
by our Lord Himself to the Twelve on the eve of
His death. He had been the envoy of the Father to
eartii. They were to be His envoys on earth. As
He had interpreted the Father to men, so were
they to interpret Him to men. Their chief, their
supreme duty, was to bear witness to Him : to
teach the world how He lived, what He said, what
He wrought (Jn 17'», Ac 1«).

A ooniparison has often been drawn between the disciples of
I'lito or of the Pharisees and the disfiiiles of Jesus. And such
couiparisons are not without sujfgestivenesa. But a sajjacious

mind discerns that the apostolate of Jesus Christ is a unique
institution. The Apostles differ from, far more than they agree
with, the disciples of any thinker or teacher. They stand by
themselves, devoted to the performance of an unexampled task.
No one but Jesus could have conceived such a task ; the
Apostles were the fit instruments for its accomplishment.

It is a noteworthy circumstance that few writers
have spent any time in describing the actual .selec-
tion of the Twelve. The silence of the Gospels on
this point is only av hat was to be expected, but it is
surprising tliat those Avritersof our Lord's life who
have given the freest rein to their imagination in
endeavouring to reproduce the scenes of His career,
have passed this event over as if it atiorded no
opportunity for their skill. Yet Avhat materials
lay ready to their hand ! What Avere the senti-
ments AAith Avhich our Lord addressed Himself
to the task ? W hat Avas His appearance as He
stood on the mountain side and called His fol-
lowers to Him ? How did these followers feel as
they perceived that He Avas about to make a choice
among them? Was there excitement among the
crowd? Was there strong desire on the pait of
many to be cliosen ? Was there any discussion as
to the principles He foUoAved in the choice, or did
reverence prevent all debate? Was there much
disappointment Avhen the number Avas completed ?
Was there surprise at the persons named? Not
less instructive would be some knoAvledge of the
sentiments of the Apostles when they stood to-
gether for the first time in the jiresence of our Lojd.
What A\ere their thoughts? Were they filled with
exultation? Did they infer that the Kingdom of
God would immediately appear? Diil they antici-
pate a brilliant future for themselves ? Or were
there tliose among them Avho reHected Avith
humility on their unfitness to be the generals and
statesmen of the new Kingdom? Did it occur to
even one of them that the clioice just nuide Avas
a fresh disclosure of the view taken by Jesus of
the Kingdom of God and of the means by Avhich
it was to be extended ?

Who now were the objects of our Lord's choice?
With some of them Ave are already acquainted.
Simon, Andrew, James, John, I'hilip, and Levi or
Matthew are already known to us. So too possibly
is Bartholomew (wh. see). Bartholomew is not a
proper name, but means .simplj' '.son of Tolmai,' and
there is much probability in the opinion that he is to
be identilied with Natlianael. These seven disciples
our Lord must have known for some time. The
remaining live names — Thomas, James the son of
Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas or Lebbaius
or rhadda?us, and Judas Iscariot are ncAV. How
long they had been known to Jesus is not told us ;
peihai;s some of them had been in His company
for several month.s. On the other hand, it is pos-
sible that He may have cho.sen some of the TAvelve
without much if any i:)ersonal knowledge, relying
on that power to read the heart Avhich He un-
doubtedly possessed.

AVho the Alphaeus was of whom James was a son (Mk 3'**)
we cannot tell. There is no reason except the similarity of
name for connecting him with the father of Levi ; and the
assumption that he is the same person as Clopas is gratuitous.
Tlie force of the epithet Cananaean is not free from doubt ;
the most likely meaning is that of zealot. But the sense of
' zealot ' in turn is not perfectly clear. It may denote the
political party known by that name ; it may, again, .simply
designate unusual devotion to a cause. Reflexion shows tliat
this latter view has but scanty recommendation, and that the
former has nearly everything in its favour. The Apostle who
bears a triple name is commonly known as Jude. That there
were two Judes among the Apostles is plain from the language
of Jn 14'-2, where 'Judas not Iscariot' is mentioned. In two
of the lists of the Apostles, those in Luke (016) and Acts (li-), he
is described as ' Judas of James ' ; that is almost certainly Judaa
the son not the brother of James. But who this James was is
quite uncertain. In Mt 10^ and Mk S's this Judas is called
Thaddseus, or, according to the Western text, Lebbceus ;
and he was probably known indifferently as Judas or as Thad-
d.uus. The exact significance of the term Iscariot is still under
discussion. Most conmionly it is regarded as a geographical
term signifying ' man of Kerioth,' but where Kerioth was situ-

104

APOSTLES

ated is keenly canvassed, some placing it to the east of the
Dead Sea and others in the south of Judah (see Judas Iscariot).
Attempts have often heen made to prove that several of the
Apostles were related to mir Lord. Manj' of those who have
sought for traces of this relationship have been governed by
motives very different from those influencing our Lord, who
would have been the last person to allow His selection of an
Ai)ostle to be determined by the tics of blood. Still there is no
reason why relatives of our Lord should not have been among
the Apostles. But w'hat evidence is there to this effect? It has
been conjectured that James and John were cousins of our Ix)rd,
Mary and Salome being sisters. This is one possible interpreta-
tion and by no means the least satisfactory of the well-known
verse in St. John (1925) which mentions the women at the cross.
■Whether the silence of Scripture regarding the relationship can
outweigh the fitness of this interpretation will be answered
variously, yet a reader will allow for the possibility that James
and John were our Lord's cousins. But if he tolerate this view
he will reject without hesitation the opinion once so common,
that several of our Lord's brothers were among the Apostles.
Practically nothing can be brought forward in support of this
hy]X)thesis ; for who can attach any value to the fact that three
of the Apostles bore the same names as three of our Lord's
brothers, when it is known that these names were among the
most common in the land ? The statement made in Jn 7* that
six months before the Crucifixion none of our Lord's brothers
believed on Him is wholly inconsistent with the view that two
or even three of them were Apostles. Scarcely less decisive is
the distinction traced in the Acts between the brothers of Jesus
and the Apostles (ll'*). Much ingenuity and labour have been
txi)ended in the endeavour to prove that James the son of
Alphieus was a cousin of our Lord, his father being a brother
of Joseph. But the steps by which this identification is made
are numerous and all open to challenge, so that no gain can
arise fron) an examination of the question. See art. Brethren
OK THE Lord.

Four lists of the Apostles are contained in the
NT, one in each of the Synoptics and one in the
Acts (Mt lO^-*, Mk 316-1^ Lk 6i^-^ Ac V^). A care-
ful examination of these lists shows that each of
them consists of three groups of quaternions, and
that in each group the same person is mentioned
fjrst. The hrst group contains the names of Peter,
James, John, and Andrew. The second is made
up of Philip, Nathanael, Thomas, and Matthew.
Tlie third is formed of James the son of Alphaeus,
Simon the Zealot, Judas or Thaddiieus, and Judas
Iscariot. Is this arrangement due to accident, or
does it rest on a perception of the historical im-
portance of the disciples at the time at which it
was drawn up ? Tlie places given to Peter and
Judas and the contents of the different groups
suggest thattliere is liere an indication of the view
taken of the Apostles in the early Church. By
wliom tlie catalogues Avere framed is unknown, but
their value as historical witnesses is great. They
form, as it were, a table of precedence dating from
the earliest times, and embodying the verdict it
may be of tlie Apostles themselves, or at least of
tlio.se of them who survived when they were pre-
pared. In all the lists the name of Peter occupies
the first place. St. Matthew (10-) writes: 'Now
the names of tlie twelve apostles are these ; the
first, Simon.' In what sense is this 'first' to be
understood ? It might refer to the fact that Peter
was the first of the Apostles to be chosen. This is
perfectly credible, but the fact that the order of
the names is not uniform in the lists may be
regarded as showing that tiie memory of the order
in whicli the Twelve were called was not preserved
in the Church. But why was Peter the first
called ? Must not an explanation of this fact be
souglit ? And is it not to be found in the circum-
stance that he was the foremost of the Apostles,
tlieir leader, their spokesman? Primacy in the
seii.xe of jurisdiction or Jiuthority over his fellow-
Apo.stles I'eter never received and never exercised.
His po.sition IS that of the foremost among equals ;
a position ,hie not to any formal or officialappoint-
mcnt hut to tlie ardour and force of his nature.

\Miat kind of men were the Apostles? What
was tlieir character, education, social rank, ability,
age? llie Apo.stles were in an eminent sense
religious men. The tie which bound them to Jesus
was .1 religious tie. It was iaipossible for any per-
son to become a follower of Jesus who did not

believe in obedience to the will of God as the first
of all duties. The Apostles were men who desired
to fulfil the demands of the law of God. Tlieir
aims were high ; their morals were pure ; whatever
their ignoiance, misconceptions, defects, they were
men of integrity, justice, and mercy ; diligent,
candid, honest, pious, God-fearing. None of the
Apostles had received more than a common educa-
tion. The range of their knowledge was that of
most of their fellow-countrymen. But they were
in no sense illiterate. It is probable tiiat all of
them could read and write. Most if not all of
them spoke Aramaic .and Greek. Their minds hail
been quickened and nourislied by the services in
the Synagogue. The education that springs from
the truest knowledge of God and of man was theirs.
And the discipline of their daily lives had rendered
them alert, considerate, patient, energetic.

The Apostles without exception belonged to tlie
working classes as they would be calleil to-day.
There was no man of rank or distinction or of
social consideration among them. Four of them,
we know, were fishermen. One of them was a col-
lector of taxes. The rest belonged to the same
rank in life, and followed similar occupations. All
of them knew what it was to labour to maintain
themselves ; they were familiar with life as it pre-
sents itself to the great body of mankind. There
is no evidence that any of the Apostles was speci-
ally distinguished by intellectual force. There
was no man of genius among them : no original
thinker ; no man dowered with the imaginative
faculty ; no man of great powers of organization.
It does not appear that any of them had an un-
usually impressive or attractive personality. As
far as can be ascertained, they were all young men,
about the same age as, or younger than, our Lord
Himself. No man of middle life, no grey head was
included in the circle. Variety of taste, temper,
mode of life found full expression among the
Apostles. No one was the same as another. Their
experience of life had differed. Their anticipations
of the future differed. Their habits of thought
and action differed. Perhaps the only common
elements were their piety and their devotion to
Jesus. Such then were the Apostles. They were
pious men belonging to the people, full of the plain
sense and judgment which mark the common man :
slow to learn, bixt teachable ; free from social jire-
judices ; untrammelled by any fixed systems of
thought ; with keen eyes for character ; anxious to
win the favour of Jesus.

The most discordant criticisms have been passed on the choice
of the Apostles, many of these betraying a complete failure to
grasp the circumstances and facts of the case. "The vindication
of the wisdom shown in the selection is the future career and
achievements of the Twelve. In judging it is necessary to bear
in mind the materials at our Lord's command and the purposes
which He had in view. The man who realizes these has no
difficulty in appreciating and admiring the sagacity exhibited
by Jesus. Here, too, he will perceive that originality which
marks His entire career. The "Twelve would never have chosen
one another. Had the selection been left to them individually
or to any two or three among them, the persons included would
have been very different. Nobody but Jesus Himself would
have acted in disregard, as it would appear, of the motives by
which men are constantly swayed. No one will suppose that
our Lord had any aversion to intellect, wealth, rank, genius, ex-
perience, in themselves, or that He preferred fishermen to
lawyers, and tax-collectors to priests. But He was equally free
from the bias which leads so many to believe that the success of
any movement depends on its being supported by the higher
classes, whether of intellect or rank. His one test of men was
fitness or capacity for the special objects He had in view. The
number of adherents at His command as Apostles was limited.
His primary aim was to discover men who could be taught and
trained to comprehend His character, aims, and labours, who
could describe His life to their fellows, who could inform them
as to what He said and as to the deeds of mercy and power
which He wrought. The defects and the limitations of the
Apmstles were far better known to our Lord than they are to us
or to His critics. Yet He called them despite of these, for
after all they were the best instruments within His reach.
Their faults of intellect, taste, manner, speech, their stupidity,
folly, their prejudices and prepossessions, their unbalanced judg-

APOSTLES

105

ment and intemperate zeal were all before His eyes ; neverthe-
less He summoned them to be His Apostles in "the confidence
that He could make them become the very men best fitted to
discharge the duties connected with the establishment of the
Kingdom of God. He had no false anticipations as to the kind
of men the Twelve would prove ; He chose them knowing what
they were and what they would become.

The Apostles were twelve in niimber. The
number was intended to be significant. Its im-
port coukl not have been lost on the Twelve them-
selves when they were first called, or on the nnilti-
tude who witnessed their election. Our Lord was
evidently tliinking of the twelve tribes of Israel.
Though ten of the tribes had largely disappeared,
Israel still consisted ideally of twelve tribes, and
tiie mission of the Messiah w.as to be to all tiie
tribes of the nation. Hence the fitness of the
number chosen by our Lord. There was one
Apostle for each tribe. Nor should it be over-
looked tliat the employment of tliis number was a
fre.sli claim on the part of Jesus to be the Messiah.
His disciples would argue tlius : Wlio but the
Messiah could venture to create a body or group
of twelve disciples only? Nobody had done so
before, no prophet, not even the Baptist. Jesus
then must be the Messiah.

It has been suggested that the niunber twelve was, so to
speak, accidental ; that our Lord did not choose a definite num-
ber of disciples, but that He allowed all who desired to do so to
remain beside Himself. The alleged choice of the Twelve is pro-
nounced not historical. They chose our Lord, not He them.
Tlie Twelve is but a name for His closest and most devoted
adherents. The only arguments advanced for this view are the
silence of the Gospel of St. Matthew as to the selection of the
Twelve, and the omission of the list of the Twelve from the
Gospel of St. John. But St. Matthew furnishes a list of the
Twelve, and therefore presupposes their selection. He assumes
as self-evident that they had been appointed by our Lord. St.
John not less than St. Matthew takes the selection of the Twelve
(067. 70) as known, and even makes our Lord refer to His ap-
pointment of them (15^6). To assert that the Twelve attached
themselves to our Lord gradually and spontaneously is to mis-
read the tenor of the statements regarding them.

The title 'Apostle' and its equivalents. — It is
expressly stated that the Twelve received from
our Lord the title ' apostles ' ; but it is doubtful
whether the title was bestowed Avhen they were
chosen, and its exact sense has always been a
subject of debate. It will be expedient at this
jioint to examine the designations borne by the
Apostles, because they are not called uniformly
by one name.

The most common of all the appellations be-
stowed on them in the Gospels is that of disciples.
This usage is as characteristic of the Fourth
Gospel as of the Synoptics. And it is noteworthy
that in none of tlie (jusiiels are the twelve disciples
sharply discriminated from the other disciples of
our Lord. Tliey are called ' the disciples of Jesus,'
'his disciples,' 'the disciples,' but the context
alone reveals wiietlier the writer is speaking of
a limited group or of the disciples of our Lord in
general.

A peculiar usage appears in the Gospel of St. John. There
the title is applied to those who first attached themselves to our
Lord. 'The disciples' form a body or class by themselves long
before the Apostles are chosen. From the narrative it looks as
if no jierson belonged to this group who was not at a later stage
included among the Apostles, but the point is not by any means
certain.

The adoption of the term ' disciples ' to denote
the followers of our Lord requires no explanation.
The primary sense of the word indicates the rela-
tion of a pupil to his teacher, and the designation
was therefore the most natural and appropriate
which could be employed.

The Twelve. This phrase explains itself. As
soon as our Lord had selected a specific number of
persons for a definite end, it was to be expected
that they should be called by the number which
they formed. They were twelve, and were accord-
ingly known as 'the Twelve.' It is doubtful
whether it is proper to supply such a substantive

as 'disciples' or 'apostles.' There is authority in
the NT for the use of both of these phrases, but it
does not follow that the name first given to this
inmost circle of our Lord's adherents was ' the
twelve disciples' or 'the twelve apostles' rather
than 'the Twelve.' A time came when all three
designations were current. St. Matthew mentions
'the Twelve' four times (10^ 26'^-2»-47,^ gt. Mark
nine times (4i« 6' 9^^ W 11 '^ W- "• ^o. ^i), St. Luke
six times (8' 9'- ^^ 18»i 22^- •'^), and St. John four
times (667-'»-" 20^^). St. Matthew speaks four
times (10' IP 20^^ 2620) of 'the twelve disciples,'
but he stands alone in his use of this description.
It is worth while to observe that after the death
of Judas the phrase 'the Eleven' was employed
precisely as ' the Twelve ' had been. It is found
absolutely in Lk '24^ ; it is found with the substan-
tive 'disciples' in Mt 28'^ and with. the substan-
tive ' apostles ' in Ac 1-'^.

The word dTTjoroXos occurs ten times in the
Gospels. In the Gospel of St. John it is used only
in its etymological sense of a person sent forth
(13'"); in the otiier three Gospels it refers to the
twelve disciples of our Loid. But there is some
doubt as to the meaning it bears in each of
these Gospels. St. Matthew employs it once only
— in the passage already quoted : ' The names of
the twelve apostles are the.se' (10-). This language
is used to introduce the list of the Apostles, to-
gether with the charge addressed to them. The
term may be understood here in either of two
senses : it may designate the Twelve as sent out
on one special mission of evangelization, or it may
bear the meaning which it has in Christendom
to-day. A decision between these senses is hardly
possible in the case of St. jNlatthew's Gospel. It is
otherwise with the Gospel of St. Mark. Here the
term is employed twice (3'^ 6^"), and apparently in
both instances only with regard to the particular
missionary tour or journey on which they were
about to enter. The use of the term in St. Luke
is noteworthy. It occurs six times. Once (11^")
it is possibly used in its etymological meaning of
messenger ; in two other places (6'^ 9'") it may be
used to designate the special mission on which the
Twelve were first sent ; but in the remaining three
(I75 22''' 24'") it is employed to designate the Twelve
in their capacity as the representatives of Jesus,
the sense which it commonly bears in the Acts.

It is unnecessary for our present purpose to
enter on the history of the word ' apostle ' in
Greek. That the word was in use in NT times in
its etymological sense of messenger is generally
allowed. This fact is confirmed by the NT itself.
Our Lord, in speaking to His disciples on the
night of the betrayal, declared that the person
sent (apostle) is not greater than he that sent him
(Jn 13'"). Again when our Lord is designated in
He 3' as ' the apostle and high priest of our
confession,' the reference is probably to His own
description of Himself as ' the sent of God ' (Jn
17'*). There is then clear evidence that the word
was current in our Lord's time in its sense of
messenger, delegate, envoy. Was it also in use in
a technical sense to designate those who were
despatched from the mother city by the rulers of
the race on any foreign mission, especially such as
were ciiarged with collecting the tribute paid to
the temple service? (Lightfoot, Gal. 93). And was
it this usage which suggested to our Lord His own
employment of the term ? There is no evidence to
show that the term was current in this technical
sense before the Gospels were written. Besides,
even though it had been in existence, it is doubtful
whether our Lord would have employed a term
which had already in the minds of His hearers
distinct associations of its own. The absence of
such associations would reconnuend a term to Him.

106

APOSTLES

It was the very simplicity and directness of the
expression 'apostle' wlHch'won for it the favour of
our Lord. The Twelve were simply to be His
messengers or envoys. The analof,'y between His
own case anil tiiat of the men He had selected was
always present to His mind. He liad been sent by
tiie Father : they were to be sent by Himself. A
technical term could only have served to bewilder
the Twelve and lead them to misconceive the object
of tlieir mission. What was necessary for our
Lords purpose was a word which set forth simply
and ai)tiy tiie relations of the Twelve to Himself,
and for this there was no more suitable term tiian
' messen<j:er,' 'envoy.' Tiie term 'ajmstle' then
was not suf^fjested to our Lord by its currency as
a technical expression. He chose a common word
and atlapted it to His own purpose. He wished to
{jive the most expressive title to the men whom
He had chosen, and none seemed to Him so suit-
able as the word 'sent.' It reminded them per-
petually that tiiey were men with a mission.

It is jienerally held that the name ' apostles ' was given to
the Twelve on the occasion of their call. The language of St.
Luke (G'-') docs not compel us to adopt this conclusion, nor
IS that of St. Mark (3i-i) decisive on the point.* The state-
ments in hoth Gospels are consistent alike with the view
that the Apostles were so named when they were first called,
and with the view that this title was bestowed on them at a
later date. The other considerations to which appeal may be
made tell in opposite directions. It may be urged that the im-
pression left on the mind of an ordinary reader is that the
Apostles received their name at the time of their call, but it
does not follow that this impression is correct. For it is said in the
same context that our Lord gave to Simon the name Peter, and
we ktiow that this name was given to him long before he became
an Apostle. This proves that the statements made in connexion
with the appointment of the Twelve must not be pressed as if
they referred to that event exclusively. Again, it may be con-
tended with nnich propriety that there was a special fitness in
our Lord assigning a new name to the men whom He had set
apart for a new task. The new relation might well be desig-
nated by a new name. But it may be pointed out in reply that
an interval elapsed between the choice of the Twelve and their
being sent forth. Is it not probable that the new designation
was given only when the new vocation was actually begun?
Would the new title be vmderstood apart from the experience
by which it was illuminated? This argument is strengthened
by the circumstance that St. Mark appears to employ the term
'apostle' only in connexion v\ith the missionary journey of the
Twelve. With him it is not so much a title belonging to them,
as a term descriptive of the functions assigned to them on a
special occasion. To decide between these conflicting opinions
is not easy, but on the whole the suggestion that the disciples
were not called ' apostles ' till they were first sent out appears
the more probable.

The Sermon on the Mount is regarded by many as an address
delivered by our Lord when He chose the Twelve. The note of
time in the Gospel of St. Luke ascribes it to this occasion, and
there is no reason to reject this testimony. Besides, it has the
greatest internal probability in its favour. The appointment of
the Apostles formed an epoch in the ministry of our Lord ;
what more natural or suitable than that He should avail Him-
self of the occasion to explain and enforce His convictions as to
the true life of man ? The time was most opportune for such a
deliverance. The hearts of the disciples were deeply moved ;
their whole natures were quickened and alert; why not sow
seed which might afterwards bear abundant fruit? The char-
acter of the Sermon itself is another argument confirming this
conclusion. It is didactic rather than hortatorv. It expounds
truth rather than proclaims the mercy of God. Finally, there is
nothing in the Sermon which conflicts with this opinion. It may
tliiMi he assumed with some confidence that the Sermon on the
Mi.uiit was spoken in connexion with the call of the Twelve
Miiiiy writers go further and contend that it was spoken to them
pnncipally or exclusively. But this opinion is at variance with
the statements of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke, and
IS not re(|uired by the contents of the Sermon. The truths it
announces were not intended for the Twelve alone • why then
should they not have been heard hv all the disciples? This
result IS in no way inconsistent with the opinion that the
Sermon on the Mount formed, as it were, a special charge to
the Twelve in view of the new position which thev were hence-
forward to occupy. It is not necessary for our purpose to dis-
cuss the hmit« of the Sermon or do more than furnish a brief
a.-,-ount of Its teaching. Our Lord wished His followers to
un- .i-staiid the meaning of ri-hteousness ; to know what the
will of (,od really was; the true nature of the demands He
made on them ; how to fnime tlieir conduct if thev were to
ol.Uin His approval. The subject oi the address then is the
true life of man. The characteristic features of that life are set
forth in a eeries of blessings pronounced on those who possess

* It should bo noted that the words

do not occur iu Til. See, however, UVni

tvf xoei ttTofl'ToXow ^voLucff'iy

the qualities spoken of ; the mission of Christians as the light
of the world and the salt of the earth is touched on ; and then
our Lord proceeds to contrast the perfect requirements of the
Law of God as understood by Himself with the requirements of
that Law as contained in the OT or as sanctioned by tradition ;
after which He illustrates the true nature of almsgiving, fasting,
and prayer, and of devotion to the will of God. See Sermon on
THE MoiiNT below, and in Hastings' BB, Ext. Vol. 1 B.

It would have been most instructive had any record of the
effect produced on the Apostles by this Sermon been preserved.
Their surprise must have equalled their admiration. 'The severe
requirements, the strictures on the Law, the novelty of the
interpretations, the apparent paradoxes, must have astonished
and perplexed them. It is doing them no injustice to say that
much it contained was beyond their comprehension. They may
have seen that the qualities required of them were embodied in
our Lord's own life, and that the temper -of the Beatitudes was
exactly His temper. They may have felt that the sphere of the
inner life was not less properly the sphere of law than that of
speech and conduct. 'They may have discerned that the true
greatness of man is to live not merely as God enjoins, but as God
Himself lives. But they could hardly grasp what our Lord meant
by the fulfilment of the Law. A fulfilment which was at the
same time an abolition was a mystery to them. Nor would they
perceive that He had transformed morality by reducing it to the
principle of life according to God ; the one supreme rule of duty
being to love God and man. The paradoxical expressions, too,
would be as puzzling to them as they have proved to thousands
since. In their discussions there would be champions of literal-
ism, but these would soon be brought to acknowledge that a
perfectly literal obedience to the commands given was im-
practicable.

4. Training of the Apostles. — From the call of
the Apostles the mission of our Lord was more a
mission to them than to His fellow-countrymen at
large. He had waited until the time that a proper
selection from His disciples could be made : now
that the choice had taken jilace He devoted Him-
self to their instruction and training. The Apostles
were to accompany Jesus from place to place ; they
were to be with Him continually. This implied
the relinquishment of their means of living. It
was not possible for them to continue at their
occupations and be Apostles of Jesus. The sacrihce
made by each Apostle in obeying the summons to
apostleship has seldom been adequately appreci-
ated. In some instances the property left or
sold, the income abandoned, might not be great
intrinsically, but a man's all is great to him,
hence the moral courage needed of every Apostle
was not sligiit. How then were their wants sup-
jilied ? Whence did they obtain money to meet
tlieir daily expenses? The arrangement followed
was probably devLsed by our Lord, and formed one
of the earliest lessons He intended them to master.
In a sense this first lesson is the supreme and even
the sole lesson whicli He sought to teach, that of
absolute reliance on Himself for everything. Trust
in the Father, trust in Himself, was the lesson
which Jesus sought to inculcate at all times. The
Twelve and our Lord formed, .as it were, a single
household, of which He was the head. He presided
at the common meals, He gave directions as to
their movements. The cost of their maintenance
was borne by a common pur.se. One of the Twelve
was the treasurer of the company (Jn 13-^). Tiie
food needed was either carried with them, or pur-
chased, or provided by the hospitality which is so
characteristic of the East. The company could not
only supply their own wants, but could minister to
those of the poor (Jn 13'-"). The sources from which
their supplies were drawn were doubtless various.
Some among them had had or still had property,
and the proceeds, contributed to the common stock,
helped to defray the charges of each day. It is
almost certain that presents were made to our
Lord and the company from time to time by grate-
ful friends and neighbours. But the principal
source seems to have been the generosity of several
women who accompanied them on some of their
journeys, and placed their means and services at
the command of our Lord. The names of some of
these women have been preserved in a most in-
structive passage in St. Luke's Gospel (8-- =*), which
is the chief authority on the subject under con-

APOSTLES

lo;

sideration. Among these are mentioned Mary of
Mai,'dala, Joanna (possibly a widow wliose husband
had been a steward of Herod Antipas), and Susanna.
It is evident from St. Luke's statement tliat the
number of such women was large, and it was prob-
ably owing to their generosity that our Lord and the
Twelve were able to devote themselves untroubled
and untranmielled to their task. It should be noticed
that the kind of life lived by the Twelve was itself a
practical illustration of some of the cardinal lessons
which Jesus desired to teach. The subordinate
value of earthly possessions could not have been
more ettectively taught than by the life of depend-
ence on the liberality of others. Their journeys,
too, from place to place had also their value. They
were stimulated bj^ new scenes and new persons";
new conditions had to be faced, new duties per-
formed. Tiiey had leisure to ponder on what was
said to them ; they were not distracted from the
great work of their life, the knowledge of tlieir
Master. This was their ihity, and it l>ecame then-
glory. For in understanding Him they came to
resemble Him. The education of the Twelve, tiie
transformation of tliem from the men they were
into the men they became, is one of the greatest
of our Lord's achievements. The Apostles were to
be our Lord's witnes.ses, but the witnessing of
which He tliought demanded insight, sympathj',
courage, self-command, tolerance, patience, charity.
It was inseparable from the highest moral endow-
ments. It involved great receptive and assimilative
jxiwer, issuing in vigorous and unceasing obedience
and service.

In order that the Apostles might become His
witnesses, our Lord made use of three principal
agencies ; {n) His personality, (b) His miracles, and
(c) His teaching.

(«) To bs with Jesus was in itself the best of all
education and training. It was on this account
that the Apostles were chosen to be with Him
habitually. A complete knowledge of Him could
be attained only in this way. For knowledge is
acquired insensibly not less than sensibly, and the
Apostles learned much regardingJesuswhen itnever
struck them that they were doing so. Gradually
His influence told on them. His ideals, motives,
ends became clear to them. His manners, looks,
tones, words, ways became their inspiration and
guide. Tiiey felt what goodness, truth, duty were.
Above all, they came to know God as the Father.
It would, however, be a serious error to hold that
the Twelve from the first moment of tlieir selection
appreciated tlie true grandeur of the life of Jesus.
On the contrary, that life must often have pre-
sented to them a problem of no little difficulty.
It was not the type of life which they iiad been
accustomed to regard as specifically religious, still
less as embodying religion in its perfection and
integrity. It is probable that those of the Apostles
who had been disciples of the Baptist were at first
more impressed by liis austere and solitary life
than by the life of Jesus, which was substantially
that o{ ordinary men. He ate and drank as they
did. He dres.sed like them. He moved freely
among them. He never sought to protect Himself
from the ajiiJioach of men, but on the contrary in-
vited them to draw near. Nothing in His bearing
or speech betrayed that He regarded Himself as
standing on a different plane from other men, or
that He expected them to treat Him as belonging
to a different order of existence. He was simple,
genial, affable, accessible. His mode of life, too,
viewed as religious, must have tilled them with
.surprise. He had no fixed hours or forms of
prayer. His approach to the Father was the ex-
pression of His Iiabitual reverence, adoration, and
trust, but it was not determined, mucli less fettered,
by rule. He prayed as He was moved to pray.

Again, He departed from a usage which wa^ one
of tlie chief features of the piety of the time.
He declined to fast. Not only had He no regular
fast days. He neither fasted Himself nor did He
inculcate the observance on them. Another respect
in which He deviated widely from the religious
practices of His time was His disregard of cere-
monial ablutions. He paid no attention to the
rules affecting ritual purity. There is no evidence
that He violated the usages of His nation as to
foods, but His attitude towards these showed
that He attached no value to them. Even that
rite which was fundamental and distinctive, the
pledge of salvation because the assurance of being
a member of the covenant, the rite of circumcision,
was unnoticed in His teaching. In yet another
and hardly less important respect our Lord's life
was largely different from the accepted type of
sanctity. The Sabbath, like circumcision, was
one of the peculiar glories of Judaism, and the
teachers of our Lord's age and of preceding
generations had framed a code of rules to protect
it from desecration. These He trampled under
foot. The endless regulations intended to stop
the performance of any work whatever on that
day He brushed aside as at variance with the true
eml of the Sabbath institution. He rejoiced in
the Sabbath, esteeming it to be one of God's best
gifts to man, but He was everywhere denounced
as a Sabbath-breaker by those who regarded
theiusehes as tlie interpreters of the law (Jn 5"*).
Even in the matter of almsgiving He was not as
the men who professed to be specially religious.
He was beneficent in the highest degree, but He
followed no systematic rules.

Hence it is plain that the tenor of our Lord's
life must have formed a problem of no little com-
plexity to the Twelve during the first stages of
their apprenticeship. Was this life — so simple, so
natural — a truly religious life ? Was the religious
life bright, sunny, cheerful, full of hope and joy?
Was this life of simple trust in tlie Feather and of
obedience to His will in the fulfilment of the
common duties of life— was this religion? Nor
was the perplexity of the Apostles lessened by
the classes with which our Lord preferred to
associate. He addressed Himself to the sick, the
poor, and the outcast. The solicitude of Jesiis for
the least necessitous of these classes was a difliculty
to some of them, but their surprise rose to the
height when they saw Him mi.x freely with those
under a social ban.

Doubtless the eyes of the Apostles were opened
gradually. They came to perceive, as we do
to-day, that tlie life spent by their Master vas
the typical life of man. Its likeness to tiie
common life of men is its glory. F'or by it tlie
common life which all must live is transfigured
and made the ideal life of men. Its freedom from
rule is discerned to be the reason why it is capable
of becoming the model of all lives without excep-
tion. F'or that freedom teaches men that true
religion creates its own forms, wliile its essence
of trust in God and devotion to His will remains
unalterable. The sympathj' whicii He exhibited
for all classes was a revelation of the truth tliat
He was the Saviour of the world.

(b) Perhaps nothing impressed our Lord's dis-
ciples more when they Hrst became acquainted
with Him than His mirciclcs. The expectation
that the Messiah would work miracles seems to
have been general. The Gospels leave the im-
pression that the common people anticipated that
works of a most marvellous description would be
performed by the Messiah. The nature of these
works was undefined, but thej' transcended the
ordinary endowments of man. The Twelve then
may have felt little surprise when they saw their

108

APOSTLES

Lord perform miracles, but every new miracle
would serve to strengthen their conviction of His
title to be the Messiah. It is not likely, however,
that they were prepared for tlie kind of miracles
which He worked. None of them could have fore-
told that tlie Messiah would confine Himself in
great measure to the accomplisliment of miraculous
cures of l)ody and mind ; that He would spend
many liours on many days in healing sickness and
in expelling deiuons. The miracles of Jesus were
as unexpected as His mode of life. The Apostles
weic dreaming of miracles of judgment at the very
hour when He was performing miracles of mercy.
Even the miracles over nature were not those of
Mliich tiiey naturally thought.

The Ajwstles could not fail to perceive the range
of the power wielded by their Master and be filled
with amazement. No disease could withstand His
word or touch. The very demons yielded to His
sway. Death itself was powerless before Him. It
is important to notice that some of the miracles
were peiformed ])efore the Apostles only. The
miracles in wiiich the Apostles as a whole or some
(if tiicm were specially concerned are these : the
Miraculous Draught of Fishes recorded by St. Luke
(5'-"), the Stilling of the Storm (Mk 4^"), "the Walk-
ing on the Sea (6^*, Jn B"*), the Stater in the
I'isli's Mouth (Mt 17-''), the Cursiuf' of the Fig-tree
(Mk IF"), and the Second Miraculous Drauglit of
Fishes (Jn '2P'). These signs had a peculiar value
for tlie Twelve. They were proofs of knowledge
and of power fitted to promote faitli and to
enforce truth. There is a fitness in the circum-
stance that most of the miracles on nature were
wrought before or on behalf of the Apostles.
For they more than others were prepared to
embrace the truth that Jesus was the Loid of
nature. It was indispensable that they should
be taught this fact, and how could it have
been better illustrated tiian by the miracles
wrought on the Sea of Galilee? What a revela-
tion of the knowledge or power of Jesus ; what a
propliecy of the success of the new vocation to
which they were summoned, was the first draught
of fishes ! What a lesson concerning the might of
Jesus was contained in the instant obedience of
the raging waves and Avinds to His command !
What a fresh disclosure of His power was His
walking towards them on the sea as they toiled to
make the western shore of the lake ! What in-
struction to Peter and to the rest when Peter first
succeeded in imitating his Master's walking on the
water and then began to sink ! How fraught with
suggestions to Peter the coin found in tlie mouth
of the first fish which came to his hook as he
lowered it into the lake ! What confirmation of
all that they had learned was found in the second
draught of fishes, that after the Resurrection !
The cursing of tlie fig-tree occupies a place by
itself among our Lord's miracles, but the lesson it
teaches is most weighty. A miracle of judgment is
a.s suitable a.s a parable of judjjment. The lesson
of the need of correspondence between profession
and practice could not have been more impressively
taught than by the fate of the fig-tree.

No one can doubt that the number and variety
of the miracles witnessed by the Ai)ostles enhanced
their conception of our Lord's person and powers.
Perhaps, too, they discerned, even if imperfectly,
what 1.S so clear to us to-day, that the miracles
were indeed what He called them, signs -. manifes-
tations of the character and qualities of the kiu"-
dniu which He had come to .set up. The boundless
sympathy and compassion of their Master must
hav,. Ntruck tlicm ; llis life not less than His teach-
ing was nifivy and service. His works of mercy
were tlie living (Mubodiment of the principles of
mercy He inculcated. He healed all who sou<rht

His aid, making no inquiry into their past, their
station, their gifts, but caring only for their needs.
It was impossible for the Apostles not to discover
that the miracles they beheld with such frequency
were signs of the grace and love of the Father
speaking to men through Jesus.

As the Apostles saw the miracles and heard
what Jesus said respecting them, did they form a
just conception of their nature and function?
Were they able to compare them with the por-
tents for which they had at one time longed? Did
they perceive the relation of the signs to the
person of Jesus? Did they discern that the signs
could be fully understood only through His char-
acter ? Did they recognize that the character and
words of Jesus were greater than His signs, but
that these were nevertheless such as to convince
every impartial judge that His mission was of
God? They knew that Jesus never regarded His
miracles as the chief evidence for the validity of
His claims ; they were neither His sole nor His
principal credentials ; they were rather a part and
element of His message and His work. Did they
see clearly that the evidential value of the miracles
did not consist in their departure from the estab-
lished order of nature, in their capacity as mar-
vels, but in their congruity with the character and
aims of Jesus, and as illustrations of His spirit
and ways? We Avould gladly learn whether the
Apostles ever reflected on the use made by our
Lord of His miraculous endowments. Believing
in Him as the Lord of nature and of life, aware
that He had unnumbered forces at His command,
were they surprised that He never employed His
powers to promote His advantage cr to defend His
disciples or Himself from injustice and violence?
W^hence this self-repression ? Why was the sphere
of the miraculous so strictly limited? Why were
none of the miracles of a character to dazzle,
compel, overwhelm ? Why did Jesus refuse so
often the request for a sign, and especially for a
sign from heaven ? W^hy was the thaumaturgic
element wholly absent from His works? The fact
that our Lord observed a peculiar temperance in
the employment of His miraculous gifts must have
imprinted itself on the minds of the Apostles, and
it is probable th,at the significance of the fact
became more and more obvious as their experience
widened. Even before the Crucifixion they may
have discerned that this self-restraint was in full
harmony with His attitude towards the world, and
only the corollary of His conception of the King-
dom. See, further, art. Miracles.

(c) From the first, the disciples had regarded
Jesus as a teacher, and whatever more He became
to them as their intercourse with Him deepened, a
teacher He remained to the end. Or, to speak
more correctly, from being a teacher He became
the Teacher ; and the greatest of teachers, measured
by any proper standard, He certainly was and
abides. The substance of His teaching is the
truest, wisest, and best on the loftiest and
weightiest of all topics — topics as to which all
teachers before Him were as men grojiing in the
dark. He and He alone speaks with the confidence
of ])ersonal knowledge regarding the nature of God
and His relations to man. It is sufficient for our
present purpose to refer to the naturalness, the
ease, the familiarity with which Jesus spoke con-
cerning the Kingdom of God ; the character and
intentions of the Father ; the righteousness He
requires ; the conditions on which entrance into the
Kingdom depends ; its history and its final issues ;
the testimony borne by Jesus to Himself ; the place
He assigns to His person and work. Never man so
spake (Jn T^**). Yet He speaks what He knows,
and testifies of what He has seen (Jn 3"). Here, if
anywhere, the entire religious experience of man-

APOSTLES

109

kind affirms the truth of the witness He bore.
His message authenticates itself ; it bears the seal
of its Divine origin upon it. Such views never
sprang up within the mind of man ; they descended
out of heaven from God.

And this teaching was conveyed to the disciples
and to the people according to definite methods
and in language which forms an epoch in human
speech. It is unlikely that our Lord ever reflected
on the problems wliich form the science and art of
teaching, or that He ever laid down rules for His
own guidance ; but the essence of all that is best
in the writings of the great educators is embodied
in His practice. Let a reader come to the Gospels
full of what he has learned regarding education
from Plato and Aristotle and their successors, and
he can perceive without difficulty, in the relations
between our Lord and the Apostles; in His attitude
towards them ; in His modes of stimulating, en-
larging, and enriching their minds ; in His tact,
patience, and Avisdom, — the signs of skill Avhich is
incomparable because so spontaneous, so flexible,
and so fertile of resource. Never for a moment did
He lose sight of His object, to qualify the Apostles
to be His witnesses and representatives ; but He
did not dwell on that purpose. He was aware
that the power of personality is the strongest and
most penetrating of all forces, and accordingly He
separated the Apostles more and more, as the days
went by, from their familiar scenes and labours, in
order that they might, because of their complete
intimacy with Him, breathe His spirit and share
in Kis aims. They were ennobled, as it were,
despite themselves. New ideals and motives took
possession of them. He was so constantly before
their eyes, so continually the subject of their
speech, so much the centre of their interests and
the goal of their hopes, that they grew into His
image. Not less evident was His desire that the
Apostles should not be mere echoes of Himself, but
men of originality, courage, and resource. It was
on this account that He delivered no systematic
instruction ; that He caused nothing to be com-
mitted to memory ; that He did not store the
minds of the Apostles with rules, lists of duties,
tables of the forbidden and the permissible. Hence
He gave no dogmas in fixed shape even on the
greatest of all subjects. Hence, too. He furnished
no directory for the duties of the day, and made no
attemi)t to prescribe the hours to be employed in
devotion or the words to be used, or to determine
the provision to be made for the sick and the poor.
Again, He taught only as His disciples were able
to receive. Not that He never went beyond their
capacity. This He frequently did, and of set pur-
pose. But He observed an order in what He said.
Tlie most obvious illustration of tliis fact is His
teaching regarding His person. He did not begin
to tell at once who He was, nor did He open His
lips as to His death until He had evoked from
Peter's lips as the spokesman of the Twelve the
confession that He was tlie Messiah (Mk 8'^,
Mt 16'", Lk Q-"). It is expressly stated that He
kept back much from His disciples, leaving them
to tlie enlightenment of the Spirit, because they
were unprepared to receive what He had to com-
municate (Jn 16'-). If He spoke of what they did
not comprehend at once, it was either that their
intellects might be quickened or that they might
treasure in their memories the truth mentioned, in
view of their future experience. His references
to His death had as their chief aim to render the
Apostles certain of the fact and, above all, that it
was foreknown by Him. Nor was He impatient
for results. He never forced growth. He knew
that to build durably is to build slowly ; and so
He Vjore with ignorance, with misapprehension,
with imperfect views, with partial and hasty

inferences, knowing that these would be corrected
by the discipline of experience. He sought
especially to preserve the individuality of His
disciples, and to unfold the characteristic endow-
ments of each. None of them was to be other
than himself. No one was to be a model for the
rest. He knew each so well that He could play on
him as on an instrument, but this knowledge He
used only to promote the welfare of the disciple.
The manifestation of personal character, the per-
sonal discernment of truth, the exhibition of
personal sympathy, appreciation, reverence, devo-
tion, love, filled Him with delight.

The Gospels show on every page that our Lord
encouraged the disciples to ask Him questions.
Whatever difficulties presented themselves to their
minds they were free to place before Him. This
they did so constantly that the habit must have
been created by our Lord. How large a portion
of the Gospels is occupied with the questions and
remarks of the Apostles ! It is to these questions
that we are indebted for the explanation of the
parable of the Sower (Mk 4"*). The same is true
of His teaching regarding defilement (Mt 15'^).
How much we owe to Peter's questions — ' How
often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive
him ? ' (Mt 18-1) . ' wjiat shall we have therefore ? '
(Mt 19-'). But perhaps the finest illustration of
the relations of our Lord and the Apostles in this
connexion is the intercourse on the night of the
betrayal. No passage in the Gospels is so in-
structive as to the readiness of the disciples to
break in by questions on what our Lord was say-
ing, and the skill with which He availed Himself
of these questions to open to them His deepest
thoughts and purposes (Jn 13^"^-).

The resources of human speech have been strained
to tlie utmost to describe the grace and power of
the language of Jesus, and yet the result is felt to
be inadequate. Did the Apostles recognize the
originality, the strength, the flexibility, the charm,
the aptness, the simplicity, the depth of the words
of Jesus ? We cannot tell ; it may have been that
their apprehension of the beauty and majesty of
His language was much less than ours, but even
they must have felt a strange thrill as they heard
the most sublime of all truths clothed in terms
which they were in the habit of using every day
of their lives. It was a new experience to have
religion speak the tongue of the home, the work-
shop, and the street. Then, too, the illustrations
which He used ! The whole life of the ordinary
man was laid under tribute to illustrate the King-
dom of God. The furniture of his home, his food,
his clothing, his work, his intercourse with his
fellows were made the symbol and the vesture of
heavenly truths. Earth shone in the light of
heaven. One form of speech is specially identified
with the teaching of Jesus — the parable. The
parable may be regarded as the creation of Jesus.
The parables of the OT, and those found in Jewish
writings, hardly deserve mention in this respect.
Nor did Jesus teach in parables because the Lan-
guage of parable is the language of the East. He
devised the parable to meet the requirements of
His hearers. The parable is His own workman-
ship, the product of His mind and heart. Tiie
parables of Jesus are unique alike in literature
and religion, and are as distinctive of Him as the
miracles.

An ordinary reader of the Gospels is apt to suppose that the
ministry of Jesus, from its beginning to its close, was distin-
guished by the use of parables. But this opinion is erroneous.
No parables marked the opening of the ministry. The first use
of the parable is noticed at length. To the question why Jesus
finally adopted the parable most men would reply — to attract, to
interest, to stimulate, to find the readiest and most direct access
to the mind for truth and duty. But when the Gospels are con-
sulted they give an answer altogether different. They tell that
our Lord, when questioned on the subject, affirmed that He

110

APOSTLES

taught in parables, not to reveal but to conceal the truth ;
not to instruct but to condemn men (Mk 4l2). These words
have alwajs been a stumbling-block to interpreters. Perhaps
their true significance may never be ascertained ; but the view
which rejects them as the correct description of the parables as
a whole is justified, because they are at variance with the Gospels
themselves. The most cursory examination of the parables
shows that many of them are messages of grace. Who can fail
to discern that the heart of God is represented in the parable of
the Prodigal Son as the heart of a Father? Is this truth meant
to extinguish hope? Again, an examination reveals that many
of the parables were spoken to the disciples themselves. Was
this the penalty of their blindness and hardi\ess of heart?
Accordinglv, the conmion view of the parable is the tiue view,
and our Lord spoke in parables to render his teaching as simple,
vivid, stinmlating, and effective as possible. See Par.^bles, and
Illustrations.

Tlie extent to -wliidi the parables were addressed
to tlie Twelve has scarcely received adequate recog-
nition. Indeed the parables are seldom spoken of
in connexion with the education of the Twelve.
Yet one-third of tiiem were, to all appearance,
directed to the Apostles exclusively. Tliese cover
the period from tlie time when our Lord first began
to speak in parables till His deatli. The ten
jiarables belonging to tiiis class, following the
order lirst of .St. Matthew and then of St. Luke,
are : the Hidden Treasure, tiie Pearl, the Drag-net,
the Unmerciful Servant, the Labourers in the Vine-
yard, the Ten Virgins, the Talents, the Friend at
Midnight, tlie Unprofitable Servant, the Unjust
Judge. A slight acquaintance with these parables
sliows that the lessons they teach were those our
Lord was most anxious that His disciples should
learn. The measureless value of the kingdom of
God, the certainty of a final severance between the
evil and the good, the necessity of a forgiving dis-
position, the nature and conditions of the future
recoiiii)ense, the obligation of watchfulness, the
reward of perseverance in prayer, the truth that
no men have claims of merit on God, are the sub-
jects with which tliese parables deal, and these
subjects were constantly in the heart and on the
lips of our Lord. A flood of light was thrown on
all these topics by the parables. The truth was
now clearer, more comprehensible, more afi'ecting,
more subduing.

Is it jiossible to discover the sentiments with
Avhich the Twelve listened to the parables? Per-
haps they were too plain men to perceive their
exquisite naturalness and beauty. In all their
discussions concerning them not a word may have
been spoken in prai.se of that perfect felicity which
secures for them an unequalled jilace in the litera-
ture of the world. But they would at least per-
ceive their appro]iriateness. How they must have
lived in their memories and illuminated truth and
duty I Did the Twelve find any difficulty in under-
standing the import of the parables ? I'resumably
their condition was just that of the diligent and
devout reader of to-day. Some parables bear their
nieanings, as it were, on their forehead. Nobody
doubts what is the meaning of the parable of the
( Joud Samaritan or of the Ten Virgins. It is true
tliat there are questions connected with their inter-
pretation which are still under discussion, but the
lessons which they inculcate are obvious. But
what of the parables wliich perplex expositors
to-day? What of the Unjust Steward? \Vhat of
the LaUurers in the Vineyard? The same diffi-
culties which occur to us must have occurred to
the disciples. But they had this immense advan-
tage over us that tliey could ask their Master ques-
tions as to His meaning, and we know that these
questions were freely put. The interpretations of
tlie parables of the Sower and of the Tares are
said to have been replies made to the request of
the disciples for an ex))ia)iation. What strikes
one in thes.> answers is th.. point, depth, freshness
of the inc.uiing. These cx[ilanation.^ liave sonie-
tiuiea been asbigned to the Apostles themselves,

but the supposition is without probability. Were
it sound, it wouM form the most striking proof of
the etlect on them of their intercourse with Jesus,
for it is impossible to suggest juster or more
suitable interjjretations of the parables concerned.
One peculiarly instructive sentence was spoken by
our Lord in tiiis connexion (Mt 13^-). He had been
exjwunding some of the parables to His disci jdes,
and asked if He had been understood. When they
replied affirmatively. He remarked that every
teacher of the Law instructed regarding the king-
dom of heaven Avas like a householder who produced
from his stores things new and old. The Apostles
were the scribes of Jesus, taught to understand the
nature, characteristics, and history of the King-
dom of God, and hence capable of furnishing most
prolitable instruction to their hearers. Tiie old
and the new alike were at their command in their
mutual relations and connexions. Tliej^ did not
despise the one nor vaunt themselves concerning
the other. The Law and the Gospel, prophecy
and its accomplishment, the Law and its fulfil-
ment, furnished them with the subjects which they
could treat with knowledge Jind power.

After the Twelve had been some time with
our Lord, they were sent forth on a missionary

Iourney (mission of the Apostles, Mk 6", Mt 10*,
Ai 9'). The time at which the mission took place,
the town from which they started, the duration
of the mission, are uncertain. Two reasons pro-
bably infiuenced our Lord in despatching the
Twelve on this enterprise. The first and most
prominent was His profound sympathy for the
condition of the people of Galilee. It was im-
possible for Him to evajigelize all Galilee, to say
nothing of the entire land ; others must share His
labours. This was one of the ends for which the
Twelve had been chosen, and accordingly He sent
them to announce everywhere that the Kingdom
of God was nigh. A second reason was that He
might in this way train them for their future career.
The message which they were to proclaim corre-
sponded with their own comparative immaturity on
the one hand, and with the spiritual state of their
audiences on the other. To have declared the
Messiahship of Jesus would have led to misunder-
standing, and have hindered rather than furthered
the expansion of the kingdom ; hence they were
confined to the assertion, so full of promise and
hope, that the Kingdom was at hand To assist
them in discharging their mission as the envoys of
Jesus they were endowed with miraculous jiowers.
They were enabled to cure disea.se and to expel
demons. These power.": they v.ere to exercise
gratuitously. This liberality was intended by
Jesus to be an evidence of the nature of the king-
dom, of wiiich they announced the near approach.
It was to be a kingdom of compassion, symijathy,
tenderness These endowments, besidso serving to
show the nature of the kingdom, were also a
demonstration of the truth of their message. The
Apostles were enjoined to make no special pro-
vision for the mission on which they were about
to enter. They Avere to start on it just as they
were. They were to take neither money, nor food,
nor clothing for their journey. They were to rely
for their maintenance on the providence of God,
and on the hospitality which they were to seek.
Because of the urgency of the case their attention
was to be concentrated on the lost sheep of the
house of Israel. It is, indeed, not probable that
our Lord meant their mission to extend beyond
Galilee, or even to the whole of the province,
the Greek-speaking cities being excluded. The
efi'orts of the Twelve were probably intended to be
restricted to the homes of the people. No refer-
ence is made in the instructions given them to any
appearance in the synagogue or iu the market-

APOSTLES

APPAEITION

111

place. Their inexperience did not permit them to
deliver addresses in public. Tlie Twelve were sent
on their mission by twos ; that is, six ditt'erent
enterprises were carried on by them at once. The
wisdom of this arrangement is ob\ ious. It was
desirable that they should overtake as many of
the population as j.ossible, but it was not less
important that they should be encouraged and
strengthened by one another's presence. Had each
of the Twelve entered on the work alone, he would
have felt isolated and discouraged, and often have
been at a loss how to act. No agreement exists
among scholars as to the length of time occupied
by the mission. Some consider that it lasted only
a single day, others two days, others several weeks,
and otliers again, several I'nonths. It may be pro-
nounced with confidence that it took up some weeks
at least.

The Twelve strictly followed the commands they
received, passing through the villages, preaching
repentance and the gospel, and casting out demons
and healing everywhere. How their message was
received does not appear. It is simply known that
on their return tliey told our Lord what they had
done and taught. No reference is made to the
experience tliey had acquired or to the conclusions
they had been leil to form. It would have been
most prolitable had any information on these
points reacheil us. Not less advantageous would
It have been for us to know how they felt when
they wrought their iirst miracles. Were tliey
startled ? Did they exult ? Or were they grateful
and humble? AVe can but speculate on tiiese
ixtints, but we may feel assured tliat the Apostles
profited not a little by this their first mis.sion.
Besides those lessons of confidence in the wisdom
and power of their Master which tliey were always
receiving, they were taught how to apply the
truths they had learned, and how to use tlie
powers with which they were clothed. They were
forced to act for themselves, to refiect and decide
in a way which elicited their latent capabilities.

From this point the education and training of
the Apostles may be regarded as merged in the
life of our Lord, and the further treatment of the
subject must be .sought under tlie relevant articles.
The intercourse between our Lord and the Apostles
should be regarded from their side if tlie work He
accomplished in their case is to be fully appreci-
ated and understood. To study the life and teach-
ing of Jesus through the eyes and minds of the
Apostles is advantageous in no common degree,
because of the many new questions which are thus
raised, and which cannot be determined without
a clearer and fuller insight being obtained into
the wisdom of the methods He followed in prepar-
ing them to exjjound His thoughts and to extend
His kingdom. A list of some of the more important
topics to be considered may be serviceable. They
are such as these : the question put to the Twelve
at the crisis in Galilee, 'Will ye also go away?'
the confession of Peter, and its significance for
the Apostles; the predictions of the death and
resurrection made, it would appear, to the Apostles
only ; the strife for the first places in the King-
dom, and the action taken by our Lord regarding
it ; the words spoken to the Apostles on the night
of the betrayal, some of which form a parting
charge to them ; the appearances to the Eleven ;
the final commands addressed to them. Two sub-
jects besides are deserving of particular notice :
the inner circle of the Apostles — Peter, James,
and John, tiie Three within the Twelve ; and the
many questions connected with the name of Judas
Iscariot.

The Christian Church rests on the Apostles, for
the Christian Church is their creation. But they,
in turn, were the creation of Jesus. That He trans-

formed them in so brief a space of time from the
men they were when called, as to be able to con-
vince the world that He was the Messiah of Israel,
the Son of God, the Saviour of mankind, is not the
least of His titles to the admiration and the grati-
tude of men ; for His success proves what can be
made of ordinary men when they surrender them-
selves to the guidance of His spirit.

Literature. — The chief books to be consulted are the Com-
mentaries on the Gospels and the Lives of Christ, together with
art. 'Apostle' in the different Bible Dictionaries and Encyclo-
pcedias, though the best of these are meagre and inadequate
for the purposes of the student of the Gospels. For a general
treatment two valuable works in English should be named —
Bruce's Training of the Twelne and Latham's Pastor Pastorum.
On the name and office of an Apostle see Lightfoot, Gal.^ 92-101 ;
Hort, Christian Kcclesia, 22-41 ; and on the Apostolic group,
Expositor, I. i. [1875] 29-43, lii. ix. [1SS9J lOOff., 187 ff., 434 ff.

APPARITION.

W. Patrick.

In AV this word occurs thrice, in the Apocr. only : Wis 173
(Gr. Uix>.iJ.ix., RV 'spectral form'), 2 Mac 2,-* (Gr. irr)^i.yux., RV
'apparition,' RVm 'manifestation'), and S'* (Gr. £Ti?«»£ja, RV
'vision,' RVm 'manifestation'). In RV it occurs thrice only:
Mt 1426 II Mk 649 {^at-rct.(rfJM, AV 'spirit'), and 2 Mao 32-» (as
above).

The Revisers have used this word in its ordinary
current sense of ' an immaterial appearance, as of
a real being, a spectre, phantom, or ghost.' There
is always connected with this term the idea of a
startlincf or iinexpectcd appearance, which seems
also associated with the original (pavTaa/xa. The
immaterial appearance of a person supposed to be
seen before {double) or soon after death {ghost), is a
ivrnith ; but these three synonyms are often inter-
changed.

The Jews of Christ's time, like all unscientific
minds (ancient and modern), believed in ghosts
naturally, instinctively, uncritically. Dr. Swete
{The Gospel according to St. Mark, London, 1898, p.
131) refers to Job 4'5ff- 20**, and especially to Wis
17^*^* and 17'^ C^' for earlier evidence of a popular
belief in apparitions among the Hebrew people.
The disciples' sudden shriek of terror {avfKpa^av, Mk
6^^) shows that they thought the phantom was real ;
but if we try to realize their attitude and outlook,
we shall understand the futility of attributing
to such naive intelligences the discrimination of
modern psychological research. The suggestions
of excitable imaginations were indistinguishable
from the actual presentations of objective reality.
The best illustrations of their habits of thought
must be sought in ancient and modern records of
Oriental beliefs.

A. Erman {Life in Ancient Egypt, London, 1894, pp. 307, 308)
says that ' the Egyptians did not consider man as a simple
individuality ; he consisted of at least three parts, the body,
the soul, and the ghost, the image, the double, or the genius,
according as we translate the Egyptian word Ka. . . . After
the death of a man, just as during his lifetime, the Ka was still
considered to be the representative of his human personality,
and so the body had to be preserved that the Ka might take
possession of it when he pleased. ... It is to their faith in the
Ka that we owe all our knowledge of the home life of the
people of ancient Egypt.'

E. J. W. Gibb (HiMory of Ottoman Poetry, London, 1900, pp.
56-59) says that ' according to the Sufi theory of the human
soul it is a spirit, and therefore, by virtue of its own nature,
in reality a citizen of the Spirit World. Its true home is there,
and hence, for a certain season, it descends into this Physical
Plane, where, to enable it to act upon its surroundings, it is
clothed in a physical body. . . . The power of passing from the
Physical World into the Spiritual is potential in every soul, but
is actualized only in a few.'

For the mediaaval conception of the nature of ghosts see the
locus classiciis — Dante, Purg. xxv. 88-108 — in which Dante ex-
plains his conception of the disembodied soul as having the
power of operating on matter and impressing upon the surround-
ing air the shape which it anin)ated in life (Aquinas), thus form-
ing for itself an aerial vesture (Urigen and St. Augustine). See
also Dante, Conv. tr. ii. c. 9, and Thomas Aquinas, Suintna
Theol. pt. iii. suppl. qu. Ixix, art. 1.

Keim {Jesus of Nazara, London, 1879, iv. 184-
191) critically reviews the various explanations
offered of the miracle of Jesus walking over the
billows, but says nothing of the word ^dfraa^a,

112

APPEARANCE

APPRECIATION

merely remarking (p. 190) : ' If we adhere to the
actual narrative, the going on the water was far
from being an act of an onlinary character— it Avas
something divine or ghostly.' For the latest criti-
cism of the popular belief of NT times in the
manifestations of the spirit world, see P. Wernle,
Bcqinninrjs of Christ ian it ij, London, 1903, ])p. l-U.

1*. Hkndkkson Aitkkn.
APPEARANCE. See Christ in Art, and Por-
traits.

APPEARANCES.— See Resurrection.

APPRECIATION (OF CHRIST).— The whole NT
is one long ai)preci.ition of Christ. It is no blind-
folil acceptance of Him, no mere echo of a tradition,
but a series of utterances of men personally con-
vinced of tlie supreme value of Christ to the world.
St. Paul speaks of Christ only as he himself has
been intluenced by the Lord, not as the disciples
had described Jesus to him. His phrases— high,
beautiful, and so often mystical — are the direct
exjjressions of his own personal consciousness of
Jesus Clirist. No one has accused him of extra-
vagan<;e or of exaggeration. It is because he has
felt that to be clothed with the Lord must be the
jjcrfection of power and joy, that he says, ' Put ye
on the Lord Jesus Christ' (Ro 13"). It is because
he lias seen the love eternal that nothing imagin-
able can utterly root out again from the awakened
lieart, that he says, ' Neither death, nor life, . . .
nor any other creation, shall be able to separate us
from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our
Lord ' (Ro 8^'). And St. John opens his first Epistle
witli the strongest personal declaration of the whole
of the Epistles, ' that which we have heard, . . .
seen with our ejes, . . . and our hands have
handled of the word of life . . . declare we unto
you' (1 Jn 1').

But the simplest appreciation of all — as natural
as a bird's song or a child's praise — is that which
threads its way through every page of the Gospels.
In si)ite of all the enmity written there ; remembering
that there were those who saw in Him an ally of
Beelzebub (Mt 12-^), working with the devil's aid;
that some called Him ' a gluttonous man, a wine-
bibber, friend of publicans and sinners' (11^*);
that lawyers, and Pharisees, and Sadducees were
ever watcliing to trip Him (221^), and plotting with
Herodians (v.^^) to destroy Him ; that the Galiltean
cities, which should have known Him best, —
Cliorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum ( 1 1'-'i- -^), and even
Nazaretli, — rejected Him (Lk 4^'-) ; and remem-
Ijering tlie awful and lonely agonies of the last
hours, we can yet point to the Gospels as abounding
with witness to the wide contemporary apprecia-
tion of Christ.

It was most natural that it should be so, even
when He is thouglit of entirely apart from any
doctrine of His Divine jjersonality. His own
sympathy for others, and indeed for all things,
was sure to attract others to Him. His quick
perception of tlie good in all. His tender response
to the least wave of the world's infinite nmsic,
show Him as destined to be the desired of men.
\h- ciime upon the most diverse types, the most
opp(jsitu of characters, and instantly knew their
possil)ilities and their Morth. He .sees through
tlic pure-minded iiesitancy of Nathanael (Jn 1^^),
He recognizes the true value of the widow's
mite (Lk 2l'-»), He draws Nicodemus the
tumd to Him (Jn 3'), He knows what will
satisfy Thomas (Jn 20-"), and what M'ill please
and win Zacchams (Lk ll)*) ; and His immediate
followers include a Mary Mngdalene as well as a
Mary of I'.ctliany, a Judas as well us a John.
Even tlie failures are appreciated by a standard
o^ faith unknown to the world. He acknowled-^es

the longing of the heart though a weak will robs
it of fruition ; He reads the zealous affection of
Peter between the lines of a moment's Satanic
pride (Mt IG--), or a terror-stricken denial (Mt 26"") ;
He penetrates to the secret yearnings behind the
materialistic questions of the woman at the well,
and imparts to her His highest thought of God
(Jn 4-*). He cannot even look upon the earth or
sky but He must read into it the indwelling of the
Eternal, find in all its pages picture and parable
of spiritual realities. To His all-sensitive being
the universe of things seen is but a symbol. The
sower with his seed, the harvest-fields, the birds
of the air, the fox in his hole, the sheep in the
fold or lost on the hills, the wind that foretells
heat or rain (Lk 12'^^-^''), the prophecies of the
sunset (Mt 16^), or the springtide promise of the
sprouting fig-tree (Mk IS^'^),- all passing through
His apiireciative spirit is treasured as the visible
manuscript of God.

We might expect that such a receptive, com-
prehensive, and understanding nature would
compel confidence. Men could not help trusting
such deep and ready sympathy. And, as we read
the Evangelists, one of their most notable traits
is this— that they succeed in bringing together,
almost without form, and apparently Avitiiout
intention, a wonderful accumulation of witness
to the appreciation Jesus inspired from the first.
The record is so varied. It is from no one school,
or type, or rank. Almost every grade of life in
the community is there — from the outcast and the
leper to the Sanhedrist and the Roman centurion.
From the first His gifts of healing attract the
sufferers, and none are more definite in their
acknowledgment of Him. The villagers bring
their sick on beds to the market-places (Mk 6^^-*"),
or lower the palsied through the roof at Capernaum
(Mk 2^). The centurion in that town is satisfied
that a word from Jesus will be enough to heal his
sick servant (Mt 8*). Martha says, with such
simple trust, ' Lord, if thou hadst been here, my
brother had not died' (Jn IP'). The ruler of the
synagogue feels that tlie touch of the Lord's hand
would be enough to heal his dying daughter
(Mt 9'^). The woman with the issue of blood
would but touch the hem of His garment to ba
cured (Mk 5'^). The Syro-Phoenician woman per-
sisted in her prayer for her sick daughter, eagerly
claiming the rights, Avhile bearing the reproach
of being a Gentile 'dog' (Mk 7-**). With one cry
is He greeted alike by blind Bartima^us (Mk 10^^),
the two blind men (Mt 9-'), and the ten lepers
(Lk 17'^)— 'Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy
on us ' ; a cry the meaning of which is uttered by
the leper (Mk 1^") — 'Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst
make me clean.' When sight is given to the man
born blind, the parents testify to the Divine origin
of the power that has been exercised (Jn 9^^). And
the multitude at Nain, when they saw the dead
raised, had no hesitation in crying — ' A great
prophet is risen among us' (Lk 7'*'). It was a
glad welcome from the sufferers and their friends
that greeted Jesus as the manifestation of God
in all these things. But not less earnest is the
Avitness of the crowds to the popular estimate of
the teacher. ' There went great multitudes with
him' is the frequent note that leads up to some
great doctrine of life (Mt 19% Lk 14-5, ^j- g). The
house filled at Capernaum (Mk2-) is but the parallel
of the occasion when His own mother ' could not
come at him for the press' (Lk 8'^), or of the
thousands by the seashore (Mk 4'), or of the
multitude that 'trod one upon another' (Lk 12').
Lives that He changes from darkness to light
bear Avilling evidence to His power and charm :
Mary Magdalene will not be held back by false
I sliame from entering the Pharisee's house to

ARAMAIC

ARCHELAUS

113

acknowledge her Saviour (Lk 736-50^^ ^^j. |jg ^.^
jjulsed by the charge of wastefulness through
sentiment (Mk 14^); and Zacchaius will boldly
profess a practical conversion before those who
know him intimately (Lk 19^).

We look for appreciation from His nearest
disciples, a quick obedience, a joy that has no
place for fasting (Mk 2"*), the mother's confidence
at the marriage-feast at Cana (Jn 2''), tlie great
utterances of His forerunner the Baptist ( Jn P" 3^"),
the exalted vision of the Transfiguration (Mk Q^),
and that Petrine outburst, repeated by all, as they
neared Gethsemane — ' If 1 should die with thee,
I will not deny thee.' From these His intimates
Ave anticipate such trast. We look for it, too,
from tiie band of holy women — Joanna, Susanna,
Salome, tlie Marys, and those ' who ministered
unto him of their substance' (Lk 8^). But beyond
these we have tlie scribes (Mt 8'", Mk 12^) ear-
nestly approaching Him, Pharisees inviting Him
to their houses (Lk IP^ 14'); we have the confes-
sion of the council of priests and Pharisees — ' If
we let him alone, all will believe on him ' (Jn IV^) ;
we have the acknowledgment of Samaritans, con-
vinced not by hearsay but by personal knowledge
(Jn 4-"-), of centurions (Mt S^-^'\ Mk 15^"'), and of
the rich young man 'running and kneeling' and
saying, 'Good Master' (Mk 10"). Strangers seek
Him out — 'Sir, we would see Jesus' (Jn 12-"); and
the common peo|)le of His own race ' heard him
gladly' (Mk 12'"), and acclaimed His entry into
Jerusalem (Mk ll*''"). In tlie beginning, shep-
herds and magi, angels and stars bear witness
to the newborn King; so that to the last it is
a strange mixed conipanj', that seems to include
(by his long faltering before judgment) Pilate
liiiiiself, the lone, mysterious figure of Josepii of
Arimatluca, and Nicodemus 'bringing myrrh and
aloes '(Jn lO^").

This many-sided appreciation of our Lord in His
own (lay, in addition to its obvious gain to the
Christian preacher, is suggestive of the many
dillering i)oints of view from which men may rever-
ently regard Christ, each one expressive of a truth,
though not the entirety of the truth. And it may
also indicate the many successive ways of wonder,
repentance, sympathy, and vision in which Christ
speaks to each individual soul.

Edgar Daplyn.

ARAMAIC— See Language.

ARBITRATION.— The settlement of disputes by
the acceptance of the judgment of a third party
supposed to be imiDarti.al. The ai'rangement may
be })urely private, or in accordance with special
statute; the application is multifarious. Some
method of settlement by umi)ires is as old as civil
government. In Job 9^^ the ' daysman ' is perfectly
described. The Greek term {iJ.e<TlTrjs) translated
' mediator' (or middleman) has the same meaning ;
though as applied, in the NT, to Moses and to
Christ (Gal 3"*- -», 1 Ti 2*, He 8« 9^^ 12"-*), as standing
between man and God (cf. Dt 5*), it belongs to an
essentially diH'erent order of ideas, inasmuch as
God is not man. The complexity of modern life
has multiplied the occasions ; but the most import-
ant recent advance has been the application to
international ditt'erences. Thereby questions such
as have often led to wars become capable of
amicable settlement. The first notable instance
Mas the (ieneva arbitration under the Washington
Treaty (1871) in the Alabama Question. The
])rinciple, then disputed, has now found universal
acceptance. Treaties of arbitration already exist
or are being negotiated between most nations that
have mutual relations. And in tlie future, except
wh(!re amliitions and strong passions are involved,
this means of agreement will be largely resorted to.
VOL. I. — 8

The idea is based on the acknowledgment of the
identity of moral law in the two spheres of indi-
vidual and national life. Duty for iiersons or
communities or nations is one. There is no valid
distinction of private and public right; the code
of ethics that is binding for the private individual
is equally obligatory on kings and the representa-
tives of peo])les. This doctrine is opposed to the
long history of statecraft, to the maxims of diploma-
tists, and to the passions of despotism. But few
now openly deny its truth ; and the acknowledg-
ments already made in treaties of arbitration
may be reckoned one of the greatest triumphs of
Christian civilization.

The principle may be said to be based on the
Golden Kule (Mt 7'-, Lk 6"'), which teaches recipro-
cal obligation, or on the kindred command to love
our neighbours as ourselves (Mt 22^", Mk 12^').
These fundamental laws are given as the sum of
practical duty. They condemn the egoistic atti-
tude. They teach us to regard the position of
others with full sympathy, to seek an impartial
standjioint, and to make tlie individual will har-
monize with the general mind. The principle of
arbitration is also an illustration of the grace of
peaceableness. 'Blessed are the peacemakers'
(Mt 5®). This truth finds full expression in the
Epistles, Avhere peace, the fruit of the Spirit (Gal
5--), and the concomitant of righteousness, is con-
trasted with the strife and envy of sin, and is
noted as a mark of the kingdom of God, who is
the God of peace. Once more, the principle may
be based on prudence ; for a willing settlement
may prevent a legal defeat, or even a worse dis-
aster (Mt 5--^- -«, Lk 1258- 6a, cf. Pr 25S- '•>).

Christ declined on one occasion to be an arbiter
(Lk 12'^f-). He was addressing the multitude, when
one of them s.iid, ' JNlaster, bid my brother divide
the inheritance wuth me.' Jesus replied, 'Man,
who made me a judge (kpitt)v, so BDL and the
crit. edd. ; Til has SiKaaT-qv) or a divider {fxeptarriv,
only here in NT) over you?' The words which
follow (v. "''^•) show that Jesus knew that this man
Avas moved by covetousness ; but apart from His
censure of a wrong motive, He here affirms that it
was no business of His to arbitrate between men.
He would not interfere in civil disputes which fell
properly to be decided by the regular law (cf. Dt
21''). But His saying goes far beyond the sphere
of jurisprudence. Christ lays down universal laws
of justice and love, but does not apply them.
Moral casuistry was no part of His mission, and
decisions of the kind this man wanted could only
have weakened the sense of personal responsil)ility,
and hindered the growth of those spiritual dis-
positions it was His chief aim to create.

R. Scott.

ARCHELAUS ('ApxAaos) is named once in the NT
(Mt 2--), and probably is referred to in the parable
of the Pounds (Lk ID'^^-). He was the elder of the
two sons of Herod the Great by ISIalthace, a Sam-
aritan woman (Jos. BJ I. xxviii. 4, xxxiii. 7).
Judaea, with the title of 'king,' was bequeathed
to him by his father's will ; but he would not
assume the royal dignity till he had obtained con-
firmation of that will from the emperor Augustus
(Atit. XVII. viii. 2-4). Before his departure to
Rome a rebellion broke out in Jerusalem ; and
in quelling it his soldiers put three thousand men
to death, among whom were pilgrims visiting the
Holy City for the i)assover {ib. xvii. ix. 3). Thus
at the beginning of his reign an evil reputation
was gained by Arclielaus, and the alarm of Joseph
may be understood ('But when he heard that
Archelaus did reign in Judcea in the room of his
father Herod, he was afraid to go thither ').

After the rebellion, Archelaus proceeded to Rome
[Ant. xvil. ix. 3-7, cf. Lk 19'='). Augustus, dealing

114

ARIMATHiEA

ARISTION (ARISTO)

with Herod's •will, received a deputation from the
peojile of Judica, who bej^ged tliat iieitlier Arche-
laus nor any of his lirothers sliould be appointed
king (ef. hk \d^*). The emperor finally decided
tliat Archelaus should receive Jnda'a, Samaria,
and Iduma^a, with the title not of 'king,' but of
'etlinarch' (.l;*^ XVII. xi. 1-4; i^J II. vi. 3). On
his return from Home the ethnjirch souglit ven-
geance against his enemies (cf. Lk 10-") in Judipa
and Samaria. In the ninth or tenth year of his
reign, after many acts of tyranny and violence,
he was banished by the emperor to Vienne in
Gaul (Ant. xvil. xiii. 2). According to Jerome,
tlio tomb of Arciielaus was pointed out near
IJcthluhem {de Hitu et Nomin. Loc. Hebraic. 101.
11).

LiTF.RATinE. — .Tosephiis, Antiquities o/theJcwa, Wars of the
Jeirs [IjJ], as citoil above; references s. 'Archelaus' in Index
to Hrhiirer's Gpuchichtf des Jiidischen Volkes im Zcitnlter Jesxi
Cliristi, 18;»S-i;)01 (Enjr. tr. of 2nd ed. 1885-90) ; and Hausrath's
ticiitestamoitliche Zcitijeschichte, 1873-77 [Eng. tr. in 2 vols.
lS78-8()). Of the last named work, vol. i. [German] was pub-
lished in a 3rd c,i. in 1879. J. HeRKLESS.

ARIMATHjEA (' \piixa0aia) is mentioned in Mt
27", Mk 15«, Lk 23^', and Jn \9^ as the place
from which Josepii, who buried the body of Jesus,
came up to Jerusalem. In the Onomasticon (225. 12)
it is identified with 'Ap/jLade/j. Zeiipd (l{amathaim-
zujthim*), tlie city of Elkanah and Samuel (1 S V),
near Diospolis (Lydda) and in the district of
Tiinnah (Tilnieh). In 1 Mac IP*, Ramathem is
referred to along with Aplu-erema and Lydda as a
Samaritan toparchy transferred, in 145 CC, to
Ju(hea. These notices of Ramathaim point to
Bcit-Rimn, 13 miles E.N.E. of Lydda, and 2 miles
N. of Timnah,— an identification adopted by G. A.
Smith (IIGHL 2,54 n. 7) and Buhl (GAP 170).
Another possible site is RLhn-alJah, 3 miles S.W. of
Bethel, suggested by Ewald (Hist. ii. 421). The
jiroposed sites S. of Jerusalem are not ' in the hill-
country of Ephraim '(IS P). If ArimatluTa, then,
be identified with the Ramathaim of Elkanah, it
m.ay well be at the modern hill-village of Beit-
Hi iwt. The LXX form of Ramathaim is'Ap/xa^ai^
(ISP and elsewhere), thus providing a link be-
tween Ramathaim and Arimathiea.

A. W. Cooke.
ARISTEAS (Letter of).— This interesting piece
of fiction may hnd a place in this Dictionary,
because it gives the first account of that work
which more than any other paved the way of the
gospel in early times, namely, the Greek trans-
lation of the OT, the so-called Septuagint. There
is no agreement as yet about either the age or the
aim of this composition. That it is a fiction is
now generally admitted. The author pretends to
have been (jiie (jf the two ambassadors— Andreas,
apxi(Tup.aTO(pv\a^ of the king, being the other— sent
by king Ptolema^us Philadelphus to the high priest
Eieazar of Jerusalem in order to get for him a copy
of tiie Law, and men to translate it for the Royal
Lil)rary at Alexandria. The letter gives a lon-^
description of the gifts sent by Philadelphus to
Jerusalem, of the city, its temple and the religious
custonis of the Jews, and of the table-talk between
he king and each of the 72 interpreters. When
tlie work was lini.shed, a solemn curse was de-
no.imiMl on any one who should change anything
n. It (cf. I)t4-', Rev 22'«-i9). S(.hiirer, L Abrahams"
ami o hers Ii.k the date about B.C. 200 : Hi-rriot (on
r- ;*a''';!n- '^ ^'^^-^''^ ' ^^''^I'hausen (Isr. nndAd.

win'i 1'^ ••,I*-23<i,heas..igns it to the 2nd cent.) ;
>\endland, between 96 and 63,t nearer to 96; L.

^U,.^lla«f ngs- UB iv. 438^. line 7 l/on. botC-of text, read

Colin doubts whether it was known to Philo ;
Graetz placed it in the reign of Tiberius, and
Willrich (Judnica, 1900, pp. 111-130) brings its
composition down to 'later than A.D. 33.' Lom-
broso was the first to show that tiie 'author was
well acquainted with the details of court life in
the times of the Ptolemies' ; and recent researches
have confirmed this ; on the other hand, there are
interesting connexions with the Greek of the NT ;
compare KaTajioX-q used absolutely for ' creation '
(Mt 13^5 and Aristeas, § 129 [a usage apparently
unknown to Hort ad 1 P P", and Swete, Introd.
p. 397]); avardTTecreaL (Lk 1' and Aristea.s, § 144;
Mt &^- 3- and Aristeas, § 140, etc. ).

While Jerome had already called attention to
the fact that Aristeas speaks only of the Law as
having been translated by the 72 interpreters, in
later times it became customary to consider the
whole Greek OT as the work of the 'Septuagint.
Philo seems to follow a somewhat different tradi-
tion, and mentions that in his days, the Jews of
Alexandria kept an annual festival in honour of
the spot where the light of this translation first
shone forth, thanking God for an old but ever new
benefit. He is sure that God heard the prayer of
the translators 'that the greater part of mankind,
or even the whole of it, may profit by their work,
when men shall use philosophical and excellent
ordinances for regulating their lives.'

On the use made of the Greek OT in the NT see
Swete, ])p. 381-405, ' Quotations from the LXX in
the NT.' That Jesus Himself Avas acquainted
with it would seem to follow from tiie quotation in
Alt 15"= Mk V. For t'le Avords fiirTjv Se ae'fiovTal /xe
are the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew 'nni
□j-n-1', which rendering rests on a confusing of the
first word with inni (noticed already by Grotius).
But it is doubtful whether we are entitled to ex-
pect in our Greek Gospels such a verbatim report
of the words of Jesus.

On the influence of the Septuagint on the spread
of the Gospel, cf. (in addition to older works like
Grinfield, Oikonomos, etc.) Alfred Deissmann, ' Die
Hellenisierung des semitischen Monotheismus,'
Leipzig, 1903 (reprinted from Ncue Jahrbiicherfiir
das klassische Altcrtum, 1903).

LiTERATrRE.— The Letter of Aristeas was first published in
Latin (Rome, 1471 fol.) in the famous Latin Bible of Suevnheim
and Pannartz ; first edition of the Greelc text by Simon Schard,
Basle, 1561 ; all subsequent editions superseded bv that of
(Mendelssohn-) Wendland (Lipsiae, Teubner, 1900), aiid that of
H. St. J. Thackeray in H. B. Swete's latroductiun to the OT in
Greek (Cambridgre, 1900, 2nd ed. 1902). English translations by
J. Done, 1633 and 1685; Lewis, 1715; Whiston (Authentic
Iteeords, i. 423-584), 1727; recently by Thackeray (JQli xv.,
April 1903). Compare, further, Abrahams, ' Recent Criticism on
the Letter of Aristeas' (("6. xiv. 321-.342) ; the works on the
Septuagint (Swete, I.e.; Nestle in Hastings' DB iv.); Fried-
lander, Geschichte derjiidischen Apologetik (Zurich, 1903)

Eb. Nestle.

ARISTION (ARISTO). — One of the principal
authorities from whom Papias derived (written';')
'narratives of the sayings of the Lord' (riiv rov
Kvpiov \6ywv 8ir]yr](Teis i cf. Lk 1'), and (indirectly)
oral traditions.

1. Importance and Diffindty of Identification. —
According to Eusebius (HE iii. 39), Papias of Hier-
apolis in his five books of Interpretations (var I.
Interprettition) of the Lord's Oracles 'referred fre-
quently by name ' to ' Aristion and the Elder John '
as hi.s authorities. From the Preface {Trpooi/jLi.ov)
Eusebius cited the following sentence to prove that
Iremeus had misunderstood Papias in taking him
to refer to the Apostle John as his authority,
whereas the ' John ' in question was not the ' dis-
ciple of the Lord,' but a comparatively obscure
' Elder.' We abridge the sentence, but give the
relevant variants : et di irov Kai Trap-nKo\ov0vKus tls
Tols TTpea^vT^pois iXdou, toi)s tCjv vpia^vTiptisv aveKpivov
Xoyous* Tt 'Avbpiai ij tI U^rpos dTreu . , . ij ris eVepos

ARISTION (ARISTO)

115

Twif Tov Kvpiov fj-aOriTuiv, fire 'AptcrTiuv /cat 6 TrpecTJiirrepos
'Iwdvvtjs oi TOV Kvpiov nadrjTai Xeyovffiv.

For 'Apurriuv Syr. and Arm. read 'AplirTav, and omit the clause
01 ToD Kvpio-j iu.atiy,Ta.i X-youtnyi, Arm. by compensation rendering
' Aristo and John the Elders.' Nioephorus {HE ii. 46, but not
iii. 20) makes the same omission. Rufinus renders ceterioue
discipuli dieebant. Jerome changes the tense {loquebantur).
Four Greek MSS and Niceph. (iii. 20) omit ol

Deferring the question of the significance of the
variant readings, it is apparent that ' Aristion and
the Elder John ' are in several ways placed in con-
trast with the group of ' disciples of the Lord ' men-
tioned immediately before, by whom Papias cer-
tainly means the twelve Apostles, enumerating
seven (including James the Lord's brother ; cf. Gal
1"' 2^), from Andrew to 'John (author of the
Revelation) and Matthew' (author of the Logia).
The designation fiaOrjrai instead of dwocToXoi is em-
ployed because the function in consideration is that
of transmitting fiadri/xaTa — the precepts (ei/roXat)
learned from the Lord. The disciples (including
James) of the Lord Himself are the first generation
of traditores. The group next mentioned, ' Aris-
tion and the Elder John,' are distinguished ex-
pressly and implicitly as belonging to a subsequent
generation.

(1) As Eusebius points out, the John spoken of
in connexion with Aristion is (a) ' mentioned after
an interval,' {h) 'classed with others outside the
number of the Apostles,' (c) has ' Aristion men-
tioned before him,' (d) is 'distinctly called an
Elder' (in contrast with the Jolm mentioned just
before, who is called a ' disciple of the Lord '). No-
where in the context should the term ' Elder ' be
taken as = 'Apostle.'

(2) A distinction not referred to by Eusebius, but
at least equally important, is the contrast of tense
(disregarded by Kutinus and Jerome), whereby
Papias makes it apparent that at the time of his
inquiries the Apostles, including John, were dead ;
whereas Aristion and the Elder John were living.
He ' used to inquire of those who came his way
what had, been said (rt elirev) by Andrew, Peter,
Philip, Thomas, James, John or Matthew, or any
otlier of the Lord's di.sciples ; as well as what was
being said (are X^yova-iv) by Aristion and the Elder
John.' Hence, as an authority of note, and a trans-
mitter of Gospel traditions earlier than the time of
Papias' writing (A. D. 145-160), Aristion is a witness
of the first importance for the history of Gospel
tradition. On the other hand, great difficulty and
dispute are caused by the descriptive clause attached
in most texts to his name and that of John the
Elder, because it is identical with that by which
the Apostles are appropriately designated as tradi-
tores of the first generation ; whereas the distinc-
tions already noted, especially the contrast of tense
Ti direv — fire Xiyovcnv, make it certain that Papias
did not regard Aristion and the Elder John as be-
longing to this group. P'or Lightfoot's proposal
{Essaijs on Sup. Eel. j). 150, n. 3) to regard X^yovcriv
as ' a historical present introduced for the sake of
variety,' is confessedly advanced only to escape
the 'chronological difficulty' of supposing two
'disciples of the Lord' still living at the time of
Pajiias' inquiries. It is certainly inadmissible.

The Armenian version makes a natural inference
when it forms the second group by reading ' Aristo
and John the Elders.' But the change is clearly
arbitrary. Papias applies the title 'the Elder'
only to ' John ' to distinguish him from the Apostle.
It was doubtless applicable to Aristion as well
(Conybeare, Expositor, 1893, p. 248, against Hilgen-
feld, Ztschr. f. wisscnschaft. Theol. xxxvii. 1894, p.
626), but was superfluous. The exegesis suggested
above (Weitfenbach, Corssen, et al.) removes all
diffi(^ulty by rendering tovs tQiv irp. dviKpivov X(i7oi'j
as an ellipsis : ' I would inquire the utterances of

the Elders (reporting) what Andrew or Peter . . .
had said,' because ' Elder ' is then used consistently
throughout the paragraph for traditor of the jxjst-
Apostolic generation (cf. Ac. IS^- •*• ^ 21'* and the
Heb. jpi), though it is not relied on (as in Arm.) to
make the distinction of the Apostolic from the
post-Apostolic generation, but only of the two
homonymous individuals, John the Apostle and
John the Elder.

On this interpretation, Aristion and John were
members of the group which perpetuated the tradi-
tions of the Apostles (in Palestine ?) until Papias'
day (cf. Hegesippns ap. Eus. HE III. xxxii. 6-8,
and Lk V--, Ac 11^" 15-'- *■ «• 22. 23 2118). But even if
til is exegesis be rejected, there is no escape from the
following alternative : Either the descriptive phrase
ol TOV Kvpiov /j.ad7]Tai, appended after 'Aristion and
the Elder John' precisely as after the list of
Apostles, is textually corrupt (assimilated to the
preceding clause) ; or the designation is used in a
ditterent and very loose signilicance. On this view
the only certainty is that Aristion was living at
the time of Papias' inquiries (A.D. 120-140?) after
' Apostolic narratives ' (dwoaToXiKas dnjyrjaeis), and in
a region whence Papias could obtain tliem only
from ' travellers who came his way.' For Eusebius'
statement that ' Papias was himself a hearer, not
of the Apostles, but of Aristion and the Elder
John,' is made in the interest of his desire to tind
'some other John in Asia' besides the Apostle
(Zahn, Forsch. vi. 117 f.), and is corrected by him-
self in the next clause : ' At all events he mentions
them frequently by name, and sets down their
traditions in his writings.'

(3) A second difficulty of more importance for
the true reading of Papias and the identiiication
of 'Aristion' than is generally recognized, is the
spelling of the name, which Syr. and Arm. give as
'Aristo.' For this spelling, in combination with
the omission of the designation ' the disciples of
the Lord,' is not only traceable to about A.D. 400
(Syr. is extant in a MS of A.D. 462), but these two
main variations are accompanied by minor ones in
Syriac, Armenian, and Latin authorities, which
form a group in that they manifest a belief in com-
mon regarding the personality of Aristo-Aristion
which differs from that of the received text of
Eusebius.

2. Text of Ensehiiis.—'Mommsen (ZNTW iii.
1902, p. 156 ff. ) regarded this textual evidence as con-
clusive in conjunction with the admitted 'chrono-
logical difficulty.' He would therefore omit the
epithetony;-o/» the text of Eusebius. Coi'ssen (ib. iii.
p. 242 tf. ) rightly criticised Mommsen's proposal to
omit, because some designation of this second link
in the chain of traditores is indispensable to the
sense. He thought Papias capal)le of the colossal
anachronism of regarding his own contemporaries
as 'disciples of tlie Lord.' The present writer
had argued {Jottrn. of Bibl. Lit. xvii., 1898) for the
reading ol tovtwv fMadr/Tal {sc. tQv diroffToKwv) as the
true text of Papias, on the internal evidence, and
because ' the Elders ' of Papias are twice referred
to by Iren.Teus (Hwr. V. v. 1 and V. xxxvi. 1) as
'the disciples of the Apostles.' The corruption
followed by Eusebius (and probably even by
Irenteus in this passage, though he transcribed
others where ' the Elders ' were correctly described
as 'disciples of the Apostles'), involves only the
change (by assimilation) of three letters, OITUT-

(TON)MAeHTAI becoming OITOT(KT)MAeHTAI.
In the form wherein Edwin Abbott {Ene. Bibl. s.v.
' Gospels,' ii. col. 1815, n. 3) adopts the emenda-
tion, the change involves but two letters, OITOT-

(TO)MAeHTAI becoming 0IT0T(KT)MAGHTAI, as

in Jg 4-^ (LXX) TfiX TlfiX B becomes KT TlfiX in
A. This would largely explain the strange error

116

ARISTION (ARISTO)

of Irena?us in taking Papias to belong to a genera-
tion even earlier tlian Polycarp (' some of them saw
not only Jolin but other Apostles also, and heard
these saTne things from them and testify [present]
these things'). The difficulty experienced by
Eusebins in refuting it could hardly have been
so great if his text of Papias had not the same
corruption.

On this view the variants are of no help to
inijirove the text of Euscbms, Avhich is correct
in the received form (Bacon, art. ' False Witness,'
etc., in ZNTW vi. 1905). They have some im-
portance, even if arbitrary, as indicating tiiat in
antiquity also the 'chronological difficulty' Avas
felt as well as (in Arm.) the incompleteness of
sense produced by simple omission of the descrip-
tive clause and (in Kulinus) the incongruity of
applying to ' Aristion and John the Elder' the
same designation by which the Apostles had just
been distinguished. They would have great im-
portance if it could be made probable that they
rest, directly or indirectly, upon a knowledge of
PapinJi (or, much less probably, of Aristion-Aristo)
independently of Eusebius.

3. Origin of Variants. — 'Aristo' is not simply
'the Greek name Aristion badly spelt' (Cony-
beare. I.e. p. 243), nor even should it in strictness
be called 'an equivalent {gleichbcdeutcnde) form of
the same proper name' (Hilgenfeld, Ztschr. f.
wisacnschaft. Theol. 1875 ii. p."256, 1883 i. p. 13,
1894 p. 626). It is at least the more usual, if not
more correct form, and 'occurs very frequently in
ancient writers. It has been calculated that about
thirty persons of this name may be distinguished.'
But Smith's Diet, of Greek and Roman Biogr., the
authority for the statement just made (i. p. 310),
knows of but two occurrences of the form 'Aris-
tion,' once as the nickname of the adventurer
Athenion (n.c. 87), once as designating a surgeon
of small repute c. 150 B.C. In Jewish literature
only the form 'Aristo ' occurs (Jos. Ant. xix. 353
[ed. Niese]). Pape (s.v. 'Aptcrr^wj') adds four others
from Antiph. vi. 12, JL'^sch. nXarat/cos 3. 162, Plut.
Num. 9, and Pausanias. Patristic literature
knows only tlie form 'Aristo' in Christian legend
(Acta Barn. xiv. ed. Tisch. p. 69, knows a Chris-
tian host Aristo in Cyprus ; Acta Petri, ed. Lipsius,
p. 51, 14-53. 13, one in Puteoli ; Constit. Aj^ost. vii.
46, ed. Lagardc, p. 228, 21, gives to the first and
third bishops of Smyrna the name Aristo). The
form 'Aristion' is unknown. Eusebius himself
(HE iv. 6) draws his account of the devastation
of Judica in the insurrection against Hadrian (132-
135) from a certain Aristo of Pella. This writer,
accordingly, would be a contemporary of Papias in
position to he referred to as a traditor of Apostolic
teacliing. To speak of him and ' the Elder John,'
if by tlie latter were meant Jolm the elder of the
Jerusalem Church (Ens. HE iv. 5 ; cf. Schlatter,
hirehe Jcrusnlcms, 1898, p. 40), Avhose death is
dated by Epiphanius (//a-r. Ixvi. 20) in the 19th
year of Trajan, as 'disciples of the Apostles,'
would mvolve no greater looseness or exai,'geration
than we sliould expect in Asia c. 150 A.D. But
as huse bins gives no account of Aristo's writings,
allhougli making it a principal object of his work
t<.<cs(-nl.e early Ciiristian authorities, it is pro-
bable that Ansto of Pella was not a Christian, but
a .l.wish or (more probably) pagan writer. To
this supposition tliere is but one serious objection,
fur the ii«ferenccs of Nicephorus (HE iii. 24) and
the 7r,.srA.,/ thronieh may admittedly be disre-
garded as nierely reproducing Eusebius. Maximus
Confessor however, in ids scholiun cm the Theol.

ij't 7, ' n ^^'■•'"I'^git'^'l'* (c- 5. p. 17, ed. Corder),

nidoubtclly refer.',- to tlie same 'Aristo of Pella'

( V<^ra,.. TV Il.XXa/v) as author of the Christian

Dialogue of Jason and Pajiiscus, basing bis state-

ment on 'the sixth book of the Hypotyposeis of
Clement of Alexandria,' who seems to have
referred to this 'Jason' as 'mentioned by (I.
6v dfaypd^pai) Luke' (Ac 17*'^). Only, while the
Dialogue is known to Celsus (c. 167), Oiigen,
Tertullian, Cyprian, and Jerome, if not to jjseudo-
Barnabas and Justin Martyr, and even probably
survives in more or less altered form in tlie Alter-
catio Simonis ei Theophili (TU l. iii. p. 1I51K ;
P. Corssen, Altercatio S. et Th. 1890), it is known
to none of these as the work of Aristo, nor do
any of the later quotations, references, or other
evidences indicate that the work in question
contained hi-r]'^r\<sei^ rCov rod Kvplov \byuv (Eus. I.e.),
If the name ' Aristo ' was ever properly connected
with the Dialogue, it circulated only anonymously
after A.D. 200, and without the introductory narra-
tive portion -which it may have once possessed.
The late and unsupported statement of Maximus
is therefore much more likely to be due to some
misunderstanding of the Hypotyposeis, especially
as we have the explicit quotation of the same
Aristo of Pella by Moses of Chorene (400-450?)
extending to considerable length beyond tlie por-
tion quoted by Eusebius, accompanied by the
statement that Aristo was secretary of Ardasches,
king of Armenia, when the latter was sent by
Hadrian into Persia (Langlois, Coll. dcs. Hist, de
VArmenie, i. p. 391 ff., cf. ii. 110, n. 3, and Le
Vaillant de Florival, Hist. Arm. ii. 57). Harnack
(TU i. 2, p. 125) and Zahn, it is true, reject Moses'
quotation as a fabrication ; but it contains no-
tiiing ' fabulous,' and is defended with reason by
Hilgenfeld (Zts. f. w. Th. 1883, p. 811'.). Besides
this, Stephen of Byzantium, who knows of no
Aristo of Pella, mentions an Aristo of Gerasa (less
than 25 miles distant) simply as an dcTTelos jjrjTojp.

Our conclusion must be that, while direct
acquaintance with Papias is quite conceivable, the
variant form 'Aristo' in Syriac and Armenian
sources is best accounted for by a mistaken identifi-
cation of this Aristo of HE iv. 6 with the ' Elder
Aristion ' of HE iii. 39 and Moses of Chorene.

4. The Appendix of Mark. — The most important
addition to our data regarding Aristo Avas made by
Conybeare's discovery at Ecmiadzin in 1893 of
an Armenian MS. of the Gospels dated A.D. 989,
in Avhich the longer ending of INIark (Mk 16"--")
has the separate title in red ink, corresijonding to
the other Gospel titles : ' From the Elder Aristo '
(Expositor, Oct. 1893, pp. 241-254). This repre-
sentation, though late, Conybeare takes to be
based on A'ery early authority (Expositor, Dec.
1895, pp. 401-421), appealing to the internal evi-
dence of the verses in question. Undeniably t!ie
reference in Mk 16'* to drinking of poison Avith
impunity must have literary connexion Avith
Papias' anecdote regarding Justus Barsabbas (Eus.
HE iii. 39), Avhatever the source. Conybeare's
citation of a gloss 'against the name Aristion' in
a Bodleian 12tli cent, codex of Rufinus' translation
of this passage, Avliich referred to this story of the
poison cup, Avas even (to the discoverer's eye) a
designation by the unknown glossator of Aristion
as author of this story. But, besides the precarious-
ness of this inference, it Avould scarcely be possible
to write a gloss 'against the name Aristion'
Avhich Avould not be equally 'against the name
of the Elder John ' immediately adjoining ; and as
mediaeval legend reported the story of the poison
cup of John (i.e. the Apostle, identified Avitli the
Elder in the glossator's period) this Avould seem to
be the more natural reference and meaning of the
gloss.

The evidence connecting the Appendix of Mark
Avith the name 'Aristo' is thus reduced to the
statement 'inserted by an afterthought' by the
Armenian scribe John, A.D. 989, over Mk 16^"-",

ARISTION (ARISTO)

117

which he had attached, contrary to Syriac and
Armenian tradition, to his text of the Gospel. This,
however, is unquestionably important, especially
if, as Conybeare maintains, ' it must have stood in
the older copy transcribed.' The statement has
been generally received at its face value, but
with difi'erent identifications of 'the Elder Aristo.'
Resch (' Ausserkanonische Paralleltexte,' TUx. 3,
1894, p. 449 ; Eng. tr. by Conybeare in Expos. 4th
ser. X. [1894], pp. 226-232) regards Aristo of Pella
as the only personality open to consideration as
author of the Appendix. Hilgenfeld (Ztschr. f.
wissenscJirift. Theol. xxxvii. 1894, p. 627) stands
apparently alone in identifying the 'Aristion' of
Papias with Aristo of Pella, ' a notable contem-
porary of Papias,' and I'ef using to the Aristo of
the E^miadzin codex any signiticance beyond that
of 'some Elder Aristo or other before c. 500 A. D.,
from Avhom a Syriac MS will have borrowed Mk
]g9-2o ' (regarded by Hilg. as the original ending).
Other critics regard it as ' practically certain '
that the Mark-Appendix is really taken from the
authority referred to by Papias. Harnack sets
the example of peremptorily refusing the sug-
gestion of Ilesch {TU X. 2, p. 453 ft'.), that this
'Elder Aristo' may be no other than Aristo of
Pella, but gives no other reason than the date
('■. 140) ; which, as he rightly says, is irreconcilable
with the (disputed) phrase ol rod Jivpiov /xa$7]TaL
(('/iron. i. p. 269; on the textual question, see
above, § 2). Zahn (Thcol. Litemturhl. 22nd Dec.
1893 [Eng. tr. by Conybeare in Expos. l.c.'\ regards
it as a conclusive objection to Rescli's identification
that ' Aristo of Pella, who wrote his (?) Dialogue
of Jason and Papiscus after 135, and perhaps a
good deal later, cannot be the author of a section
(Mk 16^"-") which Tatian already read in his Mark
at the latest in 170, and which Justin had already
known so early as 150, though ^lerhaps not (N.B. )
as an integral part of Mark.' We may inquire
later what authority the scribe John may have
had for his insertion of the title.

5. Internal evidence of the Apjiendix. — The im-
pression of Westcott and Hort (Gr. NT, ii. p. 51),
corroborated by Conybeare (Expositor, 1893, p.
241 ft'.), that the Appendix to Mark is not the
original full narrative, but an excerpt, constitutes
the next step in the solution of our problem. In
particular, a real contribution is made by Zahn
(Gcsch. Kan. ii. App. xiv. \a, and Forsch. vi. § 3, p.
219) in the demonstration that Jerome (c. Fclag.
ii. 15, ed. Vail. ii. 758) had access to it in a fuller,
more original form ; for he adds after v." ' Et
illi satisfaciebant dicentes : Swculum istud ini-
quitatis et incredulitatis substantia (cod. Vat,_ 1,
'sub Satana') est, qute (I. qui) non sinit per im-
mundos spiritus veram Dei apprehendi virtu tem ;
idcirco jam nunc revela justitiam tuam ' (cf. Ac
1®). Jerome's source for this material, whose
Hebraistic expressions and point of view confirm
its authenticity, becomes a question of importance.

This source can scarcely have been the Dialogue
of Jason and Papiscus, whoever its author ; for
while Jerome Avas acquainted with this work (Com.
on Gal 3'^ and Qua'st. Heb. in lib. Gen., beginning),
and while Celsus, who also used it, twice quotes
the substance of Mk le* (c. Cels. ii. 55 and 70), the
nature of the work, so far as ascertainable, was
not such as to admit material of this kind. Besides,
we have seen that by all early authorities it is
treated as anonymous. Zahn's supposition (Forsch.
vi. p. 219) has stronger evidence in its favour, and
still leaves room to account for the points of con-
tact between the Appendix, the Dialogue, Celsus,
and Jerome. According to Zahn, 'The ancient
book in which Mk IG^^-" was extant independently
of the Second Gospel, and whence it was drawn
by transcribers of Mark, can only have been the

work of Papias, in which it was contained as a
SiTjyrjais of Aristion (sic).' But Jerome, he holds,
obtained his version indirectly, through his teacher
ApoUinaris of Laodicea. This explanation has in
its f.avour certain evidences adduced by Cony-
beare (Expositor, Dec. 1895), to connect the can-
cellation of Mk 16-'"-" in Armenian MSS with
knowledge derived from Papias of its true origin.
In particular, the same E(;miadzin codex whicth
attributes the Appendix to ' the Elder Aristo ' has
a version of the Pericope Adulterai (Jn 7'^^-8"
TR) independent of the received form, briefer, but
with the explanatory comment after Jn 8" 'To
declare their sins ; and they were seeing their
several sins on the stones.' Echoes of this addition
are traceable in Jerome (Pelag. ii. 17), in uncial U,
and perhaps elsewhere. Moreover, Conybeare's con-
tention that this ' represents the form in which
Papias . . . gave the episode,' is strongly sup-
ported by Eusebius' statement of Avhat he found
in Papias ('a story about a woman accused of
many sins before the Lord, which the Gospel ac-
cording to the Hebrews contains'). This applies
to the Ecmiadzin text only ('A certain woman was
taken in sins, against whom all bore witness,' etc.
Cf. Ens. HE iii. 39). It has some further support
in the express statement of Vartan (14th cent.)
that this pericope was derived from Papias, though
this may be merely dependent on Eusebius. Cony-
beare's suggestion that the story will have been
one of the 'traditions of the Elder John,' and for
this reason have become attached in most texts to
the Fourth Gospel, is more probable than Zahn's
attributing it to ' Aristion ' ; but see Blass, Phi-
lology of the Gospels, p. 156, who thinks it was
simply appended at the end of the Gospel canon.

The Ecmiadzin Codex, accordingly, in the two
most important questions of Gospel text makes
deliberate departure from the received Armenian
tradition, in both cases relying on authority
which might conceivably go back indirectly to
Papias himself. (1) Until about this date (A.D.
989) Armenian tradition followed the Sinaitic, or
older Syriac, in omitting the Mark-Appendix. In
the 10th cent, it begins to be inserted as in the
Curetonian and Tatian, but with various scribal
notes of its secondary character. Our codex is
simply more exact and specific than others of its
time in adding a datum which could never have
gone with the Appendix, but must have been
derived, like the comment of Vartan on the
Pericope Adultene, from comparison of Eusebius,
which in the Arm. spells the name ' Aristo ' and
expressly designates hhn as 'Elder.' (2) It also
goes beyond current Armenian tradition regard-
ing Jn 8^"". Instead of attaching the story after
Lk 2P'', as the Gosp. ace. to the Hebrews pro-
bably suggested, it adopts the position usually
assigned it after Jn 7^-, with the marginal scholion
in red ink ttjs fj.oLxa\idos, and an expurgated and
embellished text, which Eusebius enables us to
identify as that of Papias. To infer from this,
however, that the scribe John had actual access to
Papias would be rash in the extreme. On the
contrary, the evidence is only too convincing that
his title is based simply on a comparison of the
two Eusebian passages regarding 'Aristo,' with
the further statements of his own chief national
historian, INIoses of Chorene (400-450), regarding
the Aristo of Pella quoted by Eusebius in HE iv. 6.

6. Aristo of Pella. — Moses of Chorene (cf.
Langlois, I.e.), in writing of the death and obsequies
of Ardasches, king and national hero of Armenia,
transcribes first the quotation of Eusebius from
Aristo of Pella regarding Hadrian's devastation of
Jerusalem, to explain how Aristo came to be
attached to his (Ardasches') person as secretary ;
for Ardasches had been sent by Hadrian into

118

AEISTION (ARISTO)

ARMY

Persia. He then continues, quoting professedly
from ' the same historian,' an elaborate account of
Ardasches' death and obsequies. The conne.xion
of this supplementary (pujtation, liowever, is so
awkwardly managed as to leave it quite ambiguous
to whose person Aristo was attached as secretary.
In the text it follows tlie statement that Hadrian
'establislied in Jerusalem a community of pagans
and Christians wiiose bisliop was Mark. Langlois
accordingly makes him secretary of Mark (cf.
Eus. HE iv. 6). Zahn understands of Hadrian
himself (':). The Eciuiadzin scribe seems to have
l)een of I>anglois' opinion, and to have drawn the
inference that this Aristo, secretary of INIark the
bisliop of Jerusalem under Hadrian, could be no
other than ' the Elder Aristo ' of Ens. HE iii. 39, as
well i\i the natural completer of ' Mark's' Gospel.

If the attribution of Mk IG^--" to 'the Elder
Aristo' be dismissed as untrustworthj% our know-
ledge of tlie ' Aristion ' from whom Papias de-
rived (indirectly) his 'accounts of the Lord's
sayings' is reduced to a minimum. Eusebius
clearly did not identify him with Aristo of Pella,
and from liis silence would seem to have known
notliing more about him than the statement of
Papias tiiat he was an elder, one of the 'disciples
of the Ajiostles' ; or, as his text of Papias would
seem already to have read (by assimilation to the
preceding), 'of the Lord.' Aristo of Pella, Eusebius
certainly did not include in his chain of Christian
writers, and save for the late .and improVjable
statement of Maximus Confessor, all that we know
of Aristo indicates that he does not belong there.
He may, or may not, be the same as ' the cultured
rhetorician Aristo of Gerasa.'

7. Cundusions. — The foUoAving may be taken as
more or less probable conclusions from the fore-
going data. (1) In the famous extract of Eusebius
from Papias and the adjoining context (HE iii. 39),
there is no warrant for substituting the reading
'\plcTU3v, the common form of the name, for the
rarer form ' S-piuTiuv. The Syriac, followed by Arm. ,
assimilates it to 'Apiaruv (6 JTeWai'os), quoted a few
paragraphs farther on by Eusebius himself {HE
IV. G), or perhaps merely falls into the ordinary
snelling. The reverse process is inconceivable. Of
this Aristion, Eusebius seems unable to relate any-
thing Ix'yond what he found in Papias. He cer-
tainly did not regard him as identical with Aristo
of Pella, whose narrative of the revolt of Bar
Cochba was in his hands. Papias, however, knew
of Aristion as a traditor (orally ; cf. ov yap e/c r^v
Pi8\i(jv, K.T.X.) of the teachings of the Apostles, him-
self 'one of the disciples of these,' ])robably in
Palestine, since Papias obtained his traditions
(Eusebius to the contrary notwithstanding) only
from 'those who came his way.' Aristion was
still living at the period of Papias' (youthful ? KaXC^s
ilJivt)ixl)ve{«ra) inquiries.

(•2) Prom this otherwise unknown 'Aristion' of
Paiiias we must sharplv distinguish 'Aristo of
Pella,' the historian of the revolt of Bar Cochba,
quoted by Eusebius. Had this been a Christian
writer, it is inexplicable that Eusebius, in spite of
the avowed jiurpose of his l)ook, elsewhere so con-
sistently followed, should have <nuitted all mention
what.soever of his works. The Viri Ulust. of
Jerome is CMpially silent.

CM The process of confusion of Papias' Aristion
witii Luseluus' Aristo of Pella begins with the Syriac
transl.itor (r. 400), followed by the Armenian ; or,
If .Maxim us Confessor be right in attributing to
(. lenient s Hupotiiposeis the (conjectural?) assign-
ment of the antmymousjD tr/.'of/Mco/jrt.wn awr/ Pajow-
f iM t^) this author, perhaps with Clement. The late
and unsupported statement of Maximus {r. 600)
<|uUe in conliut with all that is known either of
the DuUuguc or the writer, is really valueless.

(4) The Armenian historian Moses of Chorene
(5th cent. ?) appears really to have known, as he
claims, Aristo of Pella. His quotation, where it
goes beyond that of Eusebius, shows more and
more manifestly the secular, non-Christian writer.
His statement that Aristo was secretary of Ard-
asches, which was so unfortunately ambiguous as
to seem to make him secretary of Mark, bishop of
Jerusalem, seems to be the starting-point for the
last stage of the process.

(5) The scribe ' John ' who wrote the Armenian
Codex of the Gospels in A.D. 989 (found by Cony-
beare at Ei^miadzin), departed fi'om previous Ar-
menian tradition by appending, after the row of
discs by which he had marked the end of the
Gospel of Mark, at Mk 16*, the spurious ending
vv.""-**, literally translated from the ordinary Greek
text. To justify this unusual insertion, he crowded
in ' by an afterthought ' between the first line and
the row of discs, in small, cramped, red letters,
the title ' Of the Elder Aristo.' That he knew the
Eusebian passage about Papias' informant is indi-
cated by his use of the title ' Elder ' and the form
'Aristo'; for only the Armenian Eusebius has
these peculiarities. That he .should have identified
the writer of the INIarkan appendix Avith ' the
Elder Aristo' is most probably explained by his
finding in Moses of Chorene what lie took to be
the statement that Aristo (of Pella) was secretary
of ISIark, the bishop of Jerusalem, in the time of
Hadrian. Who indeed should venture to complete
Mark's unfinished Gospel, if not his secretary ?

B. W. Bacon.

ARMOUR.— Lk 11- speaks of the Tra^oTrXi'a [air.
\ey. in Gospels ; also Eph 6"- ^^ with which cf.
1 Th 5^) of ' the strong man ' = the Wicked One
— the def. art. 6 (v.-') indicating a single and de-
finite person. Tlie 'armour' is the potent influ-
ences at his disposal, called by St. Paul (Eph 6")
' wiles' and (C") ' iiery darts,' by which he deludes
and overcomes. Trusting to these, lie with his
possessions is ' at peace ' until ' the stronger than
he' (iaxvpJrepos avroO [cf. Lk 3'"]) comes on the
scene, when the armour is taken away and he is
spoiled of his possessions.

Tiie passage has a soteriological and an eschato-
logical bearing. (1) It points to the power of Christ
as able to dislodge evil passions and habits from
the heart (cf. Mt lO-** c^ ^>«.S5.). He is '.stronger'
than 'the strong man,' and has 'power to heal'
(Lk 517). He thus fuUils the prophecy of Is 492^- -^
and 53'-, delivering the prey and dividing the
spoil. (2) Eschatologically it points to the final
victory of good over evil. Cf. Col 2'^ where we
have the word dTreKOuo-d^tfi'oj (cf. Lighfoot's note,
in loc. ). The ' stronger ' had already come into
the ' strong one's ' house and had delivered many ;
the conflict was continued by Him and against
Him till His death, when He overcame him that
had the power of death ; the same conflict of evil
against good is still continued, His ' spoiling ' is
going on. He is still taking from His adversary
one ancj another of his possessions, till in the end
He shall bind him in the abyss and utterly destroy
him(cf. esp. 1 Co lo-^-^^ and Rev 19«-"«-).

For passages descriptive of Roman armour of
the time, in Polj'bius and Josephus, see Hastings'
DB, s.v. • cf. also Martial, Epirjr. ix. 57. With
these St. Paul's description of the Christian's
armour is in close harmony ; but to find a ' diabolic '
significance in the several details is rather fanciful
than helpful.

Literature.— Hastinprs' BB, s.v.-, Ecce Hnmo, ch. xiii. ; Expos.
Tiuu-s, iii. (1S92) p. 349 ff.; Bunyan, Uohi War, ch. ii.

R. Macpherson.
ARMY. — 'Armies' {crrparevfiaTa) are mentioned
by Jesus as the natural instruments of discipline
at the command of an Eastern king (Mt 22'). He

ARNI

ARREST

119

also foretells (Lk 21-") the day when 'Jerusalem
shall be compassed with armies' (a-TpaTOTreSa).
Otherwise there is little allusion to armies in the
Gospels, and comparatively small use is made of
lessons or figures drawn from military life. The
Roman soldier, the legionary, did not loom very
large in Palestine. When the Church spreads
into the Province Asia, to Rome and Corinth,
the impression of the army of Rome is much
stronger both in the incidents of the Acts and
in the hgurative allusions of the Epistles.

John tlie Baptist found soldiers (see art. SOLDIER)
among the crowds who came to him to be baptized
(Lk S''') ; and the most remarkable bond of union
between the military character and the character
conformeil to God, that of discipline and orderly
subordination, was suggested to our Lord by the
conduct of a centurion (Lk 7**).

M. R. Newbolt.

ARNL — An ancestor of Jesus, according to the
genealogy given by St. Luke ('A^, AV Aram). In
Mt P'- he is called Eani (AV Aram).

ARPHAXAD The spelling (in both AV and RV

of Lk 3'") of the UT name which appears more
correctly in the RV of OT as Arpachshad.

ARREST (Jn 18=-" = Mt 26^"-5« = Mk 14^-52= Lk
22-'""5^). — When Judas, withdrawing from the
Supper, betook himself to the high priests and
informed them that he was ready to implement his
agreement (see Betrayal), their simplest way
would have been to accompany him back to the
upper room and there arrest Jesus. It was, how-
ever, impossible for them to proceed thus sum-
marily. They had, indeed, the othccrs of the
temple at their command (cf. Jn T"""") ; but these
were insufficient, since the Law forbade them to
go armed on the Passover day,* and, thougli Jesus
and the Eleven were defenceless, He was the popular
hero, and, should an alarm be raised, the multitude
would be aroused and would come to the rescue.
Moreover, had they taken such a step on their own
authoritj', they would have ohended the procura-
tor, Pontius Pilate, who was ever jealous for the
maintenance of order, especially at the festal
seasons ; and it was of the utmost moment that
they should secure his sympathy and co-operation.
Accordingly, though doubtless impatient of the
delay, they first of all appealed to him and ob-
tained froin him a detachment of soldiers from
Fort Antonia, under the command of a tribune.

The Roman garrison at Jerusalem consisted of a single cohort
{ir^upx), i.e. 500 men (cf. Schiirer, HJ P i. ii. p. 55). A«^iv tv,^
a-rupa.v (.Jn 18^) does not, of course, imply that the entire cohort
was despatched on the errand. Cf. such phrases as ' call out
the military,' 'summon tlie police.'

Ere all was arranged several hours had elapsed.
Jesus had quitted the upper room and the city,
but the traitor knew whither He had gone, and
led the way to the garden on Mount Olivet, where
each night during the Passion-week the jMaster
had bivouacked with the Twelve in the open (Lk
22^"). It wa.s a motley band that followed Judas.
The soldiers would march in order, but the temple-
.servants, armed with cudgels and carrying lamps
and torches, gave it the appearance of a mere
rabble (cf. Mt26^^ = Mk I4« = Lk 22^'). And with
the rest, forgetting their dignity in their eagerness
to witness the success of their machinations, went
some of the high priests, the temple-captains.t and
the elders.

* Mishna, Shabb. vi. 4 : ' No one shall go out with sword or
how, with shield or sling or lance. But if he go out, he shall
be guilty of sin.'

t Lk 22-i- 52 a-TpccTy.yei toZ UpoZ, the D'^^P, oflRcials next in
dignity to the priests, charged with the preservation of order
in the temple. Cf. Schiirer, UJP ii. i. p. 257 ff.

When he had guided the band to the garden,
Judas doubtless would fain have kept in the back-
ground, but he was doomed to drink his cup of
degradation to the dregs. It was the business of
the soldiers to make tlie arrest, but they did not
know Jesus, and, seeing not one man but twelve,
tiiey were at a loss which was He. It was neces-
.sary that Judas should come forward and resolve
their perplexity. Casting shame to the winds, he
gave tliem a sign : 'The one whom I shall kiss is
he. Take him.' Then he advanced and, greeting
Jesus with feigned reverence : ' Hail, Rabbi ! '
kissed Him effusively.* It was the climax of Ids
villainy, and Jesus repulsed him with a stinging
sentence. ' Comrade ! ' He cried, in that one word
summing up the traitor's baseness ; ' to thine
errand.' t Brushing the traitor aside. He stepped
forward and demanded of the soldiers : ' Whom
are ye seeking ? ' ' Jesus the Nazarene,' they
faltered. ' I am he,' He answered, making per-
haps to advance towards them and surrender Him-
self ; and, overawed by His tone and bearing,
they retreated and fell on the ground.

'Unless,' says St. Jerome, { ' He had had even in His counte-
nance something sidereal, the Apostles would never have fol-
lowed Him at once, nor would those who had come to arrest
Him have fallen to the ground.' It is, however, unnecessary
to assume a miracle. Cf. the consternation of the mercenary
soldier who came, sword in hand, to kill C. Marius at Minturna;.
' The chamber in which he happened to be lying having no
very bright light but being gloomy, it is said that the eyes of
Marius appeared to dart a great flame on the soldier, and a loud
voice came from the old man : " Darest thou, fellow, to slay
C. Marius? " So the barbarian immediately rushed out, crying :
"I cannot kill C. Marius ; " '§ It is related of John Bunyan
that once, as he was jireaching, a justice ("ame with several
constables to arrest him. 'The justice conmianded him to
come down from his stand, but he mildly told he was about
his Master's business, and nmst rather obey His voice than
that of man. Then a constable was ordered to fetch him
down ; who coming up, and taking hold of his coat, no sooner
did Mr. Bunyan fix his eyes stedfastly upon him, having his
Bible then open in his hand, but the man let go, looked pale
and retired ; upon which said he to his auditors, " See how tliis
man trembleth at the word of God I"' And John Wesley was
once assailed by a gang of ruffians. ' Which is he ? which is he ? '
they cried, not recognizing him in the press. ' I am he,' said
Weslej', confronting them fearlessly ; and they fell back and let
him go unmolested.

Jesus reiterated His question: 'Whom are ye
seeking?' and, when they answered again : 'Jesus
the Nazarene,' He once more gave Himself up to
arrest, adding an intercession for the Eleven : ' If
ye are seeking me, let these men go their way.'
Recovering themselves, the soldiers seized Him,
and, as they were proceeding to bind Him, the
more roughly perliaps tiiat they were ashamed of
their weakness, tlie indignation of the disciples
mastered their alarm, and Peter, with the courage
of despair, drew a sword which he carried under
his cloak II and, assailing a slave of the high priest
named Malchus, cut off' his right ear. An uproar
ensued, and the disciples must have paid the
penalty of the rash act had not Jesus intervened.
Working His hands free from the cords and crav-
ing a brief release : ' Let me go — just thus far,'
He touched the wounded ear and healed it. IT The
miracle occasioned a diversion ; and, while his mates
were crowding about Malchus, Jesus reasoned with
His excited followers. ' Put the sword into its
sheath,' He commanded Peter. ' The cui) which
my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?
Dost thou suppose that I cannot appeal to my

* Mt 26^«-*9=Mk 14-"-^5 c/x;,ra, iMCT£C.A-.i(7£v. Cf. Lk 73S. 45.

t Euth. Zig. TO Ss £^' £ (Tisch., \VH i$' o) rra.pn olx ipony^/MnTixuS
ocvayvwa-riov' lyivaicrxi yap :*?' u Tocpiyivno' oc^.k* kTo^ccvriKui^,

X Ad Principiain Explan. Psabn. xliv.

§ Plut. C. Mar. § 39.

II Cf. Lk 2'238. Chrysostom thinks that these ^.«.x,a.ip«.i were
the knives {u(kx«-'P'^ may mean either sword or knife) which
Peter and John (cf. Lk 2'2'') had used in slaying and dressing
the Paschal lamb. It evinces their sense of impending peril
that they carried the u-y-x'^-if"'-' despite the legal prohibition.

^ This miracle is recorded by Luke alone, but the immunity
of Peter from instant vengeance is inexplicable without it.

Father, and he will even now send to my support
more than twelve legions of angels (i.e. one for
Himself and one for eacli of tlie Eleven)? How
then are the scriptures to be fullilled tiiat even
thus it must come to pass ? ' St. Ciirysostom * finds
here an allusion to the destruction of Sennacherib's
army (2 K HP) : If a single angel smote that host
of 185,000 armed men, wliat could this rabble do
against 72,000 angels?

Anxious to avert attention still further from the
Eleven, Jesus addressed Himself to tlie Jewish
rulers who with tiieir olticers had accompanied the
soldiers. 'As thougii against a brigand,' He said
scornfully, 'have ye come forth Avith swords and
cudgels? Daily in the temple I Avas wont to sit
teaching, and ye did not arrest me.' What had
kept them from arresting Him in the temple-
court? It was fear of the multitude (cf. Mt 26*-^ =
Rlk 141-2= j^i^ 22'-2). And they were cowards still,
coming forth with an armed band against a de-
fenceless man. It was a stroke of biting sarcasm,
and they felt the sting of it. Apparently it pro-
voked them to violence. At all events the Eleven
were at that moment stricken with sudden panic,
and 'all forsook him and fled.'

They made good their escape, but the infuriated
rulers f laid hands on one who, though not a
tolJower of Jesus, was evidently a friend and
sympathizer. St. Mark alone has recorded the
incident. A solitary ligure {eh n?) stiangely
attired had been hovering near during the ren-
contre. — 'a young man arrayed in a linen sheets
over his undress.' When the Eleven took to Hight
tlie rulers laid hold on him ; and, dropping his
garment, he left it in their grasp and escaped un-
dressed. §

Who was he? and why should the Evanqrelist have recorded
an incident which seems merely to introduce an incongruous
element of comedy into the tra;j:ic narrative? Of all the con-
jectures which have been offered, || the most reasonable seems to
be that he was St. Mark himself (Olshaus., Godet). The conjec-
ture is of recent date, but long' ago it was alleged that he was
from the house where Jesus had eaten the Passover (Euth. Zig-.,
Theophyl.) ; and it may well have been, as Ewald suggests, the
house of .Mary, that widow lady who resided in Jerusalem with
her son John Mark, and showed hospitality to the Apostles in
after days (Ac 12'2). Probably Mark ha'd gone to rest that
evening after the celebration of the Passover by his household,
and, with a forelwding of trouble, had lain awake. He had
heard Jesus and the Eleven descend after midnight from the
upper room and quit the house, and, hastily rising and wrapping
his sheet about him, had anxiously followed after them and
witnessed all that passed in Gethsemane. And it may be that
the incident was less trivial than it appears. In early days St.
Mark bore a singular epithet. He was styled 'the stump-
lingered," f and in the absence of any reasonable explanation of
the epithet it may, perhaps, be conjectured that during the
scuffle in Gethsemane his finger had been mutilated by the slash
of a sword (see Expos. 1st ser. i. [1875J pp. 436-446).

David Smith.

ART.— There has been in Christian history no
antagonism between religion and art as such ;
though there have been abuses of particular forms
of art, and consequent reactions against those
abuses. The NT atlbrds little guidance, for it is
not concerned with the subject. It is the revelation
of a Person, not of a code of rules. It deals with
lundamental sjiiritual facts, and it was not within
(he scope of the writers of its books to supply
dismnsitions on art or philosophy or science. Such
problems were left to be settled from age to age

• fn yrnlth. Kxxv.

t Mk U''i M ,ta.t,rxti om. Tisch., WH.

} The r»Ji, was a bed.sheet. Cf. Eus. TIE y\ 40 • f^hi>„ It)
TW tun-.f, r,: n.ur.t j-t/uve,-, i, 7« Xivu My.LuiLTi where Heinictipn
coniparinc our passage comments '"'A*^!;', w litre Hemiclien,
wt .iuo<l alias vo,at„r ;.>j2"' ' " '" *" "'^'■l^'''" 'dem

' '■."'f '*•'- ""'' al'Holutely naked. Cf. Jn 217.

^ ..• . , f •'•/"""'"'■, .March 1891.

1 Hip,K>I /'h.u.xn,,,,. vii. 3U: cin UxZxc; i iT.^T.x.f .Kn

by the spiritual instinct of a Church, to Avhich
Christ promised the abiding presence of th.e Spirit :
the NT has no more to say about art than it has
to say about economics or n<atural science, and
therefore it neither praises any of these things nor
condemns them ; it is concerned with that which
underlies them all.

The NT is neutral also in regard to the use of
art in the Avorshij) of the Temple. The Jews were
not an inartistic nation, though they had not the
genius for .art of some other races : they had music,
poetry, sculpture, architecture, and the usual minor
arts of their time ; and, though in sculpture they
were under strict regulations for the prevention of
idolatry, this did not prevent them from using
graven images within tiie sanctuary itself, Avhile
in the ornaments of their worship they had been
guided by elaborate regulations as to form and
colour and symbolism. Christianity grew up in
these surroundings, and did not find any fault Avith
them. Our Lord condemned the ethical formalism
of current religion, but not its art : He condemned
the trafficking in the Temple, but not its beauty.
Nor did His disciples have anything to say against
the art of the pagan cities Avhere they went,
thougli they had nmch to say about the Avicked-
ness : they are silent on the subject, except for a
fcAV illustrations from engraving and painting in
He P 8^ and 10^ It is in the Apocalypse alone
that Ave have any setting forth of visible beauty ;
and here there is a clearer recognition of the
principle of art, because nothing else could express
Avhat the Avriter had to show forth. It is not
enough to say that the imagery of the Apocalyiise
is merely symbolic : all religious art is symbolic.
St. John envelops his conception of the highest
form of being in an atmosphere of gloAving beauty ;
and a Church Avliich accepted his teaching could
hardly mistrust material beauty as a handmaid of
religion. It is not therefore to be Avondered at
that Christian Avorship, as Ave know of it after the
Peace of the Church, Avas much influenced by the
descriptions of the heavenly Avorship in the Apoca-
Ij'pse (see, e.g., the recently discovered Testament of
OUT Lord, A.D. 350).

But, if Ave Avould find in the NT the final argu-
ment in favour of art, Ave must turn, as Westcott
says in his great essay on the subject, to the
central message of Christianity — the Word hecanie
flesh. Here is the justification and the sanctifica-
tion of all that is tiuly human : Christianity em-
braces all life, and ' the inspiration of the new
birth extends to every human interest and faculty.'
The old conflict between the spiritual and the
material is reconciled by the Incarnation ; for by
it the visible became the sacrament, or outward
sign, of that Avhich is inward and spiritual. Thus,
like the Incarnation itself, 'Christian art embodies
the twofold concejition of the spiritual destiny of
the visible, and of a spiritual revelation through
the visible. The central fact of the Christian faith
gives a solid unity to both truths.' The office of
art, Westcott continues, is 'to present the truth
of things under the aspect of beauty ' : the effect
of Christianity upon art is that of 'a new birth,
a transfiguration of all human poAvers by the
revelation of their divine connexions and destiny ' ;
and thus ' Christian art is the interpretation of
beauty in life under the light of the Incarnation.'
Thus the Christian artist is a teacher, his art is
ministerial, and Avhen it appears to be an end in
itself idolatry has begun ; his true function is both
to interpret the Avorld as God has made it in its
beauty, in the light of a deeper understanding of
its meaning, and also to embody to men his own
visions of the truth— ' he is not a mirror but a
prophet,' and love is his guide. Thus he is led
' through the most patient and reverent regard of

phenomena to the contemplation of the eternal ' ;
for ' the beauty whicli is the aim of Christian art is
referred to a Divine ideal. It is not "of the world,"
as finding its source or its linal measure there,
but "of the Father," as corresponding to an unseen
truth. The visible to the Christian eye is in every
part a revelation of the invisible.'

Westcott, however, assumes an ' antagonism of
early Ciiristians to contemporary art,' and points
to the central message of Christianity as establish-
ing a reconciliation between sui)posed ' elements of
contrast.' Was there, we must ask any sudi an-
tagonism as a matter of history ? Wlien Westcott
wrote. Christian archjeology was still in its in-
fancy ; much that we now have was still undis-
covered, and that which was known was uncertain
in date and inaccurately reproduced ; notions still
held the Held which have since been disproved, as,
for instance, that Avhich credits the early Church
with the wanton destruction of pagan monuments,
when, as a matter of fact, the ancient Roman
temples were, after the triumph of Christianity,
long kei)t in repair at the expense of the Christian
State, as the chief glory of the city.

The question is of great importance, for modern
writers frequently condemn Christianity because
of its supposed depreciation of humanity. Thus
the natural scientist Metchnikofi' — writing, as
people do, about matters which are outside his
province — declares in The Nature of Man that
Christianity lowered our conception of human
nature, and gives as evidence this statement : —
'Sculpture, which played so great a part in tlie
ancient world, and which was intimately associated
with Greek ideals, began to decline in the Chris-
tian era,' — the real truth being, as we shall see,
that sculpture had been declining for several
generations in pagan hands, and that Christian
artists did Avhat they could with the decadent
craft.

Now Westcott himself states that ' the literary
evidence is extremely scanty ' as regards the rela-
tion of Christianity to art ; and, writing twenty-
two years later, we may add that archaeological
evidence all points in the opposite direction to
that which he supposed. The literary evidence,
indeed, i)roves little as to the first two centuries,
though recent discoveries have increased our know-
ledge of the 3rd century.

The usual quotations from the Fathers — such as
Westcott gives — are, indeed, 'extremely scanty' ;
but the one extract which does deal directly and
definitely with the subject has been curiously over-
looked. It is from Clement of Alexandria in the
chapter headed ' Human arts as well as Divine
knowledge proceed from God' (Strom, i. 4), and is
quite final as to Clement's opinion. After perti-
nently referring to the craftsman Bezalel the son
of Uri (Ex SI'--"), whose 'understanding' was from
God, he proceeds —

' For those who practise the common arts are in what per-
tains to the senses highly gifted : in hearing, he who is coni-
nionly called a musician ; in touch, he who moulds clay ; in
voice, the singer ; in smell, the perfumer ; in sight, the engraver
of devices on seals. . . . With reason, therefore, the Apostle has
called the wisdom of God "manifold," which has manifested its
power "in many departments and in many modes" [Eph S'O,
He 1']— by art, by knowledge, by faith, by prophecy— for our
benefit. " For all wisdom is from the Lord and is wuth him for
ever" [Sir !>], as says the Wisdom of Jesus.'

Though less comprehensive than this admirable
statement, the passage to which Westcott himself
alludes is also extremely interesting. Clement
describes a number of subjects commonly engraved
upon seals to which Christians could give a Chris-
tian meaning (see CHRIST IN ART), whilst he
forbids the use of seals which bear idols, swords,
bows, and drinking cups — condemning thus, not
art, but idolatry, war, and drunkenness {Pwd. iii.

3). Origen's answer to Celsus (c. Ccls. viii. 17-20) is
often quoted as denying the use of art. He meets
Celsus' charge that ' we shrink from raising altars,
statues, and temples,' by saying that Celsus ' does
not perceive that we regard the spirit of every
good man as an altar,' and that Christ is 'the most
excellent image in all creation,' and 'that we do
refuse to build lifeless temples to the Giver of all
life, let anyone who chooses learn how we are
taught that our bodies are the temple of God.'
This rhetorical answer cannot be taken as denying
the use of art by the African Christians : it is a
vindication of the sjiiritual nature of Christian
worship, and the ' lifeless temples' must be referred
to paganism, since there Avas nowhere any shrinking
from the erection of church buildings. Oiigen is
not concerned with the question of art : he merely
denies ' altars, statues, and temples ' in the heathen
sense.

Even Tertullian, IMontanist though he was, is
clear in not condemning artists for practising their
art, though he has a good deal to .say about their
making idols ; the artist who makes idols works
'illicitly' like Hermogenes, who 'despises (lod's
law in his painting' [adc. Hcrmog. 1). An artist's
profession was full of temptation from heathen
patrons : so Tertullian warns them that ' every
artificer of an idol is guilty of one and tiie same
crime ' as he who worships it (dc Idul. 3), since to
make an idol is to worship it {ib. 6) ; and he
advises them to practise their art in other direc-
tion.s — 'gild slippers instead of statues' — ' We urge
men generally to such kinds of handicrafts as do
not come in contact with an idol' [ib. 8). Else-
where he gives useful testimony by his incidental
mention of Christian art work in the painting of
the Good Shepherd and other subjects upon chalices
(de Piidlc. 7 and 10).

This is, in fact, the conclusion to which the literary
evidence leads us: the early Christians were told
to keep clear of paganism, with wiiich their dailj^
work M as often so closely involved, but they were
not told to forswear art.

If we wish to find a condemnation of art as such,
we must turn not to Christianity, but to pre-
Christian philosophy, and — in spite of all that has
been said about the opposition between Hel)raism
and Hellenism — not to a Jewish but to a Greek
writer. Plato knew what art was ; he belonged to a
race with whom art was not a mere incident but a
most important part of life ; in descriljing his ideal
city he had to deal with the prolilem of art, and he
settled it by excluding the artist altogether. Be-
ginning with dramatic art, he proceeds, towards the
end of the Republic, with a consistent adherence
to principle that is as rare now as it was then, to
include every form of art in his condenmation.
His reasons are three — The artist creates without
knowing or caring what is good or bad, and thus
separates himself from morality ; he is an imitator
of appearances, and therefore a long way off the
truth ; and art, whether poetry or painting or the
drama, excites passions whicii ought to be curbed.
Plato fully recognized that if painting is wrong,
poetry must be wrong too ; and he decided that
jioetry also must be excluded from the perfect city.
He was right at least in this, that all art must
stand or fall together ; and in the light of his clear
thought it is easy to see that the three movements
which have appeared in Christendom — Asceticism,
Iconoclasm, and Puritanism — were not really move-
ments against art. The Christian Church never
adopted Plato's position : the ascetic precursors of
Monasticism came nearest it, but they formulated
no principle beyond that of complete renunciation
of the world for the benefit of their own souls, and
they did little or nothing to check tlie lavish deco-
ration of churches which characterized their age.

The Iconoclasts of the Byzantine Empire were often
great patrons of architecture, jtoetry, and the minor
arts ; and, tliongh they carried their special prin-
ciple down to tlie forbidding of pictures of sacred
.sul)jects even in books, they did not carry it beyond
tlie question of images, the Puritans, being Eng-
lishmen, were naturally less logical tlian the Greek
iconoclasts; thus, tliey accepted Judaism when it
forbade images, and ignored it when it commanded
ceremcmial : in fact, tliey disliked art in so far as
it embodied ideas which were distasteful to them,
and no further. Puritanism was a mingling of the
two earlier reactions, asceticism and iconoclasm :
it can hardly be taken as emliodying a principle of
opl)osition to art.

The question is not, then, one between Puritanism
and rath<>licism,or between Hebraism and Hellen-
ism, but between Platonism and Aristotelianism.
For it was Aristotle who answered Plato ; and he did
so by ])ointing out that a true philosophy must make
the whole of human nature rationally intelligible ;
for, tlie Universe being rationally organized, the ex-
istence of art proves that it must have a proper
function in life. This is surely the philosophy also
of the Incarnation : the Word became flesh, and in
that tin; whole of human nature becomes intel-
ligible ; it is good in itself, and in its unstained
jierfection can become a fit manifestation of the
Divine.

Sin, indeed, mars this perfection ; and Avhile sin
remains, asceticism continues to have its function
in the world. The love of the beautiful may de-
generate into the lust of the eye, because the
inward and spiritual is forgotten, and the sacra-
mentalism of art is lost. It may then become
necessary to pluck out the eye that sees, or to cut
oil' the fashioning hand, in order to enter into
life; but it is a choice of evils, —the man escapes
Gehenna, but he enters into life 'maimed.'

So, tiiough it is better to be maimed than to be
lost, better to hate art than to make it a god,
hiding the eternal which it should reveal, better,
indeed, to break images than to worship them ; yet
the fulness of truth lies not in the severance, but
in the union of the good and the beautiful. They
have often ajipeared as rival tendencies in history,
licligious men have often been narrow and in-
human, artists have often been Aveak in Avill and
the creatures of their emotions, as Aristotle found
them ; but the one-sidedness of men serves only to
illustrate the manysidedness of truth. Christen-
dom through all her struggles has loved righteous-
ness, and has not forgotten to love art also. She
has her fasts, but she has also her feasts.

It is certain as a historic fact th.at the early
Church had no suspicion of art, but accepted
without scruple the decorative motives and forms
of the classical civilization to which, apart from
religion and ethics, she belonged, eliminating only
such themes as bore an idolatrous or immoral
nieaning. Limited at first in her resources, she
did not for a while attain to magnificence ; but all
the evidence of archaeology, which is yearly ac-
cunmlating, shows that she made use of art so far
as she had opportunity. Nor did she try to create
an art of her own ; she used the art as she used the
huiguages of the empire. Tiie art of the early
('hurch IS not Christian in its form, but in its
inspiration.

Most of the earliest Cliristian art that has been
discovered is in the Catacombs of Home. This
does not inean, as Westcott supposes, that the
Uuircli of Italy was artistic while the rest of the
Church was not; still less does it show, as is
popularly imagined, that the Roman Christians
used the Catacombs as their churches and per-
manent hi.ling-phu^es. The art of the Catacombs
liDs survived because it has been preserved under-

ground ; but it was not the only art, and the early
Christians worshipped above ground like every-
body else, except in the case of occasional services
for the departed. But hardly anything has sur-
vived of the art above ground : in literature we
have only hints that stir but do not satisfy the
imagination, — as when Eusebius tells us [HE viii.
12) that in times of persecution the churches were
pulled down (as by Diocletian in 302), and men-
tions that the church at Niconiedia, destroyed in
303, was of great size and importance (de Mort.
Pcrs. 12, ' fanum illud editissimum "). At a time
when not the buildings only, but the very books of
the Christians were destroyed, it was in the burial-
places — immune by Roman law from molestation,
and hidden away from the ravages of sun and air,
and of barbarians ancient and modern — that works
of art survived ; and to the Catacombs we must
turn for our evidence. There is every reason to
suppose that the art which we find there is typical
of that of the whole Church ; for (1) the Cliristian
Churches were bound together by remarkably
close ties in the first three centuries ; (2) the sym-
bolism of tlie Catacombs is shown by the early
literature to have been that of the rest of the
Church also ; and (3) there was a uniformity of art
throughout the empire, of which Rome was the
cosmopolitan centre, — an Italian city indeed in
which most of the art was executed by Greeks.

Enough description for our present purpose of
the paintings in the Catacombs will be found in
the article on Christ in Art. To that article,
Avhicli deals with Christian art on its most import-
ant side (the Christological), reference may also be
made for illustrations from the other arts which are
here more briefly mentioned. It will suffice here
to make a few general statements. (1) Pictorial
art is found in the earliest catacombs, belonging
to a period before the end of the 1st cent., as well
as in those of later date ; (2) the first Christians
must have been fond of art to use it so freely in
the dark : the cubicula of the Catacombs, which
were only visited occasionally, and where nothing
could be painted or seen except by lamp-light,
must represent art at its luinimum. Yet that art
is both good and abundant. (3) Among the very
earliest examples, figures are included as well as
merely decorative subjects of animals, flowers, etc.
(4) The art is the highly developed art of the
Roman Empire, which was at its height in the 1st
and 2nd centuries, and declined after the reign of
Hadrian. (5) The art of the Catacombs is there-
fore Christian only in that it generally represents
Christian subjects, and that it acquires almost at
once a certain marked character of mystic sym-
bolism which is peculiar to the ages of persecu-
tion. Certainly there is something about this
early painting which at once distinguishes it as
Christian. Its authors were intent on expressing
ideas, — not the technical theology of an ecclesi-
astical system, but the faith and hope of ordinary
Christian people, — therefore they use suggestion
and symbol, and are fond of ii conventional treat-
ment even of Scripture subjects, and thus their
work is marked by a quiet reserve that excludes
all reference to the suti'erings and death of the
martyrs, and dwells upon the life and jiower of
Christ, not u]wn His death and passion. This art
is marked by simplicity, happiness, and peace ;
it deals only with such OT and NT and other
subjects as could bear a mystical interpretation in
connexion w'ith the deliverance and happiness of
the departed through the power of Christ and the
grace of the sacraments. It is sometimes of a
high technical order and of great beauty, though
the difficulties of its execution led to its being
often sketchy in character. Born full-grown in
the 1st cent., it passed in the 2nd into this second

mystical period, declining; after the 2nd cent,
gradually in technique, as the pagan art Avas
declining. After the Peace of the Church in the
4th cent, it passes into its third period, -when its
symbolism is more obvious, more didactic and
dogmatic.

Sculpture naturally does not appear so early as
painting. The dark catacombs were no jilace for
its display, tiiough in them it has its beginnings
in the graffiti or incised designs wiiieh are common
on the tombs. These were easilj' to be seen, and
could be wrought on the spot, which was an im-
portant consideration in daj's wlien it was difficult
to order Christian sculpture from pagan shops. It
would be an easier matter to have executed in the
public studios a subject that could bear a jiagan
mterpretation ; and thus it is that we do find a
statue of the Good Shepherd which probably
l)elongs to the 3rd cent., though one would natur-
ally expect Christians who lived in pagan times to
be shy of the u.se of statuary. In tlie 4tli cent,
the growing custom of burial above ground,
coupled with the prosperity of the Church, en-
c(mraged the use of sculptured sarcophagi (cf.
Chrlst in Art). Excellent carved ivories are
al.'^o found at this period, but art had been steadily
declining since Hadrian's time, and after the 6th
cent, no good sculpture of any sort is found. There
was no opposition to it in the West, but in the East
tiie Iconoclastic controversy (716-867) led to the
wholesale destruction of ' images,' whether painted
or carved ; and though it ended in the restoration
of pictures, tiiere was a tacit compromise by which
statues were not restored, in spite of the decision in
favour of ' images' by the Second Council of Nica?a
(787). This renunciation of statuary in the Ea.stern
Cliurch grew into a passionate aversion to its use
inside a jilace of worship, — an aversion which con-
tinues still.

Among the minor arts may be mentioned that
of fjold-glass, Avliich commenced early in the 3rd
cent., and has preserved for us many Christian
pictures and symbols. INIiniature illustration
came into general use in tiie 4tli cent, in MSS
of books of the Bible ; it was not decorative like
that of the ISIiddle Ages; tiie miniatures were
separated from the text, and were devoted to
giving pictures of the Scripture events described,
much as in present-day book illustration. The
handicrafts of pottery, metal, and jewel work,
etc., gradually adopted Christian symbolism,— thus
it lirst appears on lamps in the 3rd century. The
magnificence of church plate after the Peace of the
Church almost passes belief. An early instance is
given in the Pilgrimage of Sylvia (A.D. 385), which
was discovered in 1888.

' It is needless, she Sd,ys, describina: her experiences in Syria,
' to write what was the ornamenting on that day of the Church
of the Anastasis, or of the cross in Jerusalem or in Bethlehem ;
for there you would see nothing but gold and gems or silk ; for
if you see the veils, thev are all of silk, with stripes of gold ; if
you see the curtains, they are the same. Every kind of gold
and gemmed vessel is used on that day. It is impossible to
relate the number and weight of the lights, tapers, and lamps
and other utensils. And what shall I say of the adornment of
the fabric, which Constantine, with all the power of his king-
dom, in the presence of his mother, honoured with gold, mosaic,
and precious stones? '

"With this may be compared the gifts, recorded
in the Liber Pontificalis, which Constantine made
to certain churches : among them be gave to St.
Peter's '3 golden chalices with emeralds and
jacinths, each having 45 gems and weighing 12
pounds'; and 'a golden paten with a tower of
purest gold, with a dove adorned with emeralds
and jacinths, and 215 pearls, weighing 30 pounds';
while to St. John Lateran he gave no fewer than
174 candlesticks and chandeliers of various sorts,
as to which Fleury reckons that altogether they
furnished 8730 separate lights. These figures

suggest a magnificence of the surroundings of
worship that is far removed from the simple two-
handled cup of the 2nd cent, fresco of the Fractio
Panis. None the less, the fact that Constantine's
gift was made shows that tliere was no tradition
of dislike to such magnificence. Such descriptions
bear out the general impression that the early
Church made free use of whatever richness of art
her opportunities could provide, though when
necessity required she was content, as Jerome
says, 'to carry the body of Christ in a basket of
osiers and His blood in a cup of glass.'

Mosaic art, of which there are extant such
splendid examples in the churches of the Imperial
cities, Rome and Ravenna and Constantinople,
followed upon architecture, and tlourished between
the 4th and 7th centuries. Its magnificence and
durability make it to us the most characteristic
feature of the Christian art of that period. The
principal subjects represented are the great figures
of Chiist enthroned, figures of the Apostles and
other saints, apocalyptic and other sj^nbolic sub-
jects, scenes from the Old and New Testaments,
and pictures of imperial personages and bishops.

In architecture there have been many theories
as to the origin of the basilica. It is now very
generally agreed that the Christian chundi is a
development of the classical atrium, the central
colonnaded court of dwelling-houses in the Imperial
age. The earliest gatherings for worship took place
in the atrium of some wealthy convert, and were
thus surrounded Avitli all the greater and lesser arts
of the jieriod. Now, the Greek and Roman temples
were constructed for a worship in which both the
altar and the worshippers stood outside. The Chris-
tian worship began in the home (Ro 16^^ and perhaps
Ac 2^''), and the purpose of the earliest churches
was to hold a large number of worshippers before
the Lord's Table ; thus, though the style was that
of the age, the manner of its use was difi'erent
from the first. The basilica is a distinctively
Christian building, marked out by its oblong
shape, clerestory, colonnaded aisles, and apse. It
was probably in process of development in the
centuries before the Peace of the Church, — we
read, e.g., of church buildings in the newly found
Canons of Hippohjtus, c. 220-250 A. D.,— though no
extant edifice is known (unless the startling theory
just put forth by Dr. Richter and Mr. C. Taylor in
their books on S. Maria jNIaggiore in Rome comes
to be accepted — the theory being that this church
and its mosaics belong to the 2nd century). The
churches destroyed by Diocletian were rebuilt
under Constantine, and it is to the Constantini.in
period that the earliest surviving basilicas belong,
whether in Italy, Syria, or Africa. In the East
there was later one marked development, the use
of the dome, which culminated under Justinian in
St. Sofia, and has continued to be characteristic
of the Greek and Russian churches down to our
own day. In the West the basilica continued un-
changed till the 8th, and in some parts till the
lUth cent., when it was modified by the growth of
what is called Romanesque architecture, of wliich
Gothic is but a development ; but the main features
of the basilica — nave, clerestorj-, aisles, projecting
sanctuary, and often transepts — remain unchanged
to-day.

The decline of "Western art in what are called
the Dark Ages is often attriljuted to Christianity
and its supposed hatred of human nature. Tiie
truth is, that while Byzantium maintained a high
culture far better and longer than used to be sup-
posed, the whole Roman civilization well-nigh dis-
appeared under the invasions of the northern
races ; these peoples were converted and gradually
civilized by Christianity, and, as their civilization
grew up, their art developed from the barbaric

124

ART

ASCENSION

stage till it culminated in the perfection of Gothic.
Tliat art in its development had the limitations
of tlie young races ; it developed more rapidly in
arcliitecture and architectural carving than in
painting or statuary ; but all this has nothing to
do with Christianity, as writers like Taine sup-
pose—' If one considers the stained glass windows,
or the windows in the cathe<lrals, or the rude
paintings, it appears as if tiie human race had
lK;c<>ine degenerate, and its blood had been im-
poverished : pale saints, distorted martyrs, hermits
withered and unsubstantial,' etc. (Phil, dc I'Art,
88, .S;V2, 4th ed.). Passages like this are beside
the mark ; the art of the Middle Ages was full-
l)I(«)iled enough, and was admirable even in its
rude beginnings, when it had not learnt the most
dillieult of lessons — the representation of the
human form. In architecture and the kindred
arts the Middle Ages brought a new revelation of
beauty into the world, — an art that stands alone,
not only for its lofty spirituality and technical
excellence, but also for its homely democratic
humanity.

Beyond this it is not necessary to go, since we
are not dealing with the history of art in general,
but only with the relation between it and Chris-
tianity. It has been necessary to sketch the
l)egiiinings because of the widespread idea that
Christianity started with an aversion to the fine
arts, and was reconciled to them only as Avorldli-
ness increased upon her. Modern archa?ology has
ju'oved this idea to be mistaken ; and, having
l)ointed out what is now known as to the early
use of art by the Church, we need not follow the
subsequent history of painting and sculpture, of
architecture and the handicrafts, in their develop-
ments and decadences, except to say that, though
art in