ÐÏà¡±á>þÿ Œ¿EÁE2E3E4E5E6E7E8E9E:E;EE?E@EAEBECEDEEEFEGEHEIEJEKELEMENEOEPEQERESETEUEVEWEXEYEZE[E\E]E^E_E`EaEbEcEdEeEfEgEhEiEjEkElEmEnEoEpEqErEsEtEuEvEwExEyEzE{E|E}E~EE€EE‚EƒE„E…E†E‡EˆE‰EŠE‹EŒEEŽEEE‘E’E“E”E•E–E—E˜E™EšE›EœEEžEŸEì¥Á#` ð¿ä1„bjbj¡¡ 42„ÃÃé¬wÿÿÿÿÿÿ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤`4øøøø|t),”T³¶¬C¬C¬C¬C¬C‡D‡D‡D«€€€€€€€$ ´hr¶JÑ€=2¤‡D‡D‡D‡D‡DÑ€¤¤¬C¬CÛ³£D£D£D‡D¤¬C¤¬C«€£D‡D«€£D£D¤¤£D¬C Cë.îØÇø‡D£D¿Dì;$³0T³£D¼¶‡D¼¶£D¼¶¤£D‡D‡D£D‡D‡D‡D‡D‡DÑ€Ñ€‡D‡D‡D‡DT³‡D‡D‡D‡D”””d ø”””ø¸d@\¤¤¤¤¤¤ÿÿÿÿDictionary of the Bible THE EDITOR OF THIS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE DESIRES TO DEDICATE IT TO THE MEMORY OF Sir Thomas Clark, Baronet Sometime Publisher in Edinburgh Rev. Andrew Bruce Davidson, D.D., LL.D., LITT.D. Sometime Professor of Hebrew in the New College, Edinburgh A Dictionary of the Bible DEALING WITH ITS LANGUAGE, LITERATURE AND CONTENTS INCLUDING THE BIBLICAL THEOLOGY EDITED BY JAMES HASTINGS, M.A., D.D. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF JOHN A. SELBIE, M.A., D.D. AND, CHIEFLY IN THE REVISION OF THE PBOOFS, OF A. B. DAVIDSON, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D. S. E. DEIVEK, D.D., Litt.D. PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH KEGItrS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, OXFORD H. B. SWETE, D.D., Lrrr.D. KEGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE s Library of OUDERSLin. VOLUME IV PLEROMA-ZUZIM NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS Edinburgh: T. & T. CLARK 1902 Copyright, 1902, by CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS The Rights of Translation and of Reproduction are reserved I____ PREFACE In issuing the last volume of the Dictionaey of the Bible, the Editor desires to record his sense of the goodness of God in enabling him to carry it through to the end, and to beseech His blessing on the use of it, that His Name may be glorified. He desires also very heartily to thank all those who have been associated with him in its production. He thanks the Publishers for their confidence at the beginning, for the liberty they have left him, and for the perfect courtesy of all their intercourse with him. He thanks the Printers also, Messrs. Morrison & Gibb, and their employees, for their skilful workmanship and their patient personal interest And he thanks all the Authors. Chosen because' they were believed to be able to give the best account of the subjects entrusted to them, they have done their work in such a way as to vindicate their choice; while the relations between them and the Editor have been most agreeable throughout. He thanks them all, but especially those with whom he has been most closely associated in the oversight of the work—Dr. John A. Selbie, Dr. S. E. Driver, Dr. II. B. Swete, and Dr. W. Sanday. There is another, Dr. A. B. Davidson, but he has passed beyond the voice of earthly gratitude. %• While this volume completes the Dictionary as announced, an Extra Volume is in preparation, to contain Indexes and certain subsidiary articles of importance. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS I. General Alex. =Alexandrian. Apoc. = Apocalypse. Apocr. =Apocryplia. Aq. = Anuila. Arab. = Arabic. Aram, a Aramaic. Assyr. = Assyrian. Bab. = Babylonian. c. = circa, about. Can. =Canaanite. cf. = compare. ct. = contrast. D=Deuteronomist. E=Elohist. edd. = editions or editors. Egyp.= Egyptian. Eng.= English. Eth.=Ethiopic. f. =and following verse or page; as Ac 10341- tf. =and following verses or ljages; as Mt ll Gr.= Greek. U =Law of Holiness. Heb. = Hebrew. Hel. = Hellenistic. Hex. = Hexateuch. Isr. = Israelite. J=Jahwist. J"=Jehovah. Jerus. = Jerusalem. Jos. = Joseph us. LXX=Septuagint MSS=Manuscripts. MT=Massoretic Text. n. =note. NT=New Testament. Onk. = Onkelos. OT = Old Testament. P= Priestly Narrative. Pal. = Palestine, Palestinian. Pent. = Pentateuch. Pers. = Persian. Phil. = Philistine. Phcen. = Phoenician. Pr. Bk. = Prayer Look. It = Redactor. Rom. = Roman. Sam. = Samaritan. Sem. = Semitic. Sept. =Septuagint. Sin. =Sinaitic. Syinm. = Symmaclius. Syr. =Syriac. Talm.=Talmud. Targ. =Targum. Tlieod.=Theodotion. TR=Textus Receptus. tr. = translate or translation, VSS = Versions. Vulg. = Vulgate. WH= Westcott and Hort's text. II. Books op the Bible Old Testament. Gn = Genesis. Ex = Exodus. Lv=Leviticus. Nu = Numbers. Dt=Deuteronomy. Jos=Joshua. Jg=Judges. Ru=Ruth. 1 S,2S = 1 and 2 Samuel. 1 K, 2K=land2 Kings. 1 Ch, 2 Ch = 1 and 2 Chronicles. £zr = Ezra. Neh = Nehemiah. Est=Esther. Job. Ps = Psalms. Pr=Proverbs. Ec=Ecclesiastes. Apocrypha. 1 Es, 2 Es = 1 and 2 To=Tobit. EsUras. Jth=Judith. Ca=Canticles. Is = Isaiah. Jer=Jeremiah. La=Lamentations. Ezk=Ezekicl. Dn=Daniel. Hos = Hosea. Jl=Joel. Am=Amos. Ob=Obadiah. Jon=Jonah. Mic=Micah. Nah = Nahum. Hab=Habakkiik. Zeph=Zephaniah. Hag=Haggai. Zee=Zechariah. Mal=Malachi. Ad. Est = Additions to Sus = Susanna. Esther. Bel = Bel and the Wis=Wisdom. Dragon. Sir = Sirach or Ecclesi- Pr. Man = Prayer of asticus. Manasses. Bar=Baruch. 1 Mae, 2 Mac = l and 2 Three = Song of the Maccabees. Three Children. New Testament. 1 Th, 2 Th = 1 and 2 Thessalonians. 1 Ti, 2 Ti = 1 and 2 Timothy. Tit = Titus. Philem=Philemon. and 2 He= Hebrews. Ja=James. 1 P, 2 P= 1 and 2 Peter. 1 Jn, 2 Jn, 3 Jn = l, 2, and 3 John. Jude. Rev = Revelation. Mt = Matthew. Mk=Mark. Lk=Luke. Jn = Jolm. Ac=Acts. Ro=Bomans. 1 Co, 2 Co = 1 Corinthians. Gal = Galatians. Eph=Ephesians. Ph =Philippians. Col = Colossians. VU1 LIST OF ABBKEVIATIONS III. English Versions Wye. ="Wyclifs Bible (NT c. 1380, OT c. 1382, Purvey's Revision fi. 1388). Tind. = Tindale's NT 1528 and 1534, Pent. 1530. Cov. = Coverdale's Bible 1535. Matt, or Rog. = Matthew's (i.e. prob. Rogers') Bible 1537. Cran. or Great=Oanmer's 'Great' Bible 1539. Tav.=Tavemer's Bible 1539. Gen. = Geneva NT 1557, Bible 1580. Bish.= Bishops' Bible 1568. Tom.=Tomson's NT 1576. Rhem.=Rhemish NT 1582. Dou.=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. Fob the Literatt/be AET=Ancient Hebrew Tradition. AJSL=American Journal of Sem. Lang, and Literature. .4 «7TA=American Journal of Theology. -4T=Altes Testament. Bi=Bampton Lecture. 2Jilf=British Museum. BBP=Biblical Researches in Palestine. GIG — Corpus Inscriptionum Grsecarum. CIL = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. C/S= Corpus Inscriptionum Sernitiearum. COTs: Cuneiform Inscriptions and the OT. DJ?=Dictionary of the Bible. EHH= Early History of the Hebrews. G.4P=Geographie des alten Palastina. GGA = Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen. GGiV=Nachrichten der konigl. Gesellschaft der Wissensehaften zu Gbttingen. GyV=Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes. GK/=Geschichte des Volkes Israel. HCM= Higher Criticism and the Monuments. ID?=Historia Ecclesiastica. HGHL = Historical Geog. of Holy Land. HI= History of Israel. fiJP=History of the Jewish People. HPM= History, Prophecy, and the Monuments. HPN= Hebrew Proper Names. /«TG! = Israelitische und Judische Geschichte. JBL—Journal of Biblical Literature. JXTA=Jahrbucher fur deutsche Theologie. JQR=Jewish Quarterly Review. Jr£^liS=Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. JML = Jewish Religious Life after the Exile. JThSt=Journal of Theological Studies. KAT=T>ie Keilinschriften und das Alte Test. JfGi?=Keilin8chriften u. Geschichtsforschung. KIB=KeilinschriftUche Bibliothek. LCBl=Literarisches Centralblatt. £Or=Introd. to the Literature of the Old Test. NHWB=Neuhebraisches Worterbuch. NTZG = Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte. ON= Otium Norvicense. OP=Origin of the Psalter. 0TJC=Tho Old Test, in the Jewish Church. PB=Polychrome Bible. PEF= Palestine Exploration Fund. PEFSt = Quarterly Statement of the same. PSBA = Proceedings of Soc. of Bibl. Archaeology. PiJiS = Real-Encyclopadie fur protest. Theologie und Kirche. QPB = Queen's Printers' Bible. BB = Revue Bibliime. BEJ= Revue des Etudes Juives. iJP=Records of the Past. RS=Religion of the Semites. &BOr=Sacred Books of Old Test. £if=Studien und Kritiken. SP= Sinai and Palestine. SWP=Memoirs of the Survey of W. Palestine. ThL or TAL^=Theol. Literaturzeitung. T/ir=Theol. Tijdschrift. TS=Texts and Studies. TSBA = Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Archseology. TU = Texte und Untersuchungen. WA1= Western Asiatic Inscriptions. WZKM=Wiener Zeitschrift fiir Kunde des Morgenlandes. ZA = Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie. ZAW or 2^TW=Zeitschrift fur die Alttest. Wissenschaft. ZDMG = Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen- liindischen Gesellschaft. ZDPV=. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina. Vereins. Z,fi:,ST=Zeit8chrift fur Keilschriftforscbung. ZKW= Zeitschrift fur kirchliche Wissenschaft. ZNTW= Zeitschrift fiir die Neutest. Wissen. schaft. A small superior number designates the particular edition of the work referred to, as KAT1, LOT*. MAP IN VOLUME IV Canaan as divided among thb Twelve Tribes . facing page) 1 AUTHOES OF AETICLES IN YOL. IV Israel Abrahams, M.A., Editor of the Jewish Quarterly Review, and Senior Tutor of the Jews' College, London. Eev. Alexander Adamson, M.A., B.D., Dundee. Key. Walter F. ADENEY, M.A., D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis in New College, London. Ven. A. S. Aglen, M.A., D.D., Archdeacon of St. Andrews. W. Bacher, Ph.D., Professor in the Landes-Rabbinerschule, Budapest. Rev. JonN S. BANKS, Professor of Systematic Theology in the Headingley College, Leeds. Rev. W. Emery Barnes, M.A., D.D., Fellow of Peterhonse, and Hulsean Professor of Divinity, Cambridge. James Vernon Bartlet, M.A., Professor of Church History, Mansfield College, Oxford. Graf Wilhelm von Baudissin, Professor of Theology in the University of Berlin. Rev. Llewellyn J. M. Bebb, M.A., Principal of St. David's College, Lampeter; formerly Fellow and Tutor of Brasenose College, Oxford. Rev. Willis Judson Beecher, D.D., Professor of Hebrew Language and Literature in Auburn Theological Seminary, New York. P. V. M. BeNECKE, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Magdalen College, Oxford. Rev. William Henry Bennett, M.A., Litt.D., D.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in Hackney and New Colleges, London; sometime Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. Rev. Edward Russell Bernard, M.A., Chancellor and Canon of Salisbury Cathedral; formerly Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Rev. John Henry Bernard, D.D., Fellow of Trinity College, and Archbishop King's Lecturer in Divinity in the University of Dublin. Frederick J. Bliss, B.A., Ph.D., Director of the Palestine Exploration Fund in Jerusalem. Rev. W. Adams Brown, M.A., Ph.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in Union Theological Seminary, New York. K. Budde, Ph. D., D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Marburg. Rev. William Carslaw, M.A., M.D., of the I*banon Schools, Beyrout, Syria. Rev. Arthur Thomas Chapman, M.A., Fellow, Tutor, and Hebrew Lecturer, Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Rev. Robert Henry Charles, D.D., Professor of Biblical Greek in the University of Dublin. Col. Claude Reignier Condek, R.E., D.C.L., LL.D., M.R.A.S. Rev. G. A. Cooke, M.A., formerly Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Rev. Henry Cowan, M.A., D.D., Professor of Church History in the University of Aberdeen. The late Rev. A. B. Davidson, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Languages in New College, Edinburgh. Rev. T. Witton Davies, B.A., Ph.D., M.R.A.S., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Literature in the Baptist College, Bangor, and Lecturer in Semitic Languages in University College, Bangor. Rev. W. T. Davison, M.A., D.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the Handsworth Theological College, Birmingham. Rev. JAMES Denney, M.A., D.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the United Free Church College, Glasgow. The late Rev. W. P. DlCKSON, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Divinity in the University of Glasgow. Rev. Samuel Rolles Driver, D.D., Litt.D., Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford. Rev. David Eaton, M. A., D.D., Glasgow. Rev. William Ewino, M.A., Glasgow, formerly of Tiberias, Palestine. Rev. GEORGE Ferriks, M.A., D.D., Cluny, Aber- deenshire. Rev. Robert Flint, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh. Rev. Alfred Ernest Garvie, M.A., B.D., Mon- trose. Rev. John Gibb, M.A., D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis in Westminster College, Cambridge. G. Buchanan Gray, M.A., Professor of Hebrew in Mansfield College, Oxford. Rev. Alexander Grieve, M.A., Ph.D., Forfar. Francis Llewellyn Griffith, M.A., F.S.A., Superintendent of the Archaeological Survey of the Egypt Exploration Fund. AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN VOL. IV Rev. Henry Melvill Gwatkin, M.A., D.D., Fellow of Emmanuel College, and Dixie Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the University of Cambridge. Rev. G. Haefoed - Battersby, M.A., Balliol College, Oxford; Vicar of Alossley Hill, Liverpool. J. Rendel Harris, M.A., Litt.D., Fellow and Librarian of Clare College, Cambridge. Rev. Arthur Cayley Headlam, M.A., B.D., Rector of Welwyn, Herts; formerly Fellow of All Souls' College, Oxford. Edward Hull, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.G.S., late Director of the Geological Survey of Ireland, and Professor of Geology in the Royal College of Science, Dublin. Montague Rhodes James, M.A., Litt.D., Fellow and Dean of King's College, and Director of the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. Rev. Archibald R. S. Kennedy, M.A., D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages in the University of Edinburgh. Rev. H. A. A. Kennedy, M.A., D.Sc, Callander. Frederic G. Kenyon, M.A., D.Litt., Ph.D., of the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum, late Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Eduard Konig, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in the University of Bonn. Rev. JOHN LAIDLAW, M.A., D.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the New College, Edinburgh. Rev. Walter Lock, M.A., D.D., Warden of Keble College, and Dean Ireland's Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the University of Oxford. Alexander Macalister, LL.D., M.D., F.R.S., F.S.A., Fellow of St. John's College, and Professor of Anatomy in the University of Cambridge. Rev. George M. Mackie, M.A., D.D., Chaplain - to the Church of Scotland at Beyrout, Syria. Rev. J. A. M'Clymont, M.A., D.D., Aberdeen. Rev. Hugh Macmillan, M.A., D.D., LL.D., Greenock. The late Rev. John Mactherson, M.A., Edinburgh. Rev. D. S. MARGOLIOUTH, M.A., Fellow of New College, and Landian Professor of Arabic in the University of Oxford. Rev. John Turner Marshall, M.A., Principal of the Baptist College, Manchester. Rev. Arthur James Mason, M.A., D.D., Lady Margaret's Reader in Divinity in the University of Cambridge, and Canon of Canterbury. John Massie, M.A., Yates Professor of New Testament Exegesis in Manstield College, Oxford; formerly Scholar of St. John's College, Cambridge. Rev. Selah Merrill, D.D., LL.D., U.S. Consul at Jerusalem. Rev. George Milligan, M.A., B.D., Caputh, Perthshire. Rev. William Morgan, M.A., Tarbolton. Rev. R. WADDY Moss, Professor of Classics in the Didsbury College, Manchester. Rev. James H. Moulton, M.A., D.Litt., Senior Classical Master in the Leys School, Cambridge. W. MAX MtiLLER, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Old Testament Literature in the Reformed Episcopal Church Seminary, Philadelphia. Eberhard Nestle, Ph.D., D.D., Professor at Maulbronn. Rev. Thomas Nicol, M.A., D.D., Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism in the University of Aberdeen. W. Nowack, Ph.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Strassburg. Rev. William P. Paterson, M.A., D.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the University of Aberdeen. Rev. James Patrick, M.A., B.D., B.Sc, Examiner for Degrees in Divinity in the University of St. Andrews. Rev. John Patrick, M.A., D.D., Professor of Biblical Criticism and Biblical Antiquities in the University of Edinburgh. ARTHUR S. PEAKS, M.A., Professor in the Primitive Methodist College, Manchester, and Lecturer in Lancashire Independent College; sometime Fellow of Merton and Lecturer in Mansfield College, Oxford. William Flinders Petrie, M.A., D.C.L., Professor of Egyptology in University College, London. Theophilus Goldridge Pinches, LL.D., M.R.A.S., London. Rev. Alfred Plummer, M.A.,D.D., Master of University College, Durham. Rev. Frank Chamberlin Porter, M.A., Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Biblical Theology in the Divinity School of Yale University, New Haven. Rev. Harvey Porter, B.A., Ph.D., Professor in the American College, Beyrout, Syria. Rev. George Post, M.D., F.L.S., Professor in the American College, Beyrout, Syria. Ira Maurice Price, M.A., B.D., Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures in the University of Chicago. Rev. Cyril Henry Prichard, M. A., late Classical Scholar of Magdalene College, Cambridge, and Lecturer at St. Olave's, Southwark. The late Rev. George T. Purves, D.D., LL.D., Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis in Princeton Theological Seminary, New Jersey. William M. Ramsay, D.C.L., LL.D., Litt.D., Professor of Humanity in the University of Aberdeen, Honorary Fellow of Exeter and Lincoln Colleges, Oxford. Rev. Henry A. Redpath, M.A., Rector of St. Dunstan's in the East, London. Rev. Frederick Relton, A.K.C., Vicar of St. Andrew's, Stoke Newington, London. Rev. Archibald Robertson, M.A., D.D., LL.D., Principal of King's College, London, late Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. J. W. Rothstein, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Halle. AUTHOKS OF AETICLES IN VOL. IV Rev. Stewart Dingwall Foedtce Salmond, M.A., D.D., F.E.I.S., Principal and Professor of Systematic Theology in the United Free Church College, Aberdeen. Rev. William Sanday, M. A., D.D., LL.D., Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. Rev. Archibald Henry Sayce, M.A., LL.D., Fellow of Queen's College, and Professor of Assyriology in the University of Oxford. Rev. John A. Selbie, M.A., D.D., Maryculter, Kincardineshire. C. Siegfried, Ph.D., Geh. Kirchenrath and Professor of Theology in the University of Jena. Rev. John Skinnkh, M.A., D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis in Westminster College, Cambridge. Rev. George Adah Smith, M.A., D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew in the United Free Church College, Glasgow. Rev. Vincent Henry Stanton, M.A., D.D., Fellow of Trinity College, and Ely Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. John F. Stennino, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer in Hebrew and Theology, Wadham College, Oxford. Pev. George Barker Stevens, Ph.D., D.D., Dwight Professor of Systematic Theology in Yale University. Rev. W. B. Stevenson, M.A., B.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Introduction in the Theological College, Balu. St. Gkoroe Stock, M.A., Pembroke College, %Oxford. Rev. JAMES STRACHAN, M.A., St. Fergus. Hermann L. Strack, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Berlin. Rev. John Taylor, M.A., Litt.D., Vicar of "Winchcombe. Henry St. John Thackeray, M.A., Examiner in the Board of Education, formerly Divinity Lecturer in Sehvyn College, Cambridge. Rev. Thomas Walker, M. A., Professor of Hebrew in the Assembly's College, Belfast. Rev. B. B. Warfield, M.A., D.D., Professor of Theology in Princeton University. Lieut.-General Sir Charles Warren, G.C.M.G., K.C.B., F.R.S., Royal Engineers. Rev. Adam C. Welch, M.A., B.D., Glasgow. The late Rev. Henry Alcock White, M. A., Tutor in the University of Durham, and formerly Fellow of New College, Oxford. Rev. H. J. AVhite, M.A., Fellow.and Chaplain of Merton College, Oxford. Rev. Newport J. D. White, M.A., B.D., Librarian of Archbishop Marsh's Library, and Assistant Lecturer in Divinity and Hebrew in the University of Dublin. Rev. Owen C. Whitehouse, M.A., D.D., Principal and Professor of Biblical Exegesis and Theology in Cheshunt College. Rev. A. Lukyn Williams, M.A., Vicar of Guilden Morden and Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of Durham. Lieut.-General Sir Charles William Wilson, R.E., K.C.B., K.C.M.G., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S. Rev. Francis Henry Woods, M.A., B.D., Vicar of Chalfont St. Peter, and late Fellow and Theological Lecturer of St. John's College, Oxford. Rev. John Wortabet, M.A., M.D., Beyrout, Syria. VOLJV. Map 7. as divided among THE TWELVE TRIBES DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE PLEROHA {irK-fipafia; Lat. plenitudo, supple-mentttm, pleroma; AV and KV' fulness'). —A word e$ common Greek usage, which is raised to a semi-technical meaning in relation to God in certain books of the NT connected with Asia Minor (Ephe-sians, Colossians, John (prol.)). This meaning may have been given to it first by St. Paul; but • his absolute use of it in Col I*9, without any explanation added, suggests that it was already in use among the false teachers against whom he is writing. Lightfoot conjectures that it had a Palestinian origin, representing the Hebrew kSd. The word itself is a relative term, capable of many shades of meaning, according to the subject with which it is joined and the antithesis to which it is contrasted. It denotes the result of the action of the verb irXij/xwc ; but irXripovv is either (a) to fill up an empty thing (e.g. Mt 1348), or (b) to complete an incomplete thing (e.g. Mt 517); and the verbal substantive in -/ta may express either (1) the objective accusative after the verb, ' the thing filled or completed,'or (2) the cognate accusative, ' the state of fulness or completion, the fulfilment, the full amount,' resulting from the action of the verb (Ro II1* 1310 15s9, 1 Co 10s6). It may emphasize totality in contrast to its constituent parts; or fulness in contrast to emptiness (xivw/na); or completeness in contrast to incompleteness or deficiency (voripriiw Col I24, 2 Co 11", iJTTyfw'RolV2). A further ambiguity arises when it is joined with a genitive, which may be either subjective or objective, tile fulness which one thing gives to another, or that which it receives from another. In its semi-technical application it is applied primarily to the perfection of God, the fulness of His Being,' the aggregate of the Divine attributes, virtues, energies'; this is used quite absolutely in Col I19 (iv airy eiS6iC7)(rev irav rb TrXrfpw/ia KaT0iK7Jcrai), but further defined (1) as wav rb vX^paj/xa rrjs Ocottjtos, 'the whole completeness of the Divine nature,' in Col 2s, (2) as irav rb trXijpu/ia tov deov, 'the whole (moral) perfection which is characteristic of God,' in Eph 319. Secondarily, this same vXripwiw. is transferred to Christ; it was embodied permanently in Him at the Incarnation (Col I19); it still dwells permanently in His glorified Body, iv aim? KaroLKet aKepaXap6.e . . . ). In 1 Es 5s4 the LXX has viol *Bdpovnv Ifit] -j^aff 6fu\lai. ko.ko.1) has been traced to the Thais of Menander, a comic poet of the 3rd cent. B.C. The line is iambic trimeter, and the form xpi)* with one another. } W. Max Miiller (op. eit. p. 10) says rightly: ' To me it is a very suspicious circumstance that the Song of Deborah and the latest Psalms still continue to be measured in one and the same fashion.' exception, the mark of later poems. The gap was, no doubt, filled up by music, which always accompanied poetry in early times, whereas in later times learned scansion with the pen in the hand and without regard to musical sound appears to have been the rule. But, on the other hand, one is entitled to make stricter demands on lyrical poetry in the narrowest sense, especially on dance-songs such as perhaps meet us in Canticles, than on longer didactic poems like the Book of Job, which can hardly at any time have been sung. (5) The more decided and sharply cut any particular measure is, the more confidently may this be used as a medium for restoring the text. Thus, for instance, one may undertake the work of textual criticism on the kinah-me&sme with surer results than in the case of an evenly-flowing measure, because the peculiar limping form of the Icinah must have demanded closer attention on the part of the poet. In any case, we should do well, in all textual criticism which deals with anything beyond superfluous expletives, to assure oursslves of strong support on other grounds besides metrical, and not repose too much confidence in emendations bassd on metrical grounds alone. (6) Finally, it must always be kept steadily in view that the,quality and the effect of poetry are still in by far the majority of instances secured for the texts by the parallelism, even where regularity in the measure is not carried out. Hence one must guard against assigning too great importance to metrical regularity. f. Strophes.—We must deal more briefly with the use of strophes, i.e. larger formal units embracing several verses. The first to put forward a special strophe-theory was Fr. Koster in his article, ' Die Strophen oder der Parallelismus der Verse der heb. Poesie,' in SK, 1831, pp. 40-114. His example was widely followed, and, long before the stricter verse-theories were put forward, the division of the OT poems into strophes of lengths more or less equal or artistically interchanging was prosecuted as nothing short of a pastime. The results correspond exactly to those described above (pp. 6 and 7a) in the case of verse-theories. The variety of conclusions and the contradictions between them are perhaps even greater in this instance than in that. Here too in varying degrees may be seen mere strophic arrangement of the material received from tradition, alternating with a re-shaping of the text based upon a settled theory ; great irregularity alternating with the strictest attention to rule ; simplicity in the form obtained alternating with the extreme of artificiality; recognition of the parallel verse as the basis of the strophe alternating with acceptance of the line as the fundamental unit, reaching even to the denying and destruction of the parallel verse, etc. At present, in addition to the before-named leading upholders of different verse-theories, who also all put forward a special strophe-theory, the most prominent place is occupied by D. M. Miiller, with a most ingeniously worked-out strophic system based upon three fundamental principles—the responsio, the concatenate, and the inclusio.* In opposition to the line followed by him, a disposition at present prevails, following the lead of Bickell, Duhm, and others, to rest content, wherever possible, with the simplest strophic framework, consisting of four lines, equal to two verses each of two parallel members. That Hebrew poetry has a strophic arrangement is generally taken for granted as self-evident. The * Die Prppheten in ihrer urspriinglichen Form, 2 vols., Wien, 1896, Strophenbau und Responsion, Wien, 1898. Mailer's system has been adopted and contributions made in support of it by P. Perles, Znr heb. Strophik, Wien, 1896, and J. K. Zenner, Die Chorgesiinge im Biwhe der Psalmen, 2 parts, Freiburg i. B., 1896. 8 POETKY (HEBREW) POETRY (HEBREW) right to make this assumption is open, however, to serious question. It scarcely needs to be proved that there is such a thing as poetry that makes up verses but not strophes. But in this case the postulate of strophes is already satisfied beforehand. For the parallel verse is really a strophe, a higher unit produced by the union of smaller units, the lines. Ho metrical forms are shown by experience to resist more the reduction to a strophic formation than such double structures which have an inward completeness of their own. It may suffice to remind the reader of the two-membered alliterative verse of the Old German poetry and the dactylic distich of the Greeks and Komans. Upon this ground one may not, indeed, be able to dispute the possibility of strophes of a higher order, but in all probability these will form the exception, and parallel verses without any further union will be the rule. Further, the strophe-theory finds, at all events, no support from tradition. In particular, the term rhv (appended 71 times in the Psalms and in Hab3) cannot be urged in its favour. No significance attaches to the so-called alphabetical poems, a species of acrostics in which the letters K-n are made to succeed one another at the opening of sections of equal length. These prove, as was emphasized above (p. 4"), the presence of stichoi (in Pss 111, 112), but nothing more. If we can distinguish the single stichos, we can also count, according to the length designed for the poem, two (Pss 25. 34. 145, Pr 3F°-31) or four (Ps 9f. 37) stichoi, and, if the /antiA-measure is an established fact (cf. La 3, where each verse bears a letter, but each letter is repeated three times), we may include two (La 4) or three (La 1. 2) of these verses under a single letter. At most it may be said that the verse as a unit is witnessed to when in Ps 119 the same letter commences eight successive verses of two lines each. But this is yet a long way from the same thing as a strophe joI eight verses or sixteen lines.* It is generally left entirely out of sight that any new metrical unit must have a new formative medium. No one thinks of proving the existence of the latter. True, indeed, one framework of this kind is occasionally to be encountered in the OT, namely, the recurring verse or refrain. It must be admitted that this is in a high degree adapted to mark off strophes, especially when, as in Ps 42 f. (426.il 435^ at regUiar intervals it interrupts a sharply defined measure in the other verses by a different structure of verse. With always diminishing strength and importance the refrain occurs, further, in Ess 80.46. 39. 57.59.49. 99.56. 62. 67. But even if one were disposed to assume and carry through a fixed strophic structure in all these poems, upon the ground of the refrain, after all only about a dozen of the hundreds of Heb. poems would have been proved to be strophic, while the conclusion regarding the others must at best be to the effect that they are not constructed strophically. As a "special basis for the division into strophes, it is the custom simply to fall back everywhere upon the contents. A metric strophe is supposed to coincide with a section constituted by the sense, the supposition being that the poet divided his material into sections whose length, in virtue of certain rules, showed a rhythmical correspondence with one another. This assumption, however, is • A device of a precisely similar kind has lately been shown to exist in the Bab.-Assyr. literature (ZA, x. Iff.). Every 11th time the same syllable stands at the commencement of a two-membered verse, and the initial syllables of 25 sections each of 11 verses form a connected sentence. Yet Zimmern does not think of taking each of these long sections as a strophe, but concludes that every two verses make a strophe (of 4 lines), and that the 11th verse always stands by itself. It may be modestly asked whether each verse should not rather be taken by itself and the strophic structure given up. all the harder, since the contents have already done their part in the formation of the parallel verse. Not only so, but this very parallelism gives to Heb. poetry in general the impression of aphorisms linked together, and renders it extremely difficult for the poet to exhibit a finely-articulated strictly progressive development of thought. Still the possibility of the nearest and easiest approach to tins may be conceded, namely, that a single repetition of the parallelism, combining two verses of two lines, might fall rhythmically upon the ear, and that at the same time an idea seemed to exhaust itself in two parallel verses.* Deeper-reaching divisions of trie sense could scarcely succeed in striking the ear as rhythmic units. On the other hand, it is equally true that the theory of strophes is not to be refuted by postulates ; the evidence of facts must decide. But any one who has convinced himself from the literature of the subject what finely artificial structures, with ever new forms, have been successively proved to underlie the same poems, and after being long forgotten have had their place taken by as artificial successors, will not waive his right to a radical scepticism on this subject. The charm of playing with numbers makes itself felt here almost more strongly than in the instance of verse ; and the results, the more artistically these work themselves out, as in recent times those of Miiller and Zenner, make their impression much more, being carefully printed, upon the eye, than upon the ear. The following sentences may serve for guidance and caution in this sphere of inquiry.+ (a) Under no conditions must the search for strophes lead to the abandonment of the certainly ascertained unit, the parallel verse, as has been frequently done (e.g. by Delitzsch, Merx, Diestel), Never must the end of a strophe break up a verse, and the verse, not the stichos, must remain the measure of the strophe. (/3) A great risk incurred by the search for strophes is this, that in their favour the sense of a poem might be divided wrongly and thus the poem receive a wrong interpretation. The endeavour should be to get first at the sense and its pauses, and then to ask whether strophe-like forms are the result. (7) We must not obstinately persist in carrying through rigorously a division which upon the whole is uniform, such as that into four lines. The possibility is not absolutely excluded that it was considered legitimate to interrupt this uniformity occasionally by verses of two or of six lines. This practice is assumed hy Zimmern for Bab. poetry (cf. p. 7" footnote *), and, as anotber instance, it may be frequently noted in the Old Germ, poetry. Hence we must be cautious in the way ot excising or of adding lines and verses, upon the ground of the strophic measure. (S) Conversely, a succession of sections of the most varied extent are not to be called strophes, by a misapplication of a term which denotes a rhythmic whole. This practice has been frequently followed, and is so still. J (e) We must not demand strophes everywhere, but must, in the first place, make a distinction according to the different species of poetry. That dance-songs such as are found in Canticles should be strophic is not indeed necessary, but is extremely probable ; that the Book of Job should ex- * Cf. the Otfried strophe of the Old High Germ, poetry, which consists of two rhyming couplets. t Cf. earlier statements of the present writer's views in ZATW, 1882, p. 49 ft., and Actes du simhne CongrH international des Orientalistes, Leyden, 1884, p. 93 f. J Thus O. A. Briggs (op. dt. p. 399) cites, as ' a fine specimen ' of Old Egypt, strophe-formation, a poem whose twenty strophes exhibit the following number of lines: 12,14, 8, 7,13, 8, 9, 11, 9, 15, 14, 9, 10, 5, 11, 13, 10, 8, 10, 18. So we find strophes of from 5 to 18 lines ranged side by side 1 POETEY (HEBREW) POETRY (HEBREW) hibit strophes throughout is the unlikeliest thing in the world. Likewise the age of the poem must be taken into account; strophes and a more regular structure of these will be looked for rather in later than in earlier times. (f) Above all, we may recognize in a regular interchange of the length of lines an indication pointing to strophe-formation, because we have here a new formative method. Hence it is no fortuitous circumstance that the Icinah verse which is composed of unequal members lends itself with special readiness to strophe-like forms such as meet us in La 1. 2. 4 and Ps 42 f. For here the equiponderance is restored by repetition of the unequal pairs. Upon the whole, in this matter too little will do less harm than too much, and doubt will be more prudent than blind confidence. g. Subordinate matters of form. — Rhyme, as well as the other things we have spoken of, has frequently been claimed as a medium employed in Heb. poetry.* The Heb. language has at its disposal a great number of sonorous endings and ftexional additions used to denote a particular grammatical or logical relation. These would supply quite extraordinary facilities for the employment of terminal rhyme for poetical purposes. Yet, as is generally admitted, rhyme never became the prevailing medium of poetry. But it is self-evident that, where the same logical relations govern a series of lines, rhyme must come in with more or less regularity. As illustrations, Job 109-18 (cited by Sommer) and Ps 6 (cited by Briggs) may serve, although in neither instance is the rhyme satisfactory throughout. Here and there the poet himself may have been conscious of it and thus indulged in a species of by-play; but in reality the occurrence of rhyme has scarcely any more significance than attaches to J. Chotzner s (PSBA, Jan. 8, 1884) collection from the OT of a whole series of the finest dactylic hexameters. In spite of these, one will hardly agree with Chotz-ner's conclusion that the Greeks borrowed the hexameter of the Homeric poems in Asia Minor from their Heb. slaves (Jl 36). Thus, then, textual alterations ought not to be proposed in certain passages in order to make the rhyme frequently occurring in these perfectly uniform. Assonance and Paronomasia play a large and unquestionably a conscious rdle in the OT. But they belong to rhetorical, not to strictly poetical devices. All these phenomena receive exhaustive treatment in the Dissertation of I. M. Casanowicz, Paronomasia in the Old Test., Boston, 1894. That, finally, Hebrew, like other languages, has in a certain measrfre its peculiar poetical vocabulary and grammar is a matter of course, but can be simply mentioned here. ii. The Material of Hebrew Poetry.—A. The different Species of Poetry. — In the literature of Israel the drama is wholly wanting. This peculiarity it shares with the whole Semitic literature, whereas in that of the Indo-Germanic peoples the drama three times over sprang up quite fresh and independent from the germ, namely on Indian, Greek, and German soil. This may perhaps be set down to a certain one-sidedness of disposition, a want of objectivity on the part of the Semites. The belief, to be sure, has often been cherished that precisely the OT itself forms an exception to this rule, and that it contains two dramas, Canticles and Job. In the case of the former of these, this opinion is based upon a false conception of the book, which is rather a collection of lyric (in fact, marriage) songs ;t in the ease * Cf., for early times, G. Sommer, BibHscTte Abhandlungen, 1846, p. 85 9., and for modern, O. A. Briggs, op. eit. p. 373 ft. t Cf. the present writer's Commentary on Canticles in the Kurzer Hdeomm. z. AT, xvit. (1S98) p. xiiff. of the latter it is based upon a false definition of the-drama.* It is only in chs. 3-41 that the Book of Job is disposed as a dialogue, and this disposition it shares with the majority of Plato's philosophical works, which no one thinks it necessary on that account to call dramas. Nay, the latter from beginning to end follow the method of dialogue, whereas \a Job the whole action, from which the drama takes its name, is given in narrative form in chs. 1. 2. 42.t Further, L. Diestel (art. ' Dichtkunst' in Schen-kel's Bibel-Lexicon, i. [1869] p. 609) denies that anywhere in Semitic literature can the epos be found any more than the drama. This has since been shown to be incorrect, as on Bab.-Assyrian soil quite an extensive epic literature, whose contents are mythological, has been found composed in poetic form. But for Heb. poetry, so far as this is represented in the OT, Diestel's contention remains true. The OT enshrines a small number of historical poems or fragments of such — it may suffice to name the Song of Deborah in Jg 5— but this is lyric, not epic, poetry. Pss 105-107 are quite secondary productions, versification of the ancient popular history for liturgical purposes ; they are litanies, not epics. The Jewish works oi fiction of later times, the Books of Kuth, Jonah, Esther, Dn 1-6 X are wholly in prose. The strongest evidence is furnished by the narrative proper in the Book of Job, the so-called prologue and epilogue in chs. 1. 2. 42. Although it is practically certain that these were borrowed from the mouth of the people,§ and are thus no secondary work, but an original one composed in the form current among the people for such subjects, these passages are written in prose, .although this is unusually lofty or, if one will, has the breath of poetry. They share also with other narrative passages the characteristic that the direct speech of the parties acting occasionally reaches at the most critical points poetic expression (Job I21, cf. elsewhere Gn 926"27 2i6b. 7 25** 2727-29-S8'-, Jg 1516). It is difficult to regard these intermingled lines of verse as the last remnants of an originally poetic composition. We may rather find here an indication that poetry had with the Hebrews a wholly subjective, i.e. lyric, tinge, but that it was not in use for objective epic description. Wo must reckon with this fact, without being able to offer any sufficient explanation of it. Perhaps, however, in this matter the common Semitic tendency is upon the side of the Hebrews, the exceptional development upon that of the Babylonians and Assyrians.il Such we consider to be the state of the case, and C. A. Briggs alone appears to come to a different conclusion. But even when he represents Jotham's fable (Jg 98"15)—to take the most extensive illustration—as written in metre (see his metrical division of it, op. eit. p. 416 f.), this does not go essentially beyond* what was said above. For here we have direct address and at least gnomic poetry, even if it is written in prose. H But when the two Creation * Cf. the present writer's Commentary on Job in Nowack's Handkomm. ii. 1 (1896), p. vif. J. Ley's rejoinder (Xeue Jahrb. /. das klass. Altertum, etc., Leipzig, Teubner, Jahrg. 1899, ii. Abth. p. 295 ft.) only shows that he has not rightly apprehended the point on which we are at issue. fThe above remarks are not of course meant to exclude the recognition of a dramatic element in many passages in the OT, including even the Bk. of Job. The present writer could assent to the remark of C. A. Briggs (op. at. p. 419), ' the dramatic element is quite strong in Hebrew poetry,' but not to the heading ' Dramatic Poetry,' nor to the statement (p. 420) that the dramatic element reaches its climax in the Song of Songs. J Cf. above, p. 3i>. § Cf. Budde, Comm. p. vii ff. II So also Grimme, ZDMO, 1897, p. 684. 11 Parallelism proper is wanting, it is simply the rhetorical construction, with fourfold repetition of the same scene (cf. such a passage as Job 113-19) that gives the appearance of rhythm. The alterations made by Briggs on v.l& are warranted, however, even without a metrical scheme, only we must read itjf 51 and 10 POETRY (HEBEEW) POETKY (HEBEEW) narratives (P's in Gn 1 and J's in 24-4), as well as the two forms of the story of the Flood (Gn 6-8), are declared to be poetical passages, metrically composed (Briggs, op. cit. p. 559 f.)> this gives rise to a new, otherwise unheard of, state of things. Before any examination of these passages, the objection lies to hand that one cannot see why then Gn 9 and II1"9 are not to be regarded as poetical, and, most pertinently of all, ch. 5, the Sethite table which forms the transition to the story of the Flood. But when one looks more closely at the passages in question, it becomes plain that the whole doctrine of the form of Heb. poetry, as explained above, must be radically transformed before these narratives can be forced into metrical forms. We find them dominated neither by stichical division nor by parallelism. Nothing is proved by the circumstance that here and there the tone of the language rises and takes a certain poetical flight, or that here and there a few lines are capable of scansion, or that the relation between certain clauses may claim the name of parallelism. In reality the primitive history of both sources (P and J) is, so far as the form is concerned, not otherwise constructed than the following history of the patriarchs, etc., and is transmitted to us as history, not poetry, just as strictly as that is.* The conclusion, then, holds that the poetically composed epos as well as the drama is wanting in Hebrew literature. Accordingly, only one of the leading varieties of poetry, the earliest and the simplest of them, was cultivated in Israel, namely the lyric. At the same time it must not be forgotten that a secondary variety of this, namely gnomic poetry, which we might call ' thought-lyric,' likewise attained to a rich development. B. The Employment of Poetry.—-For the sake of brevity, we shall seek here to combine as far as possible a sketch of the history of OT poetry with a schematic survey of the poems that have come down to us. Only the folk-poetry of early times needs to be handled in any detail; the other survivals of Heb. poetry will be found treated of in this Dictionary in separate articles. 1. Folk-Poetry.-—This is everywhere the oldest form of poetry. Poetry as an art never makes its appearance till later epochs. The saying of J. G. Hamann (1730-1788),' Poetry is the mother-tongue of the human race,' which was more fully explained and established by his pupil J. G. Herder (1744-1803), and has in recent times been emphatically asserted especially by Ed. Reuss (cf. Herzog's BE2 v. [1879] p. 671 f-), finds everywhere its complete justification. Poetry is in point of fact older than prose ; all the most ancient utterances of different nations are couched in poetry. One may lay down the rule: in the case of a primitive people all discourse that is intended for publicity or for memorial purposes will be found clothed in a poetical form. To these two categories belongs everything of a religious character, and it must be borne in mind that in the life of ancient peoples much that appears to us secular bears the stamp of religion. In this way poetry has its home in Israel as elsewhere :— (a) In family life.—"What specially come into view here are the wedding-song and the lament for the d-ead. Of the former of these we possess a whole collection of fine specimens, which, thanks to ' and there came out fire and devoured.' By the way, Grimme (ZDMG, 1897, p. 612), too, represents Jotham's fable as written in verse, although he gives a somewhat different arrangement of it. * It appears to us that Briggs is in general inclined to draw too lightly the boundaries of poetical form, confusing, as he does, rhetorical and metrical forms. This remark applies also very specially to many NT passages to which he gives a metrical arrangement. a mistaken exegesis, found their way into the Canon of the Sacred Writings, in the book which is called in Hebrew D'Tpn it and, in English, Canticles or the Song of Solomon. Though these songs are of late origin, yet they will have preserved, as genuine folk-songs, the quality of early times with essential fidelity.* A contrafactum t of the wedding-song of older days is exhibited by the prophet Isaiah at the beginning of his Parable of the Vineyard (5Iff-). —Of the lament for the dead we possess only contrafacta, applied to historical persons and personifications, first in the mouth of the prophets and then in the Book of Lamentations (chs. 1-4). See fuller details on this point above, i. B 2 d, p. 5. In the case of lamentations for the dead, women alone were the composers and the performers (niajipp, rtaq, Jer 916), who sought to increase their collection of dirges and handed down their art by instruction (v.ls). At weddings, on the other hand, young men and young women seem to have contended for the pre-eminence, t From the official lament we ought certainly to distinguish exceptional cases when an accomplished friend might dedicate a eulogy to the dead, such as has come down to us in David's fine lament for Saul and Jonathan (2 S l17ff'), and in a lament for Abner of which at least a few lines have survived (2 S 3d3'-). Whether it was the custom to use songs to celebrate other important events and festivals in the family life, such, for instance, as weaning (cf. Gn 21") and circumcision, we have no means of determining. (b) In the life of the community.—That even the industrial life of the Israelitish farmer and nomad was interpenetrated with song we may assume without further question. Examples are thinly scattered. From the earliest times we have the Song of the Well (Nu 2117f-).§ From the life of the agriculturist Is 658 has preserved some words of a vintage blessing. Harvest songs, too, may be taken for granted, in view of the harvest feasts and the proverbial joy of harvest (Is 93), and perhaps the feast of sheep-shearing (1 S 254ff-, 2 S 1323ff-) had also its special songs. If our interpretation of the difficult text Jg 511 is correct, the rehearsal of songs is presupposed even there as part of the shepherd's life. People did not like to be made ' the subject of verse' (Sps, cf. Is 144, Mic 2*, Hab 28) or 'of music' (nj'jj, cf. La 314, Job 30", Ps 6912). Hence the ' taunt-song' must have been much in vogue. Even for eariy times its use is not to be denied, while for a later period a short specimen of quite a unique kind has been preserved in the song upon the forgotten courtezan, Is 2316, which sounds as if it belonged to the category of drinking-songs mentioned in Ps 6912, but presupposed also in Am 66 and 2 S 1935. At least no banquet proper (nnfP, avimlxsiov) can well have been without music, including songs. It is not necessary to suppose, indeed, that on such occasions only pronounced drinking-songs were sung; rather will the want have frequently been met in early times by national songs. A special class of composers and singers, whose services were called into requisition on such occasions, is named in Nu 2127 (D'VpEri). By this Hebrew name we are to understand a guild of 'travelling singers,' rhapsodists such as nourished in ancient Greece and on German soil, who not only had a rich repository of national saga and heroic poems, but also treated their * Cf. Budde, ' Das Hohelied' in Kurzer Hdcomm. t This is the name applied to the church songs of the close of the Middle Ages, which were composed in imitation of the measure, melody, and words of familiar secular songs. J Cf. the description, for modern Syria, by Wetzstein (Ztschr. f. Ethnol., 1873, p. 287 «.). § For evidence that this is not a properly historical poem, but a song such as it was customary to sing at the discovery of new springs in the desert, as well as for an attempt to restore its original form, see Budde in The New World, 1895 p. 136 ff. POETBY (HEBEEW) POETEY (HEBEEW) 11 audience to songs of a more or less wanton or frivolous character. At the royal court 'singing men and singing women' are taken for granted as part of the regular personnel (2 S 1936). To the category under consideration belongs also the single certain ancient trace of gnomic poetry which has come down to us, namely Samson's riddle (Jg 14Ua), along with its solution, and Samson's reply in v.18. Such displays of wit may have been much in vogue as 'social games' at merrymakings. That, along with these, proverbs and wise saws also had wide currency among the people we may take for granted. No doubt the collection of these in the Book of Proverbs dates from later times, but air the same this may embody very ancient material, altered or not, as the case may be. The oracle, which under the title of 1 thg last words of David' interrupts the context in '/ S 231'17, must have a late date assigned to it; the saying of Jahweh about Moses in Nu 128'8 appears to have been before the mind's eye of the writer. Another example of the same species is found in the words of Samuel in 1 S 1522'- It must be added that all three of the last cited passages tend to pass over into the following divisions—the religious, the national, and the propheticcil. (c) In the religious life.—In the first place it is extremely probable that the ancient priestly oracle, where it did not simply, by the casting of the lot, give the answer ' yes' or ' no' to the question put, was couched in verse. A classical example is furnished by Gn 25s3, an oracle, indeed, which belongs at the same time to our next division. Likewise for the cultus proper we have examples that are both ancient and certain. These are, in the first place, the Aaronic bhssing (Nu 6s4"26), then the formula; pronounced at the taking tip and the setting down of the ark of J" (Nu 10**-),* and finally Solomon's words in dedicating the temple .(IK 812(-), which must be supplemented and restored after the LXX (8B3). How far the religious service, i.e. in particular the sacrificial actions, was even in ancient times embellished by special songs, cannot now be determined. All that have come down to us emanate exclusively from the temple at Jerusalem in post-exilic times, as far at least as the form in which they now lie before us is concerned. But as surely as the religious gatherings were joyous feasts (Dt 127'12-18), with equal certainty may we conclude that even in early times music and poetry must have assumed their r61e at these, whenever any sanctuary obtained a name and a brilliant equipment, and considerable bodies of worshippers came together. (d) In the national life.—Here we may distinguish the state of rest on the one side, and of activity, i.e. war, on the other. To the first category belong the extremely numerous eulogistic and denunciatory sayings in which a people celebrates its own qualities and its superiority to other peoples; or separate divisions or groups of a people may express their own distinctive characteristics. This species of poetry is extraordinarily widespread and everywhere highly developed, but most of all amongst Israel's relations, the ancient Arabs. It may exhibit all degrees, from empty unmeaning braggadocio up to the finest and loftiest poetical utterance. In the OT it begins with the boastful song of Lantech (Gn 4s?'-), which occurs in the primitive genealogical table inherited from the Kenites (j'p), and is a genuine type of the original form of this species as found in the mouth of a small tribe. Then come the sayings of Noah (Gn g25'27), in which Israel (csp) maintains its prestige over against the wealthy Phoenician (tw) and the slave Canaan (|J>J3). Here for the first * Cf. further, Actes du dixi&me Cvngrte de OrimtaXistes, iii. (Leyden, 1896), p. 18 ff. time this species clothes itself in the form of the ' blessing,' in which, suitably to the quality of our sources, which look at everything from the vc ligious view-point, it meets us in by far the majority of instances. The characteristic of his half-brother Ishmael is defined by Israel in the words put into the mouth of Jahweh in Gn 1611'-, which can hardly have retained their original form. So Israel states his relation to his twin brother Edom in the oracle of Gn 25s3, and separately for each in the double blessing of 2T27~'ia and v.39'-, very much, of course, to the prejudice of the brother. The more extensive oracles of Balaam (Nu 237"10- 18-» 243'9- 1B-M), which show indications that they have undergone several expansions, make glorious promises to Israel, in contrast to Moab, and even, further, to other nations. But this species shows its finest development in the two poems in which each of the tribes of Israel has its dignity and its special quality assigned to it in relation to the other tribes, namely the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49) and the Blessing of Moses (Dt33). It is by no accident that these two oracles have been put into the mouth of these two particular men, for Jacob is the fleshly and Moses the spiritual father of Israel, and they alone can pass judgment upon all their sons. The Blessing of Moses presupposes the Blessing of Jacob, and on the basis of the altered relations brought about by time (perhaps in the first half of the 8th cent.) gives it a new form. Thus, then, from the two sources, J and E, the older arid the younger compositions are taken over. The older, the Blessing of Jacob, may have been compiled from separate sayings that were current about the different tribes. The self-consciousness of the tribe in which the finished poem took its rise, namely Judah, at last gave the general tone to the whole. Numerous sayings of the same kind, characterizing towns and hamlets, meadows, and clans, must have been current. A relic of these has survived in the now sorely mutilated saying about the city of Abel-beth-maaeah, 2 S SO"!*: The principal specimen of the real historical folk-song is the fine Song of Deborah, Jg 5. This attaches itself closely, at the same time, to the preceding species, being as it is a poem in which praise and blame are distributed, from v.ia onwards. First of all, praise is given to Deborah, who by her recruiting-song has called to the battle, and then to Barak as the commander (v.12). This is followed by an enumeration of the tribes who put in an appearance (vv.13"15a), with censure and ridicule of those who kept at a distance (vv.15b"17). Next a tribute is paid to the valour of the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali (v.18), the city of Meroz is cursed (v.23), while to the Kenite woman Jael is awarded the palm for the greatest deed of personal heroism (v.24ffi). We have here, at least from v.6 onwards, the primitive mode of a song that grew up in the life of the nation as a whole. We are directly reminded of the distribution of the rewards of victory after the battles of Platsea and Mykale. Of other war-songs we possess only fragments (Nu 21"'-27-30, Jos 1012'-) or very brief extracts compressed into a single verse, such as the Song at the Passage of the Bed Sea (Ex 1521), and that which was sung in honour of Saul and David when they defeated the Philistines (1 S 186fi). Similarly, the substance of a song of triumph over Saiason is put into the mouth of the Philistines in Jg le23'-. On the other hand, it is clear that the Song contained in Ex W-20 is a late composition in Psalm style, expanded from the short v.21 and really meant to take the place of this; and in like manner Davitfs triumphal song in 2 S 22= Ps 18 is a late insertion. As a feature of the real life of ancient times it ia 12 POETRY (HEBREW) POETRY (HEBREW) to be noted that in Ex 1521 as well as in 1 S 186<- it is the women, or rather the maidens, who meet the returning warriors witli songs, and the same custom is presupposed in Jg II34, in the story of Jephthah. Among the Arabs at the present day a victory is still followed by a sword - dance, performed by a maiden to the accompaniment of a song. It is an extremely important circumstance that Nu 2114, according to the note wherewith it is introduced, is derived from nin' ninn^D isd, the Book of the Wars of Jahweh, i.e. of the wars of Israel, which, as such, are the wars of Israel's God (cf. 1 S 2528). We have thus to do here with a collection of ancient war-songs which already lay before the ancient historian as a source, and thus to a certainty mark the beginning of writing amongst the Hebrews. Side by side with this source we read in Jos 1013b of a -wn -ibd or Book of the Upright, from which v.12"I8a is said to be cited. From it, according to 2 S I18, is cited also David's lament for Saul and Jonathan, no less than Solomon's words in dedicating the Temple, according to the LXX of 1 K 8s3, where iv /3i/3?U(f> Tijs H (e) Another author may tell about the prophet in such a way that the latter becomes the hero of the story. In such instances it is relatively indifferent if occasionally it is the prophet who speaks of himself in the thirdperson, but this is scarcely a likely contingency. To this last category belong Am 710ftv Is 20, and in a much less degree chs. 38-39, but, above all, large sections of the Book of Jeremiah, particularly from ch. 26 onwards. If these last-named sections at last expand into a life of Jeremiah, nay, into a history of his times, if Is 36-39 was mainly taken from a popular work of history and appended to the older Book of Isaiah, it is evident that we have now reached the sphere of prose pure and simple. But even in these sections there are prophetical discourses which by a stretch may be said to lead us back to the realm of poetry. Besides, personal endowments must be taken into account. One might have the full consciousness of a call to the prophetic office and yet be no born poet. Then it might happen that at one time the prophet would put on the unwonted poetic harness and go earnestly to work for a while, only to relapse presently into heedlessness, while at another time he would disdain to use it at all and would employ prose. Something of this kind may be observed, for instance, in Ezekiel. Under such conditions the literary form in the prophetic writings continually vacillates to and. fro, and we meet also with transition forms betwixt prose and poetry, which it is difficult to class with certainty. The possibility of a careless treatment of poetical rules, giving rise to an imperfect type or mixed species of discourse, is open to Hebrew as well as to any other language, nay, it lies nearer to hand in it than in many other languages. The stichic structure only needs to be neglected for the discourse to flow on with tolerable freedom from restraint, while the parallelism is retained as far as possible and by its peculiar undulating progress always makes itself felt. Grimme (ZDMG, 1897, p. 683 f.) is wrong, then, when he rejects in toto the idea of a ' rhythmic prose'; the dilemma by which he attempts a reductio ad absurdum of it is not cogent for those who do not accept his system. His argument fails in particular to do justice to the parallelism of the thought. For an analogy to the above-named mixed species, we may compare our own doggerel verse or rhymed prose. For the prophetical books, then, a sliding scale must be adopted, with many indefinable transitions. The poetical form will be most strictly observed in the cases described above under (a) and, a little less, (b); the prophet himself will move with more freedom in those included under (c); the instance cited under (d) will give ample scope for the intermixture of prose ; finally, in the last case prose will be the form started with, which will only occasionally make way for poetry. Details would be out of place here. 3. Artistic Poetry.—To this category belong in a certain sense the whole of the poetical books, for these were all either composed or collected in full view and with clear consciousness of their artistic POETEY (HEBKEW) POISON" 13 form. This took place, without exception, in later post-exilic times. But at the same time there is scarcely one of them which had not its roots in the ancient folk-poetry. Along with lyric poetry, the gnome and the Wisdom literature occupy the forefront in this arena. (a) Lyric Poetry.—(I) The Song of Songs.—This belongs, as was pointed out above (p. 10), wholly to the realm of folk - poetry. It is a collection of popular wedding - songs, belonging to a late period^ But it owed its retention in the Canon simply to the circumstance that it was taken to be an extremely ingenious allegorical poem with a religious meaning, and that its author was assumed to be Solomon. It is not an impossible suggestion that, because of this conception, the book underwent here and there editorial revision.* See, further, art. Song of Songs. (2) The Book of Lamentations.—Here, truly, poetry as an art rules, till artificiality is reached in the alphabetic arrangement. But this art is based on the employment by the prophets of the popular lament for the dead, and is an imitation of the latter. A higher degree of art than that found in chs. 1. 2. 4 is present in eh. 3, which is meant to be, as it were, a central peak between the other chapters; ch. 5, again, is popular, and alien in subject and form from the rest.f See, further, art. Lamentations. (3) The Psalms.—In this collection we have to recognize the Temple hymn-book of the post-exilic community, the religious lyric with artistic development. Only in a single instance has a secular song strayed into this company, namely Ps 45, also a wedding-song, but one of quite an artificial character. More frequent is gnomic poetry, although with a decidedly religious application; cf. e.g. Ps 1. But even here the popular basis is not wanting. In its purest form this meets us in the collection known as the Pilgrim Songs, Pss 120-137. Psalms outside the collection proper are found in Hab 3, which exhibits the same kind of titles and technical terms as meet us in the Psalms ; in 2 S 22=Ps 18; in 1 S 21'10 wrongly put in the mouth of Hannah; further, suitable to the situation are Ex 151'20 (cf. above); the Song of Moses, Dt 32; Is 12. Perhaps also Nah 1 was originally an alphabetical psalm (see art. Nahum for a defence of this view). In the so-called Psalms of Solomon (which see) there has come down to us, although only in the Greek language, another small collection of psalms from the 1st cent. B.C. The title 'Psalms of Solomon' expresses nothing more than that they are secondary, as compared with the canonical Psalms, which as a whole are attributed by tradition to David. On the titles found in the Book of Psalms see art. Psalms, p. 153 ff. (b) The Wisdom Literature.—(1) The Book of Proverbs unites in itself gnomic poetry of the most diverse kinds and with the most varying degrees of development. The basis and the kernel (chs. 10-2217, also chs. 25-29) are supplied by the two-line mdshdl, which in form and contents is certainly the oldest structure of this species, and in its origin is distinctly popular. To this were appended, towards the end, more elaborate species, apophthegms expressed at greater length, enigmatical and numerical sayings, and finally (3110"31) an alphabetical eulogy of the virtuous woman. At the beginning of the book (chs. 1-9) we have a connected series of pedagogical - philosophical didactic discourses, in which Wisdom and Folly personified are introduced. For details see art. Peovekbs. (2) The Book of Job is based upon a popular • Cf. the present writer's Oomm., p. xxf. t Of. Kurzer Hdcomm. story, and gives to the problem raised in this a new turn which it carries artistically through the conversations of chs. 3-426. The form adopted is essentially the same as is found in Pr 1-9, but the poet has succeeded in giving to this a lyric movp • ment throughout, and has even cast the different speakers in so plastic a mould and kept them so well apart as to give rise to the appearance of a dramatic performance (cf. above, p. 9). Beyond any doubt, the Book of Job is the highest product of the poet's art to be found in the OT. It brings to a focus, as it were, all that Heb. poetry could contribute, and stands out as one of the noblest poetical compositions of any age, or any people. See, further, art. Job. (3) Qoheleth.—This book takes its place as a counterpart to Pr 1-9, as a philosophical didactic poem, but has an essentially different point of view. Belonging to a very late period, it does not stand high poetically; both language and verse-structure leave much to be desired. See, further, ECCLESIASTES. (4) To the same species belongs the Book of Sirach. This is probably older than Qoheleth, it stands higher as regards language and form; from the religious standpoint it is more valuable, if less original in its views. It concerns us here because recently a considerable part of its contents has been recovered in the original Hebrew (^ee Sirach). With this book we may bring our survey to a close. K. Budde. POISON (ni?n hemah, 5 times, Dt 32s4-33, Job 64, Ps 584 1403; tfih ro'sh, in Job 2016; LXX 6v/t6s except in Ps 140s, where it is Us as in NT ; Vulg. indignatio Job 64, caput Job 2016, furor Dt 32>!4, Ps 584, venenum Dt 32s3, Ps 1403, Ro 313, Ja 38).— The commonest signification of hemah is fury or the heat of anger, in which sense it occurs over 100 times in the OT. In some of these passages the ideas of anger and of poison are united, as in Is 5117'22, where the cup of God's wrath is spoken of; see also Job 2120, Jer 2515, etc. Luther translates 'fervent lips' of Pr 2623 by giftiger Mund. The Greek word 0vfi6s likewise primarily means that part of human nature which is affected with passion or anger. The Hebrew idea is therefore that poison is a substance which causes fatal heat and irritation, and in nearly every instance in the OT the material referred to is the venom of serpents or scorpions; see Dt 3224-», Job 64 2016, Ps 5841403, and in the NT Bo 313. Six species of poisonous snakes occur in Palestine, Vipera Euphratiea, V. Ammodytes, Daboia xanthina, Echis arenicola, Naja Haje, the hooded cobra common in the southern border countries, but not often found in the cultivated tracts; and Cerastes Hasselquistii, the horned viper, very common, and often found lurking in hollows of the ground. Tristram has seen it in the imprints made on soft ground by camels. The Israelites were therefore well acquainted with the effects of poisonous wounds inflicted by these, as well as by the scarcely less dreaded centipedes and scorpions. In Egypt poison was likewise chiefly associated with serpent bites. In the Book of the Dead (c. 149, 1. 27ff.) the poison of the serpent Rtwk is called shmnt, which comes from a root which also means to be hot, or to produce fever. The natives of the neighbouring countries had, like most races of savage or semi-civilized man, learned to utilize this poison to render their darts and arrows more destructive. This was an ancient practice (cf. Odyssey, i. 261; Sophi. Trachiniw, 574), and it is referred to in Job 64. This usage has shown itself in the change of meaning in the word Toi-iic6s, possibly also in that of Ms, although it is now generally held that in its Homeric sense as an arrow it is connected with the Sanskrit ishus, while in its Sophoclean sense as a poison, * eira , 1 Ch 23s-24). Cf. Shaks. Coriol. m. iii. 9— * Have you a catalogue Of all the voices that we have procured Set down by the poll?' The Heb. word is always n^-ta gulgoleth, which in the places where it is rendered 'poll' as well as in Ex 1616 (AV ' for every man,' AVm 'by the poll or head,' RV 'a head') and 3826 (AV 'A bekah for every man,' AVm 'a poll,' RV 'a head') means the head or the person in counting, taxing, etc., but elsewhere means the head as severed from the body (2 K 9s5, 1 Ch 1010), or the skull as broken with a stone (Jg i)63). The idea in the Heb. word as in the Eng. is roundness.* To 'poll the head' is to make it look more rounded by cutting off the hair. The expression occurs in 2 S 1426ier (Heb. [rhi] in Piel, usually tr. 'to shave') and Ezk 4420 (Heb. cp?, its only occurrence) ; and ' to poll' by itself in Mic I1"' Make thee bald and poll thee for thy delicate children' (Heb. lja, usually to 'shear'). Cf. Wyclifs (1388) tr. of Job V 'Thanne Joob roos, and to-rente his clothis, and with pollid heed he felde doun on the erthe'; and 1 Co II5 (1380), ' Forsoth ech womman preiynge, or prophesyinge, the heed not hiM, defoulith hir heed; forsoth it is oon, as yif sche be maad ballid, pollid, or clippid.' In Jer 9M 2523 4932 RV changes 'that are in the utmost corners' into 'that have the corners of their hair polled,' in accordance with AVm. See Hair, vol. ii. p. 284". J. Hastings. POLLUTIOK.—See Purification. POLLUX.—See Dioscuri. POLYGAMY.—See Marriage. POLYTHEISM.-See God, and Idolatrt. POMEGRANATE (fusn rimmon, p6a, granatum). —There can be no doubt of the identity of this tree. Its Arab, name, rummAn, is plainly of the same origin. Its botanical name is Pumca Granatum, L., of the order Oranatece. It is 10-15 feet high, with oblong lanceolate deciduous leaves, a woody-leathery top-shaped calyx, five to seven scarlet petals, very numerous stamens in several rows, and.an ovary with two tiers of cells, three in the lower and five in the upper tier. The fruit is apple-shaped, crowned by the lobes of the woody calyx, yellowish or brownish, with a blush of red, and contains very numerous angular seeds, surrounded by a juicy pulp. It grows wild in N. Syria and possibly in Gilead. The fruit is of two varieties, the sweet and the acid. The pomegranate is repeatedly mentioned in the ]£oran as one of the trees of Paradise. It is constantly alluded to in Arab stories. The Scripture allusions to the pomegranate are also frequent. The spies brought pomegranates (Nu 1323). The Israelites in the wilderness of Zin (Nu 20s) lamented the pomegranates of Egypt, along with its figs and vines. Moses, in recounting the good things of Canaan, did not forget them (Dt 88). Saul abode under a pomegranate tree (1 S 142). Solomon compares the temples of his bride to a piece of the fruit (Ca 43), and her whole person to an orchard of them (v.13). The beautiful * This perhaps explains the name Golgotha, (the place of a skull,' Mt 2733, Mk 1522, Lk 2333 (RV), Jn 191'. POMMEL PONTUS 15 flower is alluded to (6U 712), and the juice or wine as a beverage (82). The withering or barrenness of this tree was a sign of desolation (Jl I12, Hag 219). The fruit was embroidered (Ex 28s3), and sculptured (1 K 718, etc.). It was also sculptured on the Egyptian monuments. It is mentioned in Sir 459. Numerous places were named from this tree, as Rimmon (Jos 153J), Gath-rimmon (2126), En-rimmon (Neh II29). The pomegranate is as extensively cultivated and as highly prized now as in ancient times. The beautifully striped pink and crystal grains are shelled out, and brought to table on plates. The acid sort is served with sugar. Rose-water is sometimes sprinkled over the grains. The juice of the acid sort is sweetened as a beverage, and also used in salads. The rind is used in tanning. It is also a powerful anthel-mintic, principally against the tape-worm. A knife used in cutting the rind turns black, as does ulso the section of the rind, from the formation of tannate of iron. G. E. Post. POMMEL (from Old Fr. pomel, dim. of pomme ; Lat. pomum, an apple) is the tr. in 2 Ch 4UM6-13 of rta gullah, which in the parallel passage, 1 K 74iM«;.43) is tr. 'bowl.' RV gives 'bowl' in 2 Ch also. The reference is to the' bowl- or globe-shaped portion of capitals of the two pillars in the temple' (Oxf. Heb. Lex.), so that pommel (which like the Heb. word contains the idea of roundness) is not unsuitable. Wyclif uses the word, not only of the round end of the handle of a sword, but of the whole handle, Jg 3^ 'the pomel (1388 ether hilte) folwide the yren in the wound.' In Pr 25" (1388) he uses it in the orig. sense of an apple, ' A goldun pomel (Vulg. mala aurea) in beddis of silver is he that spekith a word in his time.' J. Hastings. POKD.—See Pool. PONTIUS PILATE.—See Pilate. PONTUS (IIcWos) was a name used in a vague and loose way to designate certain large tracts of country in the north-eastern part of Asia Minor adjoining the Black Sea (which was often called by the Greeks ' the Sea'). Originally, the name was applied to all or any part of the Black Sea coasts; and the Attic orators regularly use it of theTauric Chersonese (Crimea) and the Cimmerian Bosporus; * and comparatively late writers also, such as Trogus, Diodorus, etc., sometimes apply the name to those remote parts. Herodotus, vii. 95, on the other hand, speaks of the Greeks of Pontus contributing 100 ships to the fleet of Xerxes in 480 B.C., obviously meaning the south Euxine coasts in general; and Xenophon in the Anabasis uses it of the eastern parts of the south coast. The term, as thus applied, was rather a mere description than a real name. It was only at a late period, and through political circumstances, that 'Pontus' began to have a definite sense as a geographical name. i. The first Kingdom of Pontus.—In the confusion that followed on the death of Alexander the Great, an adventurer named Mithridates managed to found a new state beyond the Halys in north-eastern Asia Minor, about B.C. 302. He assumed the title of king probably towards the end of B.C. 281, and was afterwards known as Ktistes, ' the Founder.' In later times the vanity of the dynasty descended from him invented the story of a legendary kingdom in older times, ruled by a Persian noble family ; but that older kingdom rests on no historical basis. The kingdom ruled by the Mithridatic dynasty was, to a great extent, * Bosporus was the term which afterwards was employed to designate those regions when formed into a kingdom. part of the country previously called Cappadocia: it also included some of the mountain tribes near the Black Sea coasts, and part of Paphlagonia. But, as a political unity, it required a name. Polybius in the 2nd cent. B.C. called it' Cappadocia towards the Euxine,' and Strabo mentions that some called it 'Pontus,' and some 'Cappadocia towards the Pontus.' * Such elaborate names could never establish themselves in common use: Cappadocia was fixed as the name of the kingdom which included the centre and south of the country hitherto embraced under that title, and Pontus as the name of the northern kingdom which was ruled by the Mithridatic dynasty for 218 years, B.C. 281-63. The extent of the name variea according to the varying bounds of the kingdom, which was sometimes larger (including Armenia Minor, etc.), sometimes smaller. The meaning of the name Pontus changed in B.C. 64. It had previously designated a kingdom, and that kingdom in that year ceased to exist. The Romans then incorporated part of the former kingdom in the empire, constituting it along with BlTHYNIA as the double province Bithynia et Pontus, which continued to exist with hardly altered limits for more than three centuries until the reorganization of the provinces by Diocletian. The rest of the old kingdom of Pontus was broken up by Pompey into a number of parts, which were treated in diverse ways; several self-governing cities were constituted; Comaria was governed by a priest; Gazelonitis and Pontic Armenia were bestowed on Deiotarus, the Galatian chief and king. The rapid vicissitudes of that part of Pontus in the following years cannot here be followed up in detail. Pharnaces, son of Mithridates the Great, had been made by Pompey king of Bosporus, ruling over the countries on the north-eastern coasts of the Euxine; but he took advantage of the civil wars to reinstate himself in his father's realm of Pontus, till he was defeated by Csesar in B.C. 47. The kingdom of Pontus was reconstituted by Antony in B.C. 39, and given first to Darius, son of Pharnaces, and afterwards, in B.C. 36, to Polemon.f Polemon founded a dynasty of kings who ruled over Pontus until A.D. 63. ii. History of Pontus in New Testament Times.—The new Pontic dynasty touched Christian history in several noteworthy ways; and it also was distinguished by coming into relationship with the reigning emperors, Caligula and still more nearly Claudius. The second wife of Polemon I. was Pythodoris, daughter of Antonia and granddaughter of Antony the Triumvir. Pythodoris reigned as queen of Pontus in her own right after her husband's death in B.C. 8 until some time after A.D. 21; but the history of the kingdom is quite unknown in her reign, and an interval seems to have occurred at her death. Her daughter Tryphsena reigned in association with her own son, Polemon II., during part of the reigns of Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. The one date which is certain is that Caligula i made Polemon II. king of Pontus and Bosporus in A.D. 38. Previously, Tryplwena seems to have lived for some tinie in Cyzicus, and she had married Cotys, king of Thrace (who died in A.D. 19). She perhaps retired to the neighbourhood of Iconium at some time during the reign of Claudius. Her father, Polemon I., had at one time governed a kingdom or state in the south, * K«!TiT«3«*/* ri trspi rav Eii&wvov, Polyb. V. 43. 1; 4} irpct tv n>>» Kxirx-xSoxiu, Strab. p. 534. t Son of Zenon, the rhetor of Laodioea in the Lyous valley, see vol. ii. p. 86. J Caligula's grandmother, Antonia, was half-sister of Try-phsena's grandmother. The first year of Tryphsena and Polemoa ended (according to the current Pontie year) in autumn 38; and their coins are known as late as their eighteenth year (Imhoof-Blumer in Zft. f. Numism. xx. p. 268; Wroth, Catalogue itKi txixvpttira-ir*, XX. vii. S. J Gazelonitis must also be added, as stated above. PONTUS PONTUS 17 kingdom of Polemon II. from 37 to 41, and if so, eastern Pontus also would naturally be comprised in his dominions. Moreover, Archelaus' kingdom was made into a Roman province in a.d. 17, but Trapezus and Cerasus, two cities of Pontus Cappadocicus (Trapezus being made capital of it by Trajan), dated from A.D. 63 as era, and this era must according to analogy be interpreted as the year when they were taken into the Koman Empire by being incorporated in a province. Now A.D. 63 was the year when Polenion's Pontic kingdom was taken into the empire, and the cities of Pole-moniacus date from that year as era (so Zela and Neocsesareia); hence Cerasus and Trapezus would seem to have been included in the kingdom of Polemon II.; and if so, then presumably all Cap-padocicus was similarly included. The difference of name, Polemoniacus and Cappadocicus, in that case, probably began only in A.D. 63, and was due to the fact that the eastern half of the kingdom was attached to the province Cappadocia and named accordingly, while the western half was attached to the province Galatia, and retained its former name Polemoniacus in distinction from the older Pontus Galaticus. An inscription, dating probably between 63 and 78, mentions Pontus Polemoniacus and Pontus Galaticus as parts of the province Galatia; * but does not mention Pontus Cappadocicus, thus proving that the latter was not in Galatia; and, as we know that Trapezus by that time was Koman, Cappadocia is the only province to which it could have been attached. Such is the probable sequence of events. Subsequently, Pontus Galaticus and Polemoniacus, after being included in the united provinces of Galatia and Cappadocia from about A.D. 78 to 106, were attached permanently to Cappadocia, when the two provinces were again separated by Trajan. Such is the arrangement described by Ptolemy. Yet the three names, Pontus Galaticus, Polemoniacus, Cappadocicus, persisted, with their separate capitals, Amasia, Neocassareia, Trapezus, implying that they were considered for administrative purposes as distinct regions of the vast province of Cappadocia, to which all three were henceforward attached. iii. The Name Pontus in the New Testament.—When the name Pontus occurs in the NT, what are we to understand by it amid this puzzling complicacy of three or even four distinct regions, all bearing the name ? As we have seen, the simple name Pontus, without any qualifying epithet, was regularly employed to designate the Koman province united with Bithynia; t and the writers of the NT seem to have observed this rule of ordinary usage. In 1 P I1 Pontus is clearly the province. Pew could doubt this; and Hort has proved it beyond all question in his posthumous edition of part of the Epistle. Similarly, when the Jew Aquila, who bore a Roman name, is called a man ./f Pontus, Ac 182, it is practically certain that the province Pontus is meant. The Roman name demands a Roman connexion. The suggestion that he was. originally a slave from Pontus Polemoniacus, who had been set free in Rome, seems impossible, as the freedman would not retain his slave nationality: the statement that Aquila was a man of Pontus, implies a lasting and present characteristic. Equally improbable is it that Pontus Galaticus is meant; for in the imperial system that district was merely a part of the province Galatia. In fact, there is practically no * CIL iii. Suppl. 6818, with the remarks in Eamsay, Historical Geography of Asia Minor, p. 253. t Except, of course, where the context imposed another sense without any need for a distinctive epithet. Koiyov Uevrov on coins of Neoceesareia the capital of Polemoniacus means only that region : similarly, on coins of Zela rev Tihvtvj. Il TIovtou on coins of Amasia means Pontus Galaticus. VOL. IV.—2 doubt that the intention in Ac 183 is to state that Aquila, though in recent time resident in Rome, was a provincial from Pontus, and not one who originally belonged to the city. The question then arises whether Aquila was a civis Romanus of the province Pontus (as St. Paul was a civis Romanus of the province Cilicia). That, however, is impossible, for he ranked to the Romans as a Jew, not as a Roman : the edict of Claudius, Ac IS2, would not have applied to him if he had been a Roman either by birth or as the freedman of a Roman master; * but, being a Jew by nation, a provincial residing in Rome, he was expelled by the terms of the edict. The remaining case is not so clear. In Ac 2° among the Jews and proselytes in Jerusalem at the Feast of Pentecost are mentioned ' dwellers in Judsea and Cappadocia, Ppntus and Asia.' That list presents many difficulties, and is probably not composed by the author of Acts, but quoted by him from an older authority to whom he was indebted for the account of an incident which he himself had not seen (see PHEYGIA, vol. iii. p. 867). Hence it is not possible to say whether Pontus there means the Roman province .united with Bithynia, or the whole country with its three distinct parts. But the former is much more probable, for Jews tended to prefer the peaceful and civilized countries, finding them much more suitable for trade and residence; and therefore it is exceedingly unlikely that there were many, if any, Jews in Polemoniacus in the year A.D. 29 or 30. Pontus Galaticus with the great city of Amasia would be more likely to contain Jews. But there is no possibility of reaching certainty about that unique and peculiar passage j and, being unique, it is less important. iv. Spread of Christianity in Pontus.—The Churches of Pontus addressed by St. Peter (1 P I1) were evidently mainly composed of converted pagans. When that Epistle was composed, it must be concluded that Christianity had already taken strong root in Pontus, as contrasted with its feeble hold on Lycia and Pamphylia, which are not addressed in the Epistle.t Pontus lay so far from the earliest lines of the Christian propaganda that the strength of the new religion in it is, certainly, to be regarded as an argument in favour of a date later than a.d. 64. J It is highly probable that Christianity spread thither by sea from the Asian coasts, and even from Rome (as Hort in the remarkable essay appended to his posthumous edition of 1 Peter is inclined to believe), for" it is improbable that any missionary movement occurred at so early a date on the lines leading north from Syria or Cilicia through the barbarous lands of Cappadocia and Pontus Polemoniacus. Thus it was the cities of the Ora Politico, or Pontic coast lands which earliest received the new religion; and probably Amastris was its chief centre at first. By a.d. 111-113 it had spread so strongly in the province Pontus that Pliny, governor of Bithynia et Pontus, when making a progress through Pontus, wrote to Trajan Ep. 96 (probably from Amastris, where he wrote the following letter, 98), giving a remarkable account of the spread of Christianity. He says that many persons, men and women, of all ages and every rank in the state, not merely in the great cities, but also in the villages and on farm lands, were affected by the new superstition, the temples were to a great extent deserted,,the sacrificial ritual had been for a long time interrupted, * Many excellent authorities, in defiance of this obvious and inevitable fact, regard him as a freedman. See Sanday-Headlam, Romans, p. 418 ff. t The failure of Cilicia is due to its being part of the province Syria-Cilicia, and not included in the special group of provinces contemplated, viz. Asia Minor. } See The Church in the Roman Empire before 170, p. 284. 18 PONTUS POOL and few persons were found to buy animals for sacrifice. This state of the province was of long standing (diu), and some wno were accused declared that they had abandoned Christianity 20 or 25 years ago * Hence we cannot believe that less than 40 to 50 years had elapsed since the evangelization of the province began. While it is evident that Pliny is speaking of the province in general, it is noteworthy that it was in Pontus that he finally became so strongly impressed with the evil, and wrote to Trajan for advice about it. Towards the middle of the 2nd cent. Lucian confirms the testimony of Pliny (not that any confirmation is needed to establish the truth of that official report), alluding incidentally to Pontus, the native country of Alexander the impostor of Abo-nouteichos, as 'filled full with Epicureans and atheists and Christians' (Alex. 25). Like Phrygia, Pontufe appears in the 2nd cent, as a region where Christianity was so strong that its history was no longer that of a militant religion against paganism, but rather of a contest of sect against sect. The heretic Marcion was born at Sinope in Pontus about 120. Aquila, the translator of the OT into Greek, was also a native of Pontus. From the coast lands of the province, however, Christianity spread inland only slowly. Incidentally we observe here that it is necessary to distinguish carefully between the different meanings of the name Pontus, for neglect to do so has led some good scholars into needless difficulties. Thus, when Gregory Thaumaturgus was made bishop of Neo-csesareia in Pontus about A.D. 240, he is said to have found only seventeen Christians in the country ; t and, though no reliance can be placed on the exact number, still a clear tradition, doubtless trustworthy, is implied that Gregory had gone to a practically pagan country. This has been often set in opposition to the facts implied in 1 P I1 and in Pliny. But Gregory preached in Pontus Polemoniacus, whose capital was Neoctesareia, while the older authorities speak of the province; and the contrast between the rapid spread in the one and the failure in the other is due to the tendency of the new religion to be restricted to the imperial bounds, to prefer civilized regions to uncivilized (Polemoniacus being remote and backward compared to the province), and to flourish best in districts where there had long been a strong Jewish element to prepare the soil. Still the inner lands of Pontus appear to have been Christianized to a considerable extent during the 3rd cent, by the work of Gregory Thaumaturgus and other less famous missionaries. Such martyrs as Theodorus Tiro at Amasia, Theodorus the Soldier at Heracleopolisf and Eukhaita, with many others,! are mentioned in the latest persecutions under Diocletian, Maximian, and Licinius. Before the time of Constantine the ecclesiastical system in all the districts of Pontus had been organized to a very considerable degree of completeness, not indeed so perfectly as in Pisidia and Lycaonia, but more thoroughly than in Galatia (see GALATIA, vol. ii. p. 85). For example, Hierocles gives a list of five cities in Pontus Polemoniacus, and three of these were represented at the Council of Kicsea in A.D. 325. But, as a whole, the evidence points to the 3rd and even the 4th cents, as the period when Christianity spread through inner Pontus, while * Viginti quoque, editio princeps; viginti quinque, conjecture. t Qtegory Nyss. Vtt. Greg. Thaum. xlvi. pp. 899. 954 (ed. Migne) t Wrongly called Heraclcia in the extant Acta (the best being the Armenian, translated by Conybeare, Monuments of Early Christianity, p. 224): it bore the double name Sebasto-polis-Heracleopolis, and was not far from Eukhaita ; see Acta Sanctorum, 1 Feb. vol. ii. pp. 23, 891. § In the Martyrolog. Hieronym. the martyrs' names are often very corrupt (see Duchesne's Index, s.vv. Amasia, Neoctesarea, Bebastia); see also the Syriac Martyrology, 18th Aug. the 1st and 2nd cents, were the time when the sea-coast, i.e. the province Pontus, was evangelized. Hence it is on the coast, at Sinope, that we lind an early martyr, like Phocas the bishop of Trajan'3 persecution.* About A.D. 295 Diocletian reorganized the provincial system and broke up the large provinces. The Pontic districts were then completely rearranged. The province Pontus was partitioned between Paphlagonia and Diospontus. The latter, which was afterwards named Helenopontus, after the mother of Constantine, contained also parts of Paphlagonia, Pontus Galaticus, and Polemoniacus. Pontus Polemoniacus retained its name, but was reduced in size, losing Zela to Diospontus, and Sebasteia to Armenia Minor. Pontus Galaticus disappeared entirely, losing Amasia, etc., to Diospontus, Sebastopolis-Heracleopolis to Armenia Minor, Comana, Ibora, and Zela to Polemoniacus, and probably some parts to Galatia the Byzantine province. The ecclesiastical organization followed this new arrangement. W. M. Kamsay. POOL is the trn in OT of three Heb. words.— 1. d:s '&gam, ' pond' of stagnant or muddy water, from [d:n] to be troubled or muddy. The ' ponds,' RV ' pools,' of Egypt (Ex 719 85 Slibpvyes, paludes), were probably the sheets of stagnant water left by the inundation of the Nile. In Ps 107s6 1148 the word is rendered ' standing water,' RV ' a pool of water' (\lpvq, stagnum); in Is 1423 357411S42^' pool' or 'pools' (i\os, palus, stagnum); and in Jer 5132 it is put for 'reeds,' or reedy places (avcT^fiara, paludes). In Is 1910, whilst the Vulg. renders by lacuna, the LXX has fO0os, ' beer' (see art. FlSH-Pogl). 2. nij}9 mikveh, or mpc mikyah; a place where waters flow together, from nip (Niph. 'assemble'). The word is trd differently upon each occasion of its use. In Gn I10 it is rendered the 'gathering together' (of the waters) when the earth and the seas were created (ra avert para, congregatione3 [aquarum]). In Ex 719 the 'pools,' RV 'ponds' (t& ?\rj, lacus), of Egypt were probably reservoirs for the storage of water, as opposed to the stagnant water ('dgam) left by the inundation. In Lv II36 it is translated 'plenty,' RV ' gathering' (of water) {awayuyfi, congregatio [aquarum]). In Is 22U the ' ditch,' RV ' reservoir' (iidup, lacus), made between the two walls at Jerusalem appears to have been formed by damming up the valley. 3. nj"i? berekhah, a ' pool,' or an ' artificial tank' hence the Arabic birket, and the Spanish al-berca. The LXX generally tr. the word by Ko\u|U.j3ij0pa, but in four instances (2 S 213 412,1K 2238,2 K 2020) by Kpfvn and in one (Ca 74) by \1/j.vtj. The Vulg, has piscina and once (Neh 214) aquceductus. In the NT (Jn 52. 4. 7 97) KO\v/t/3?j0pa is used. In Ps 84", where the plural occurs, AV reads 'rilleth the pools,' whilst RV has 'covereth it with blessings' (i.e. berdkhtith instead of berekhGth) ; with this may be compared the ' valley of Berachah,' koiA&s sb\oyla.s, vallis bene-dictionis, 2 Ch 2026. The pools were formed by building a dam across a valley, or by excavation ; and they were supplied by surface drainage, by springs, or by watei brought from a distance by conduits. They allowed the water to deposit any sediment it contained ; and they were often connected with aqueducts and baths. They also frequently supplied water for irrigation, and were open to the air. The pools near towns were usually rectangular in form, and had their sides lined with water-tight cement. They were sometimes surrounded by ' porticoes (oroai), in which bathers undressed themselves and lounged before or after bathing* The * The best Acta are the Armenian in Conybeare's Monuments of Early Christianity, p. 103; see also Acta'Sanctorum, July 14, vol. iii. p. 600 ft. pool of Siloam had four such porticoes, and remains of them have been found by excavation ; Bethesda, which was a double pool, had five porticoes (Ju 52), one on each of the four sides, and the fifth in the middle between the two pools. Pools are mentioned in the Bible at Hebron (2 S 4J2), Gibeon (2 S 213), Samaria (1 K 22SS), and Hesh-bon (Ec 2"); and in general terms in Is 1413 1910 and Nah 28. At or near Jerus. there were several pools : the Upper P. (2 K18", Is 73 362); the Lower P. (Is 22"); the Old P. (Is 22"); the King's P. (Neh 214); the P. of Siloah, RV Shelah (Neh 315), apparently the same as the P. of Siloam (Jn 9'); the ' P. that was made' (Neh 316); ' a' P., EV ' the' P. made* by Hezekiah (2 K 2020); and the P. of Bethesda (Jn 5a-4-7). Josephus also mentions the Serpents' P. (BJ v. iii. 2); Solomon's P. (BJv. iv. 2); the P. Amygdalon, and the P. Struthius (BJ V. xi. 4). Many of the ancient pools may still be seen in Palestine. The best known are those at Hebron and Jerusalem, and the ' pools of Solomon,' near Bethlehem, which are possibly the ' pools of water' (Ec 2s) that Solomon constructed to irri-gate his gardens and orchards. These pools are three in number, and they have been formed by building solid dams of masonry across the valley of Urtas. They have a total capacity of 44,147,000 gallons, and are so arranged that the water from each of the higher pools can be run off into the one immediately below it. The water was conveyed to Jerusalem by a conduit. C. W. Wilson. POOR.—1. This word, especially when it represents the Heb. *jy, is used sometimes with a semi-religious connotation, the nature of which it is the object of the present article to explain. In order to understand the term satisfactorily, it is necessary to bear in mind the meaning of the cognate verb, Heb. njK, Arab, 'and ('ana'"). The Arab, 'and means to be lowly, submissive, obedient, especially by becoming a captive, and so the ptcp. is often used simply in the sense of a captive * : the Heb. fijlf means analogously to be humbled, Is 314 (RV ' abase himself), in the causative conj. to humble, mishandle, esp. by depriving of independence, or liberty, or recognized rights (EV usually 'afflict'): cf. Gn 166 (RV ' dealt hardly'), Jg 19M (' humble'), —in both, parallel with ' do to her (them) that which is good in thy (your) eyes,' Gn 3160 (of the maltreatment of wives by a husband), Ex 2222-23 (of the ill-treatment of a widow or orphan), Jg jgs. e. is (gf ill.using Samson); and often of the ill-treatment of a nation in bondage, as Gn 1513 (|| ' to serve'), Ex I"-" (ef. v.13 'make to serve'); see also 2 S 710 (Ps 8922), Ps 945.t 2. The subst. 'anl (EV mostly 'afflicted,' or ' poor') thus means properly one humbled or bowed down, especially by oppression, deprivation of rights, etc., but also, more generally, by misfortune : as the persons thus ' humbled' would commonly be the ' poor,' the term came to denote largely the class whom we should call the ' poor,' arid ' poor' is thus one of the conventional renderings of the word: it must, however, be remembered that 'anl does not really mean ' poor,' and that while in the English word 'poor' the prominent idea is the poverty of the person or persons so described, in the Heb. 'anl the prominent idea is that of the ill-treated, or the miserable : in other words, the 'anl, while often, no doubt, a person in need, was primarily a person suffering some kind of social disability or distress. 3. eh rash, is the Heb. word which expresses distinctively the idea of poverty ; but this occurs only 1 S IS23, 2 S 121- 3. *', Ps 823 (RV 'destitute'), Ec 4H 58, and 15 times in Proverbs. * See Eahlfs, ')$; und ljj; in den Psaltnen, 1892, pp. 67-69. t Comp. the cognate subst. '8nl, state of being humbled or bowed dawn, EV ' affliction,' Gn 16" 31*2, Ex 3'-",1s 481" al. It is worth noticing (Rahlfs, p. 75) that 'dshir, 'rich,' never appears as the opposite of 'uni, while it is the true antithesis of rash (2 S 121- 2. < Pr 142» 1823 222- 7 286). ' Poor' is also sometimes the tr. of 'ebyon, * needy'; and often that of dal (prop, thin, reduced, feeble): cf. Driver, Parallel Psalter, pp. 450, 452. 'Ebyon is once opposed to 'ashvt, Ps 492 ; an(j dal is opposed to it 6 times, Ex 3015 pr lyis 22W 28U Ru 310. It is to be regretted that there is no English word which would both suit all the passages in which 'dni occurs, and also indicate its connexion with dnah, 'inndh, and 'era. ' % 4. In the laws of Ex 2225, Lv 19W (=2322), Dt 1511 2412> "" 15, now, 'anl is used as a purely colourless designation of the persons whom we should describe as the ' poor.' But in the prophets and poetical books, esp. the Psalms, we see gradually other ideas attaching themselves to the term. Thus allusions are made, especially by the prophets, to the oppression of the 'dniyyim; at the hands of a high - handed and cruel aristocracy (Am 84 [Heb. marg.], Is 314-15 102 327 [Heb. marg.], Ezk 1649 [in Sodom], 18]2 222S>; Job 244- »• ", Pr 30"); so that they become the objects of special regard on the part of a righteous king (Jer 2218, Ps 72-- *•la), or individual (Ezk 1817, Is 58', Zee 710, Ps 823, Pr 22^ 319-20 ; cf. Pr 1421 [Heb. text], Dn 427), and especially of Jehovah (Is 1432, of. v.80; implicitly, also, in the other passages quoted). 6. pomp, the allusions to the oppressions of the ' needy (0'}V2K) in Am 26 41 512 8*-6, Is 327, Jer &* &* and elsewhere, and of the 'reduced' (D'^5, EV 'poor') in Am 27 41 5U 83, Is 102 etc. (both words often in parallelism with 'aniyyvrri); and the manner in which it is promised that they will he in a special degree under the protection of the ideal king (Ps 72-*-i£ 13, Is 114), and that—like the •dniyyim in Is 1430--they win be the first to benefit, when society is regenerated, and J" establishes His ideal kingdom (Is 1430 25* 2919). 6. So in Ps 1827 God is spoken of as saving the 'afflicted (or humbled) people' (')j; oy), but as abasing the ' haughty eyes' ; and in Is 26°, when the tyrannical city has been destroyed, it is mentioned, as a special ground for satisfaction, that the 'anl and the dalllm may then tread unmolested over its ruins. 'Anl is used also of Israel, suffering in the wilderness or in exile or war, and regarded as implicitly or ideally righteous, and eliciting in consequence Jehovah's compassion, Ps 6810, Is 4117 4913 5121 5411, cf. Hab 314. In Zeph 312 the ideal Israel of the future, who survive after the coming judgment has removed from Jerusalem the 'proudly exulting' ones, so that none will any more be ' haughty' in God's holy mountain, are characterized as a ' humbled and poor people' (VjJ ')St ny), who will ' take refuge ' in the name of J", and (v.13) be free from all iniquity. Perhaps, indeed, the expression means also Israel generally in Is 26e. 7. These passages show that 'anl ('afflicted,' ' poor'), as also its frequent parallel 'ebyon (' needy'), and, though somewhat less distinctly, dal (EV also mostly ' poor'), came gradually to imply more than persons who were merely in some kind of social subjection, or material need : they came to denote the godly poor, the suffering righteous, the persons who, whether ' bowed down,'or ' needy,' or 'reduced,' were the godly servants of Jehovah. It is evident that in ancient Israel, especially in later times, piety prevailed more among the humbler classes than among the wealthier and ruling classes: indeed the latter are habitually taken to task by the prophets for their cruel and unjust treatment of the former. In particular, as Rahlfs (p. 89) observes, 'dni acquired thus, not indeed a religious meaning, but a religious colouring. This colouring appears most frequently in the Psalms : note the following passages, in which, if they are compared carefully with the context, it will become evident that the 'dniyyim (frequently || with the 'needy') are substantially identical with those who are elsewhere in the same Psalms called ' the godly,' ' the righteous,' 20 POOR POPLAE 'the faithful,' etc.: Ps 912 (Heb. text*; RV) 102. 9. 9.12 (Hel) text * . RV) [comp. 910 ' those that know thy name' and 'that seek after thee,' 1017 8815), 34« 3510-10 (delivered by J"), 3714 (cf. v.12), 4017 = 70s (' I am 'ani and needy'; so 861 10922), 7419-21 102title 1091614012; see also Is 662, Job 3428 366-15 (cf. the cognate subst. 'dni, AV 'trouble,' or 'affliction,' in Ps 913 2518 317 889 1195U- m- 153, of the Psalmists' own sufferings: also 442410710"41). Most of these passages—indeed, except Ps 1827, probably all—are post - exilic ; and reflect the social and religious conditions of the post-exilic community : the religious ' colouring ' of 'awl, which had been previously in process of acquisition, was then confirmed. The troubles of wnich the 'ani complains are, however, not poverty, but chiefly social and religious wrongs. 8. From 'ani is to be carefully distinguished a word with which it has been sometimes very needlessly confused, 'anaw. While 'ani means one who is ' humbled' or ' bowed down' by adverse external circumstances, 'anaw means one who is 'humble' in disposition and character, ' humble - minded' (Cheyne, OP, 98), or, to speak more specifically, one who bows voluntarily under the hand of God, and is ' submissive to the Divine will' (Cheyne, Introd. to Is. 64 f., 266). It thus, unlike 'ani, has from the beginning an essentially moral and religious connotation. In AV and RV it is mostly rendered ' meek'; but meekness is predicated of a person's attitude towards other men, whereas 'anaw denotes rather a man's attitude towards God ; so that' humble' would be the better rendering. 'Anaw is less common than 'awl: it occurs in Nil 12s (of Moses); in the prophets, Am 27 84 (Heb. textt), Is II4 2919 327 (Heb. text J) 611, Zeph 23; in the poet, books, Ps 918(Heb. textj), 1017 2226 259-9 342 3711 ('the humble shall inherit the earth'), 6932 7691476149", and the Heb. margin of Pr 3s4 (opposed to n'?b ' scorners'), 1619 (opposed to ' the proud ; cf. Sir id14 [Heb.]),—in all, of the ' humble,' either as victimized by wicked oppressors, or as the objects of Jehovah's regard, and recipients of His salvation.§ The cognate subst. anawah occurs Ps 1835 (of J"), 454,|| Zeph23 ('seek righteousness, seek humility'), Pr 1533=1812 ('before honour is humility'), 224. 9. The Heb. marg. (Kere~) substitutes thrice (Am 8*, Is 32?, Ps 918) humbled (' poor') for hnmble of the text (Kethibh); and five times (Ps 912 1012, Pr 3*11421I6I9) humble for humbled ('poor') of the text (Kethibh),—in each case, it seems (cf. Rahlfs, p. 54 f.), deeming the correction to express an idea better suited to the context (in Am 84, Is 32', Ps 918 the parallel clause has needy ; in Pr 33l I6I9 humble forms evidently a juster antithesis to ' scorner' and ' proud' than afflicted or ' poor ')• The correction is certainly right in Pr 33* I6I9, probably also in Am 84; in the other passages it does not seem to be necessary. 10. The two terms which have been here discussed seem, in fact, to have been two of the more prominent and distinctive designations of a party in ancient Israel, which appears to have first begun to form itself during the period of the later pre-exilic prophets, but which, during the Exile and subsequently, acquired a more marked and distinctive character—the party, viz., of the faithful and God-fearing Israelites, who held together, and formed an ecclesiola in eeclesia, as opposed to the * The Heb. marg. (Kerf) has in these passages the humble (EVm ' meek') : see § 9. t The Heb. marg. (dniyyi), followed by RV, yields, however, a more suitable sense here; it would also be better to read 'dniyyi in 2' (cf. Is 102). } Heb. marg. (jTei"i>) the poor; see § 9. § With Is 611 (LXX, wrongly, trrmxii, and so in the quotation, > Lk 418) cf. Mt 115=Lk 722. : II Where ' ride on on behalf of... meekness (humility)' means ' that the king addressed is to take the field on behalf of the f humble against their proud oppressors (see Cheyne or Kirk-Patrick, ad loc). worldly and indifferent, often also paganizing and persecuting, majority. The Psalms, especially the Psalms of 'complaint,' abound with allusions to these two opposed parties, the opposition between which seems to have been intensified in the post-exilic period, till it culminated, in the age of Antiochus Epiphanes, in the struggle between the nationalists and the Hellenizers. The God-fearing party are described by many more or less synonymous designations, such as 'those that fear (or love) J",'' those that seek (or wait for) J",' ' the servants of J",' the 'godly' (luisldim), the 'righteous,' etc.; from the point of view of their social condition they are specially the 'tlniyyim or (to ^.dopt the conventional rendering) the 'poor,' from the point of view of their character they are the tinawim or the 'humble.' The party opposed to them are the ' wicked,' the ' evil-doers, the 'proud,' the 'haters,' 'enemies,' or 'persecutors' of the Psalmists and their co-religionists, who are described as 'seeking their life' and 'delighting in their hurt,' etc., and as setting themselves in various ways to dishonour Jehovah, and bring reproach upon His servants (cf. Cheyne, JEL pp. 114-125).* The former party was that out of which a considerable number of the Psalms appear to have sprung, especially those which possess a representative character, and in which the Psalmist seems to give expression not simply to his own experiences and spiritual emotions, but also to those of a circle of similarly circumstanced godly compatriots. See, further, Gratz, Vie Psalmen (1882), 20-37 (whose view, however, that the 'tinatuim were Levites, is not probable); Isidore Loeb, 'La Litterature des Pauvres' in REJ, 1890-92 (Nos. 40-42, 45, 46, 48), also published separately, Paris, 1892 (clever: exemplifies very fully the characteristics of the ' poor,' especially in the Psalms, but exaggerates the idealism of the Heb. poets, and also generalizes too freely); Bahlfs, op. eit. Hupfeld (on Ps 913) contended that 'Jj; and 1JJJ were used without any distinction of meaning, both signifying afflicted, with the collateral idea of humble; but this view is antecedently improbable, and not required by the facts.t Ges. (Thes.) treated both words as meaning properly afflicted, but regarded 'anaw as having always the collateral idea of humble, ineek. Recent scholars, as Delitzsch and Cheyne (both on Ps 9]3), Lagarde, MUth. i. 81, Rahlfs, pp. 62-68, 73-80 (cf. Konig, Lgb. ii. 134, 76), more correctly distinguish 'ani, 'bowed down,' from 'anaw, ' one who bows himself,'—Del. and Cheyne, however, thinking also that, as affliction is the school of humility, and a man may be 'bowed down' with consent of his own will, 'dni acquired secondarily the sense of 'humble.* It seems best, with Rahlfs, to keep the words entirely distinct: the 'aniyyim were, no doubt, known to be also ' humble,' and so could be opposed to the ' proud,' Ps 1827, or classed with the ' stricken in spirit,' Is 662 ; but the fact is not expressed by the term used. It would be easier, if necessary, to read one word for the other, than to give one word the meaning of the other. The LXX preserves, on the whole, a consciousness of the distinction between the two words : the translators render 'dni (Kt.) by x-ivvis 13 times, by irra^o'f 38 times, by noruMr 9-10 times, by trpxSs only Zeph 312, Zee 99, Is 266^ and 'anaw (Kt.) by trfttSs 8 times, by trims 3 times, by trTnxos 4 times, by -recx-yves 4 times: in view, however, of the frequency with which ' and 1 are confused in LXX (Driver, Samuel, lxv-lxvii), we cannot be sure that they always read the Heb. text exactly as we do. In the Targ., also (especially in the Psalms, Rahlfs, p. 56f.), the greatly predominant rendering of 'dni is ' poor,'' distressed,' etc., while that of 'dndw is ' humble' (|P)JJ?). And the Vulg.' nearly always renders ani by pauper, egenus, inops, but 'dndw by mitis or mansuetus. S. R. Driver. POPLAR occurs twice in EV (Gn 3037, RVm ' styrax,' Hos 413). The Heb. rift), libneh, signifies 'a white tree.' The LXX in Genesis gives a-rvpd-Kivot=storax, and in Hosea \eiicy = ' poplar.' The authority of the Arab, lubna, which signifies the storax, may be considered decisive as to the meaning of the Hebrew. Styrax officinalis, L., of the order * Rahlfs, following Ewald, calls attention (pp. 5-29) to the numerous similarities of expression and situation characterizing in particular the group of Psalms, 22. 25. 31. 34. 85. 38. 40. C9. 71.102.109; he assigns the group (p. 30 fl.) to the close of the Exile or shortly after. t The note is much abbreviated (the sentence on the original difference of 'ty and Ity being added) in Nowack's revised ed. of Hupfeld's Comm. (1888). POEATHA PORT 21 Styracaceas, is a shrub or tree 6 to 20 feet high, %with ovate to round-ovate leaves, glabrescent at upper, and white-woolly at lower, surface. It bears numerous snowy-white flowers, resembling orange blossoms, 1 to 2 inches broad, and a green drupe-like berry. The officinal storax is the inspissated juice'of the inner layer of the bark. It has an agreeable vanilla-like odour. It was formerly employed in medicine as a stimulant expectorant, but is little used now. The name libneh, 'white,' is well justified by.the snowy-white under surfaces of the leaves, arid the wealth of beautiful white blossoms. No wild tree of the country is more ornamental than this. It is common in thickets from the coast to the sub-alpine regions. In Syria it is called hauz. It has been objected to the rendering ' styrax' (Hos 413) that it is not large enough to give the ' shadow' required, and that therefore 'poplar' should be retained. We have, however, indicated that Styrax officinalis attains a height of 20 feet, and such trees would give a better shade than the tall, cylindrical poplar. Moreover, the poplar is a tree of valleys and plains, growing only by watercourses, while Styrax grows on dry hillsides, in localities similar to those of the oak and terebinth. G. E. Post. POKATHA (xcn'w ; B QapaSdOa, K *apad0a, A Ba/>-Sa6a).—The fourth of the sons of Haman, who were put to death by the Jews (Est 98). The name is probably Persian, and the LXX reading suggests that the true form is Poradatha (mrni3=' given by fate'?). PORCH.—A covered entrance to a building. It is generally outside the main building, and so differs from vestibule which is inside, and from which doors open into the several apartments of the house. Two words in OT denote porch, viz. Heb. D^x ('Mam), found in Ezk 40 only, and d^n ('iilam), which occurs in 1 K, 1 and 2 Ch, Ezk, and Joel. As to the identical meaning of these Heb. words see under Arch. There is another Heb. word )i"npi? (misderun), which EV tr. by porch (Jg 323 ' Then Ehud went into the porch ). This word is not used elsewhere ; and while we do know that some part of a house is denoted, we have no means of saying what part. The versions render little if any aid, nor do the cognates throw any light on the meaning. The root is -rig (seder), a row, series, order. So [hipi? (misderun) might be expected, according to its etymology, to denote something built in line with or according to the form of something else, such as a wing, built along the outside walls of a porch, with sides at right angles to the main building. The word 'uldm or 'UAm is variously applied inOT. 1. It is used of the porch erected to the east of Solomon's temple, 1 K & and 719, and 2 Ch 158 297-17. It was 20 cubits long by 10 broad; its height is not given in 1 K, but in 2 Ch 34 it is said to be 120 cubits high. Now, a porch 20 cubits long, 10 broad; and 120 high would be a monstrosity; indeed the whole verse as it stands is senseless. Kautzsch, Bertheau, Oettli, and Kittel attempt a reconstruction, and all agree that 120 for the height is an evident mistake; A of the LXX, the Syr., and Arab, versions have 20, which is likely enough to be correct, though Bertheau prefers reading 30. Aug. Hirt (Der Tempel Salomons, p. 4), together with the above authorities, excepting Bertheau, decide for 20. If the text is to be upheld, it is to be explained, as by Ewald (Gesch. iii. p. 42), according to the well-known leaning of the Chronicler to exaggeration; but in this case the exaggeration is one which makes the writer ridiculous, and it is far better to emend the text. The similarly situated porch of Ezekiel's temple has the same name, Ezk 4048 4115 (read with Cornill, sing.' porch'). 2. The same word is employed for each of the two porches belonging to Solomon's palace, the ' porch of pillars' 1 K 76, and the 'throne porch' (or place of judgment), 1 K 77. 3. In Ezk the word stands for the two large apartments, one lying at the inner end of the outer gate, the other at the outer end of the inner gate. It is in this connexion that the form 'elam is mostly, though not exclusively, employed. Of these minor porches there were in all six : one at each of the three outer (N. E. S.), and one at each of the three corresponding inner gates. In NT three separate Gr. words are translated in EV ' porch.' 1. Mk 1468 ' And he (Peter) went into the porch.' The Gr. word (xpoatikiov) denotes a covered way leading from the street into the court of a house ; a sort of passage. 'Forecourt' is the word given in RVm. 2. Mt 26" 'And when he (Peter) was gone out into the porch.' This passage is parallel with the former, and, though iruXc&x usually means door, doorway, there can be no doubt that it has here the same signification as vpoaffkiov in Mk. 3. Jn 52 ' Now there is in Jerus. by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Heb. Btthesda, having five porches.' These porches (aroal) are simply five covered ways joining the street with a pool. In three other places, in each case in the phrase ' Solomon's porch,' is the word o-roi found (Jn 1023, Ac 3U 512). This was a portico on the eastern side of the temple building, hence called by Jos. (Ant. xx. ix. 7) txTok dvoToXiKi}, and supposed by him to have survived the destruction of the temple in B.C. 586, and to go back to Solomon's own day (ib. XIV. xi. 5, XX. ix. 2; Wars, v. v. 1). It is generally agreed that this eastern porch, as well as the other porches existing in our Lord's time, were due to Herod's restoration ; yet, if this porch was built so near the time of Josephus, it is singular that he should have thought it to be the work of Solomon. T. W. DAVIES. P0RCIUS FESTUS.—See Festus. PORCUPINE.—See Bittern. PORPOISE.—See Badger. PORT.—This word has in its time played many parts. It has meant (1) carriage of the body, demeanour (from Lat. portare, to carry); (2) a harbour (from Lat. portus); (3) an entrance, a gate (from Lat. porta, through Fr. porte); and (4) a wine (from Oporto, in Portugal). Of these meanings (1) and (3) are now almost obsolete. In AV the only occurrence of the word is Neh 2", where it means ' gate,' the same Heb. word (iswj being translated 'gate' in the same verse. In Ps 914 Pr. Bk. there is an instance of the same moaning, 'That I maye shewe all thy prayses wyth in the portes of the daughter of Syon.' Knox often uses the word, sometimes adding 'gate' as if the classical 'port' might not be familiar. Thus, Hist. p. 408, 'They caused to keep the Ports or Gates and make good Watch about the Towne'; Works, iii. 311, 'Let every man put his sworde upon his thygh, and go in and out from porte to poi te in the tentes; and let every man kil his brother, his neyghbour, and every man his nigh kynsman'; p. 323, ' They be-gynne to syncke to the gates of hell and portes of desperation.' Davies quotes Scott's line in Bonnie Dundee— ' Unheuk the West Port, and let us gae free.' J. Hastings. 22 POKTEK POSSESSION PORTER (-ijnE>, in Ezr 724 Aram, jnp; LXX p and 6vpwp6s, NT Bvpwp&s) occurs frequently in our English versions, especially in the Bks. of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah. It has always the sense of gatekeeper (French portier), being a derivative from porta, ' a gate.' Owing to the ambiguity of the Eng. word, which also means the carrier of a burden (French porteur, from porter, ' to carry'), it would have been well if ' gatekeeper' had been uniformly adopted as the rendering of the Heb. and Gr. terms. BV has at least' doorkeepers' in 1 Ch 1518 1638 235 261-I2-Is, 2 Ch 8". For the employment of 'porters' in public or private buildings, as well as at sheepfolds (Jn 103), see art. Gate in vol. ii. p. 113a; and for the duties and the organization of the Levitical 'porters,' see art. Priests and Levites. J. A. Selbie. POSIDONIUS {Tloi>ios).^-An envoy sent by Nicanor to Judas Maccabseus (2 Mac 1419, cf. 1 Mac 727"31). POSSESS.—The verbs possidere and possidere are said to be distinguished in Latin, the former meaning to ' have in possession,' ' own,' the latter to ' take possession of,' ' win.' The Eng. verb ' to possess' adopted both meanings. In AV it nearly always means ' to take possession of,'' win.' This is sometimes evident, as Nu 1330 ' Let us go up at once and possess it'; Jos 131 'There remaineth yet very much land to be possessed.' But sometimes it is not so, as Gn 22" ' Thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies'; Lk 1812 ' I give tithes of all that I possess'; 2119 ' In your patience possess ye your souls'; * 1 Th 44 ' That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour.' Cf. Fuller, Holy Warre, 14, 'The Saracens had lately wasted Italy, pillaged and burned many churches near Home it self, conquered Spain, invaded Aquitain, and possessed some islands in the mid-land-sea'; and Ac I18 Ehem. 'And he in deede hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquitie.' Sometimes the meaning is to ' enter into possession,' ' inherit,' as Job 73 ' So am I made to possess months of vanity' ('b 7i?ri;n |J); Zee 812 'I will cause the. remnant of this people to possess all these things' ('fij'D)ni, BV 'I will cause ... to inherit '). So ' to be possessed of' a thing is to inherit it, to have it in possession, Jos 229' the land of their possession, whereof they were possessed.' Cf. Fuller, Holy Warre, 213, 'Charles subdued Manfred and Comadine his nephew . . . and was possessed of Sicilie, and lived there.' The active form is found in Knox, Hist. 265, 'Them hee possessed in the Land of Canaan.' To be possessed with a spirit (of good t or evil) is in Ac 817 1616 simply to be ' held' by the spirit, but elsewhere means to be unde,r the influence of a demon (8ai/M>n£6/j.evos). See next article. J. Hastings. POSSESSION means the control or mastery of the * The Greek of this familiar passage is h ry ivefiovy faun xTntriirtii t«? %vj/yyos? iju.£v. There is a various reading xr'ytircttrSt for xrirsirltt well supported and adopted by Tisohendorf. But with either form the meaning is 'gain possession of,' 'win' (RV), not' hold in possession,' which would demand the perf. tense. The Vulg. gives posftidebitis, after which Wye. 'ye schulen welde'; Tind. has ' With youre pacience possesse youre soules,' and he is followed prett.v closely by subsequent versions, the meaning probably always being ' win." But that the modern misunderstanding is not very modern may be shown from Clement Cotton's tr. of Calvin's Isaiah 402 (p. 400), 'He is earnest in giving of hope to the godly, wishing them to possesse their soules in patience, until the Prophets were sent unto them with this joyfull and comfortable message.' The Latin is qua patienter devorent morce tcedium. t Cf. Tindale's Works, i. 97, 'The Faith only maketh a man safe, good, righteous, and the friend of God . . . d tb us with the Spirit of God.' will of an individual by another and superhuman personality. This is a familiar feature in early Jewish psychological beliefs, bound up with the prevalent demonology and angelology of pre-exilian and post-exilian Israel. See art. Demon in vol. i., and for. NT especially, p. 593. That psychological relations were in primitive times construed in material and spatial forms need not be argued here. It is obvious even from a superficial examination of the language employed. Thus in 1 S 1616 the ' evil spirit from God' is said to be upon fix) Saul, and the same preposition is employed in Is 611 of the spirit with which God inspires the prophet. Cf. the use of the phrase 'the hand of the LORD was upon ..." The spirit of God passed into (a nb?) Saul when he prophesied (1 S 1010 1810). On the other hand, in 1 S 1614 the evil spirit is said to terrify (ny?) Saul. In the vision of Micaiah the deceiving spirit proceeds from the presence of Jehovah, and is ' in the mouth' of His prophets (1 K 2222). The same language, therefore, is employed of Divine inspiration as of possession by an evil spirit. The supernatural agency was considered to pass into the individual and take possession of him, and he became visibly affected thereby. The lips of the prophet were for the time under the control of the Divine supernatural will, which spake by the mouth of the. holy prophets (Lk 1"!; but the same power might also cause dumbness, cf. vv.20-2S) While admitting that in some cases we have no more than the inevitable language of metaphor, the cumulative evidence of analogy leads us to refrain from pressing this view unduly. Thus the necromancer was considered to be occupied for the time by the spirit of the dead, and was said to be 21N bus, though language in this case appears to invert the relation (see Necromancy under SORCERY). Similarly, the demon or evil spirit was believed to enter or pass out of the human subject or to be driven out. While subject to his influence, the individual was said to be SaijMvi^nevos (in Arab. ,»j,sru* mejn&n, or possessed by a Jinn). Demon - possession was manifested by anything abnormal in personal appearance, especially in the strange look of the eyes. Among the many stories about Jan related by Doughty in his Arabia Deserta (vol. ii. p. 188 ff.) the following statement by Amm Mohammed is a good illustration :— 'Last year a jinn entered into this woman, my wife, one evening: and we were sitting here, as we sit now; I, and the woman, and Haseyn. I saw it come in her eyes, that were fixed, all in a moment; and she lamented with a labouring in her throat. . . . This poor woman had great white rolling eyes, and little joy in them' (p. 191). Anything of an unhealthy nature, such as an uncanny expression; any disease, and especially epilepsy or insanity, was ascribed to demon-possession. Epilepsy, in fact, derives its name (^jriXi/^is, im\rifla) from having been regarded as due to an assault by demons (cf. Mk 918). In New Hebrew the epileptic patient is called n^rj ' over- powered ' (cf. Syr. |«^**>) In the NT the demon was said to ' bind' (Selu), seize and rend (raTaXa-peTr and piutxeiv in the graphic passage Mk 918), enter and pass out of (elaipxecrOtu and e&pxeaffai) the human subject. The terms predicated of the human subject may be found in art. Demon, vol. i. p. 593. Animals were likewise affected, Mk 51;i. Among the Jews and other nations of antiquity magical formulae were employed in which the potent names of supernatural powers were recited. Among the Jews this was chiefly the name of Jehovah varied in all possible forms, while among the Christians the name of Christ was so employed. See article Magic and also Exorcism POST POTIPHAR 23 Other remedies of a material character were also used. It is doubtful whether in Ja 514 there is anything of a magical or semi-magical character, implying a belief in demon-possession. It should be noticed, however, that in this case the ' name' was invoked, just as in exorcisms. Owen C. Whitehouse. POST.—i. Door or gate-post.—1. ^x, rendered 'lintel' in 1 K 631 (RVm 'posts'), where, probably, the stone case of the door is intended; as also in Ezk 40 and 41, where RV prefers 'jambs' to AV ' posts.' It is derived from "km as indicating what projects in front of or around the door. 2. njs (possibly from nx in a metaphorical sense), once rendered by AV 'posts' (Is 64); RV substitutes 'foundations.' 3* njno, from an unused root in 'to move oneself about,' applied to the post on which the hinges turn. In later times the name was transferred to the small cylinder attached to the doorpost, containing a strip of parchment on which are written these two passages, viz. Dt 64"9 and II13*21. Every pious person on passing out or in touches this reverently, and then kisses his finger. 4. IP, from root *]55 ' to spread out,' rendered ' post' three times in AV (2 Ch 37, Ezk 4116, Am 91). In each case RV rightly substitutes 'threshold.' On the doorposts the blood of the lamb was sprinkled (Ex 127 etc.); and here the words of the law were to be written (Dt 69 etc., see No. 3, above). Moslems copy the Jews in writing verses from the Koran on their doorposts. The German Temple Christians in Palestine have engraved a text of Scripture over every doorway in their colonies. A servant who wished not to avail himself of the law of freedom was brought by his master ' unto God,' ' unto the doorpost,' and had his ear pierced with an awl (Ex 216). A special sanctity seems in the East always to gather round the doorway (see art. Threshold). To this it may be due that while the woodwork of the temple was of Lebanon cedar, the doorposts were made of native-grown olive (1 K 6s3). ii. Carrier of letters or despatches.—p> pi. D<¥T ('runners'), once (2 K II13) J'Sl, from yr\ 'to run.' The 'runners' formed the royal guard (1 S 2217, see art. Guard), kept the king's house, and were available for other service (1 K 1427ff-, 2 K 1026 ll4ff). From them were chosen the couriers, who conveyed royal mandates throughout the kingdom (2 Ch 30», Est 313-16). Those of the Persian monarch were mounted on 'swift steeds' (Est 810-14RV*). The swiftness characteristic of this service gives point to the saying of Job 926 ' My days are swifter than a post.' W. Ewing. POT. See FOOD in vol. ii. p. 40, s. 'Vessels.' POTIPHAR (ns'pis; LXX in Gn Z"l"! A IleTpe<pi)s, E Luc. Uere<t>pqs, in 391 ADE Luc. HeTetppijs; { Vulg. Putiphar). The name is generally regarded (e.g. by Ebers, in Smith, DJ32 i. ii. 1794a) as a Heb. abbreviation of Potiphera JOS 'Bis, in which case it would be Egyp. P'-dy-p'-W, and mean 'He whom the Ra (or the Sun-god) gave'; see, Sethe, De aleph prosthetico in lingua aeg. verbi formis prceposito, 1892, p. 31 (a reference, for which the writer is indebted to Mr. P. LI. Griffith), who quotes as parallel formations P'-dy-'Imn "He whom Ammon gave,' P'-dy-'st *He whom Isis gave.' Sethe also observes that in Greek transcriptions the first two syllables are commonly represented by rim-, as in UtTSfpvt itself, rjm-vcris, Jlertcurr»/>ry]t Vsrix^tr/S, Xltr6trif>is, etc., and refers, for a long list of such names, from papyri and other sources, to f&The rendering 'swift steeds' is probable, but not certain cb~i (a rare synonym of D3D) denotes a species of horse possessed of* some valuable quality, which may likely enough have been swiftness. t The form Uivrtypiis is also found, as in ed. Aid., and a 15th cent. MS ap. Lagarde, Gen. Graece [cf. p. 20]; Philo, i. 184, 604 (Mang.); Cramer, Anecd. Par. ii. 174. 25 (Parthey, p. 78). But it is certainly false (Griffith). Parthey, Mg. Penonennamen, 1864, p. 79 S. Lieblein's proposal (PSBA, 1898, p. 208f.) to identify 'Potiphar' with the isolated and uncertain Ft-ber (p. 24 n.*), does not make the etymology any clearer. The name of the 'officer' (Dnp, lit. eunuch) of Pharaoh, and 'captain of the body-guard' (-is n'naen; see vol. ii. p. 768* n. X), to whom Joseph was sold by the Midianites (Gn 3736), and who appointed Joseph to wait upon the prisoners confined in the state-prison (ib. p. 768 n. ||), which was in his house (40lff-); in the existing text of Gn, also, the Egyptian who made Joseph superintendent of his household, and whose wife made the advances to Joseph which the latter rejected (39"f-)- It is doubtful whether these two personages are not in reality distinct. Gn 37»> 40iff- belong to E, and 391*- to J; and there are strong reasons (cf. ib. pp. 767b, 768 n. §) for supposing, as is done by nearly all modern critics, that the words ' Potiphar, an officer (eunuch) of Pharaoh's, the captain of the guard' in 391, are an addition made by the redactor, who identified Joseph's 'master,' mentioned in ch. 39, with Potiphar, the ' captain of the body-guard,' of 3736 40:*; if this view be correct, the original narrative of ch. 39 (J) knew nothing of ' Potiphar,' but simply mentioned ' an' (unnamed) ' Egyptian,' to whom the Ishmaelites sold Joseph. It may be noticed that, in the existing narrative, the description, 'an Egyptian,' attached in 391 to 'Potiphar, an eunuch of Pharaoh's,' etc., seems a rather pointless addition, whereas, standing alone, it would have an adequate raison d'Gtre. The 'captain of the guard' was not a specially Egyptian office; the same title (with only ai for -ii') being used also of a chief officer of Nebuchadnezzar (2 K 25s al.; see above, ii. 768a n. %). The number of court- and state-officials mentioned in inscriptions is very great (Ebers, Mg. w. 'b. Mose's, p. 300; and esp. Brugsch, Die Mgyptologie, 1889, pp. 213 f., 222-227, 243f., 299-301); but the office attributed to Potiphar does not appear to have been definitely identified: perhaps it was that of ' the general and eldest of the court' of the Hood-papyrus, an important official, whom Brugsch (p. 213) and Maspero (Journ. As. 1888 (xi.), p. 273) identify with the dpxiffufw.To-°-yitpt>£): in this case, the expression might (as Mr. Griffith suggests) denote the ' royal cook,' an official who acquired at Thebes in the New Empire many important administrative functions—leading expeditions to the quarries, investigating tomb-robberies, etc. (see Erman, jEgypten, Index, s.v. 'Truch* sess'; and comp. above, vol. ii. p. 774, the note on Ab). POTIPHEEA POTTEE, POTTEEY names of the form 'Potiphera,' 'Potiphar' (if this be rightly regarded as really the same name), appear first in the 22nd dyn. (the dyn. of Shishak),* and are frequent only in the 26th dyn. (B.C. 664-525); it is thus at least doubtful how far either one or the other really springs from the age of Joseph (see, further, voL i. 665b, ii. 775a). S. E. Driver. POTIPHERA (jn? 'ote; LXX A Uerp^s, E Luc. HeTcippTjs ;t Vulg. Putiphare; on the etym. see under POTIPHAR).— The priest—i.e., no doubt, the chief priest—of On (which see),—i.e. of the famous and ancient temple of the Sun, at On,—whose daughter Asenath was given by Pharaoh to Joseph for a wife (Gn 4145-60 462U). S. R. Driver. POTSHERD,—This is the translation in Job 28, Ps 2215, Pr 262S, and Is 459 Ms of u-m fares, which is rendered ' sherd' in Is 3014, Ezk 23s4, but elsewhere (usually with ^>?)' earthen vessel.' Potsherd occurs also in Sir 227 as tr. of forpaicov, which is the LXX word for fares in Job 28, Ps 2215, Pr 26-3, Is 3014. The Eng. word, which is a sherd (shred) or fragment of pottery, is illustrated by Skelton's (Skeat's Specimens, 143)— ' But this madde Amaleoke, Lyke to a Mamelek, He regardeth lordes No more than potshordes'—] and Spenser, FQ VI. i. 37— ' They hew'd their helmes, and plates asunder brake, As they had potshares bene.' In translating, the distinction has to be made between ' earthen vessel' and ' fragment of earthen vessel.' The latter is the meaning, according to Oxf. Heb. Lex., in Job 28 412-, Is 3014, Ezk 2334. RV makes two changes. Job 4130 AV ' sharp stones are under him' is changed into ' his underparts are like sharp potsherds'; Pr 2623 'a potsherd' becomes 'an earthen vessel.' J. HASTINGS. POTTAGE (ttj nazid, LXX tyri/ia, "Vulg. pul-mentum).—A kind of thick broth made by boiling lentils or other vegetables with meat or suet, usually in water, but sometimes in .milk. Robinson says that lentil pottage made in this manner is very palatable, and that he ' could very well conceive, to a weary hunter, faint with hunger, they (lentils) might be quite a dainty' (i. 167). Thomson speaks of its appetizing fragrance, which it diffuses far and wide; and he gives an account of a meal in which this pottage was eaten out of a saucepan placed on the ground in the middle of the company, a cake of bread, doubled spoon - fashion, being dipped in the pot to carry the pottage to the mouth. ' European children born in Palestine are extravagantly fond of it' (L. and B. i. 252). The pottage prepared by Jacob was of the red lentil (see Food, vol. ii. 27), hence Esau's emphatic 'the red, this red' (Gn 25st>). For a mess of this, called in He 1216 /3pfia-is /da ('a mess of meat'), Esau sold his birthright. Labat in his account of the visit of the Chevalier d'Arvieux to Hebron in 1660 says that at the entrance to St. Helena's Church, now a mosque, there is a great kitchen where pottage is daily prepared of lentils and * For the name * Petu-baal' cited above, vol. ii. 774» n. ^f, is very doubtful, Mr. Griffith informs the writer, in both meaning and date. It is properly Pt-ber (Lieblein, Diet, des Noms HUrogl. No. 553); and 'though ber is the correct spelling for Baal, there is no determinative to show that it was intended for that. Pt, also, is not the same as P'-dy (in P'-dy-'Imn, etc., above); and it is difficult to find a meaning for it. The name is at present known only to occur once; and it may be wrongly copied, or may not be a compound at all. The period to which it belongs is also quite uncertain : it may be that of the Hyksos ; but it may also be earlier, or much later.' t Also rjii, vol. ii. p. 28). The prophet Haggai names pottage with bread, wine, and oil as the common articles of diet which a priest, bearing holy flesh, would be likely to touch inadvertently with the skirt of his garment (21*). Nazid, being chiefly made of vegetables, differs from pdrak (only in const, perak, Is 65J Kethibh), which seems to have been a kind of minced collops made of meat disjointed, or finely cut up and boiled in water (cf. 'mortrewes and potages' below). Keri has merak, as in Jg 619- -°, a name which is also applied to the same dish. Some suppose these to be soup poured over broken bread. The word 'pottage' was originally the same as the French potage and spelled like it, as in Chaucer's Prologue to the Pardoners Tale, 82, and Piers Plowman, who writes 'potage and payn (bread) ynough' (Text B. xv. 310), 'mortrewes (pounded meat) and potages' (ib. xiii. 41). In the Boke of Curtasye, whose date is uncertain, probably about 1460, potage is the first course at dinner (iii. 765), and is to be eaten without ' grete sowndynge' (i. 69). In the 1557 ed. of Seager's Schoole of Vertue (iv. 444), it appears with two t's, and it is spelled as we now have it in all editions of the English Bible from 1560 to the present. In Russell's Boke of Nurture, dating 'from about 1460, there is a section on different kinds of potages. A. Macalister. POTTER, POTTERY.—The art of the potter (Heb. ~!$v or iy, ptcp. of "is; ' to form or fashion'; Gr. Kepa/ieiis) can be traced back to a very early date in Egypt, and within recent years there have been considerable ' finds' in Palestine of specimens of pottery, some of which are much older than the date of the Israelite conquest. Upon the ground especially of the discoveries at Tell el-Hesy (? Lach-ish), Flinders Petrie has sought to construct a complete history of the pottery of Palestine, which he divides into three periods (see the following article, and compare Petrie and Conder in PEFSt, 1891, p. 68 ff.; also Nowack, Lehrb. der Heb. Arch. i. 265 tf.; Benzinger, Heb. Arch. 261ft'.). The products of the potter's industry would naturally be little used by the Israelites during the nomadic period of their existence, when vessels of skin or of wood must have been found more serviceable than those of earth (Nowack, I.e. p. 242; Benzinger, I.e. p. 214). Even after they entered Canaan, the Israelites appeal to have been slow to adopt the vessels of the potter; a skin is still used for holding milk (Jg 419), wine (1 S 1620), or water (Gn 2114(-); the Heb. in the first two of these passages is i»u, in the third rerj, the Gr. in all three is d Kepafitus Kada o roiis rpiaKOvra dpyijpovs Kal fioi Ktfptos. evefiaKov avrovs els rbv (A om. t!>v) oikov Kvpiov eh RV in Mt 'And they (marg. 'I') took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom (certain) of the children of Israel did price (marg. 'whom they priced on the part of the sons of Israel'), and they (marg. 'I') gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.' The reading 'potter' is thus retained (although there appears to be in the context a consciousness also of the reading 'treasury'), the language is accommodated to cover the purchase by the priests of the potter's field, and the passage has manifestly a Messianic character imposed upon it (see, further, Wellhausen, Die kleinen Propheten, ad loc, and arts. Akeldama, and Quotations Erf and J a). J. A. Selbie. POTTERY. — Materials for the study of the pottery of Southern Palestine from 1700 to 300 B.C. were furnished by the systematic excavation of the mound Tell el-ljesy by Petrie and Bliss, 1890-93 (see art. Lachish). At this site was found a series of superimposed mud-brick towns, eight in number, each distinguished by its own types of pottery. The already-dated foreign types (Greek and Phoenician) furnished a scale for approximately dating the local ware with which they were associated, or which they overlaid. The results obtained at Tell el-IJesy have since been confirmed and amplified by extensive excavations at three other mounds, Tell Zakartya, Tell es-Safi, and Tell ej-Judeideh, as well as at Jerusalem. Briefly, these results are as follows. The pre-Seleucidan pottery may be divided into three groups — (1) earlier pre - Israelite ; (2) later pre-Israelite ; (3) Jewish. (1) The earlier pre-Israelite ware has been found, unmixed with other styles, on the rock or virgin soil at three sites. The types include—{a) large bowls with very thick brims, the interior being faced with red or yellow and burnished with lines sometimes crossing ; (b) large jars with flat disc bottom, invecked necks, and ornamented with a cable - moulding; (c) jars with surfaces scraped EARLY PRE-ISRAELITE JAR. over with a comb and having ledge-handles of a wavy shape. These handles are typical of certain Egyptian pottery, regarded by Petrie as pre- historic ; he suggests a Lybian origin. All these characteristics come down to later times, especially LEDGE-IIASBLE. (Early Pre-Israelite.) the patterned burnishing, which is found in a debased form in Jewish jars. (2) The later pre-Israelite ware comes down to Jewish times, and is found in connexion with known ' Phoenician' types, ranging from about 1400 to 1000 B.C., and with Mycentean ware of the same period. The most characteristic native forms are—{a) the open lamps and bowls, both with rounded bottom, often found purposely buried in groups ; (6) ware with painted ornament, consist- LATER PRE-ISRAELITE PAINTED WARE. ing chiefly of birds, zigzags, and spirals ; (c) small flasks with pointed bottoms; (d) stands for holding these; (e) female figurines (teraphim). BOWLS (BURIED) WITH LAMP. (3) The ware we call Jewish appears to be characteristic of the later Jewish monarchy, when the POTTERY POVERTY 27 local pre-Israelite and the Phoenician types had blended and had become debased. The commonest types are—(a) cooking pots (blackened with smoke), with large wide mouths and small handles ; (6) open lamps, with thick disc bases; JEWISH COOKING POT. (c) tiny rude black jugs ; (d) flasks with long neck and stand, out of all proportion to the small body; (c) large jars with ribbed handles, stamped. The stamps are of three classes: stars of various forms; ellipse containing name of the owner or maker in old Hebrew letters ; royal stamps. The ROYAL STAMP ON JAR HANDLE. latter show a creature in two varieties, one with two expanded wings, the other with four. The second type is clearly a searabmus. Above the symbol is invariably the legend i'jd'j ; below, the name of a town, as row. As this ware appears to date from the time of the Jewish monarchy, the reading ' Belonging to the king of Shocoh' is untenable. Accordingly we should lather read : ' To the king: (dedicated by) Shocoh.' Thus far three names of known towns have been recovered, Shocoh, Hebron, and Ziph, as well as the name hbto, which is not mentioned in the Bible. As to the exact meaning of the stamp, several hypotheses have been brought forward. From the discovery of these stamped handles at Jerusalem it has been argned that they belonged to jars containing oil, wine, or other tribute sent to the capital by the towns mentioned. The wide geographical distribution (such as the finding of the stamp with Shocoh at five different sites) suggests that the place-names were those of royal potteries, situated at Hebron, Ziph, Shocoh, etc. Associated with the above-mentioned Jewish typos we lind Greek pottery, chiefly ribbed bowls, and large amphoras with loop handles. The red and black figured ware was also imported. The post-iieleucidan pottery of Palestine has not been as carefully studied as the earlier types. The Seleucidan forms are similar to those found at Alexandria. Ilhodian jar-handles stamped with Greek names are common. Roman sites contain the well-known ribbed amphora, and tiles with the stamp of the tenth legion: leg(io) X. FRE-(tensis), are common about Jerusalem. In Chris- STAMP OF TUB 10TH LEGION. tian graves are found many closed lamps, stamped with elaborate patterns, sometimes showing crosses or a Greek inscription, as ATXNAPIA KAAA. CHRISTIAN LAMP. The same general type extended to Arab times. Finally, we have the Arab glazed ware, found in Crusading sites, such as Blanche Garde at Tell es-Safi. Literature.—Petrie, Tell el-Hesy; Bliss, Mound of Many Cities; Reports on the Excavations at Tell Zakariya, Tell es-Safi, and Tell ej-Judeideh, PEFSt, 1899-1900; also the forthcoming volume on these Excavations. F. J. Bliss. Note.—The above illustrations are reproduced with the kind permission of the Palestine Exploration Fund Committee. POTTER'S FIELD. — See Akeldama and Potter. POUND.—See Money, vol. iii. p. 428% and Weights and Measures. POYERTY. — A. In Old Testament. — The paucity of abstract terms in Hebrew is illustrated by the fact that the words translated 'poverty in EV occur chiefly in the Book of Proverbs, and other post-exilic works. These are (a) from -\cn, ' to lack' :—"ipn, "liDroj (cf. "on, p"nn), ZvSeux, iar(pT)pAi, etc., egestas, etc.; (6) from t>n:— % i?K7, w'J, v'l, vei/La, egestas, etc. The poor are frequently mentioned, the following terms being so translated : (c) licna [cf. (a)]; (d) en, ptcp. of »Vi [cf. (by], Trevijs, tttux&s, etc., pauper, etc.; (e) from n:» ' be bowed down': .iiy. (Aram.), 'w 'afflicted,' ' poor,' ijv ' humble,' 'lowly' (see art. Poor), iriv^, ttoixos, wpats, raireicis, etc., pauper, etc.; (/) from nan 'crave' :—JV3N 'needy,' -rivr\i, tttuix6s, etc.,pauper, etc. ; (g) from h'n ' hang down' :—ri ' weak, depressed,' in Gn 4119 of lean cows, n-A^s, ttuxos, Taireiv-Js, etc., pauper, etc.; (A) J3JD (Aram.) only in 28 POVEKTY POVEETY Ecclesiastes, 'poor,' irivi)s, pauper; (i) the obscure and doubtful njfyj, d'n^D, in Ps 108-10-14, perhaps ' hapless,' vivqs, tttwxos, pauper. The causes of poverty, apart from sloth, thoughtlessness, and extravagance, were specially—(i.) Failure of crops and loss of cattle through bad seasons; thus the Shunammite left her homestead, by Elisha's advice, to avoid a famine (2 K 81"7, cf. Neh 53). At such times the townsfolk would suffer from the high price of food, and the falling oft' of trade through the destitution of the farmers, (ii.) Raids and invasions, (iii.) Loss of property through the violence of the nobles, supported by corrupted law courts^ e.g. Naboth's vineyard (1 K 21) and the appropriation of the Shunammite's land during her absence, (iv.) Ruinous taxation and forced labour (corvte) (Neh 54-5). (v.) Extortionate usury, which took advantage of the distress caused by bad seasons and heavy taxes to lend at high interest on the security of land. In many instances the debtors could not pay, and forfeited land and liberty to their creditors (Neh 51"5). In considering the character and extent of poverty, stress must be laid on the influetice of polygamy and slavery. The almost universal habit of early marriage which seems to have existed amongst freemen, together with concubinage and polygamy, checked the growth of that destitution amongst unmarried women which is the most painful feature of .modern poverty.! Indeed, if the principles of family and clan life had been loyally carried out, a free Israelite could want only when the whole family or clan were destitute. But actual practice mostly fell far short of this ideal. Again, with us, the last resort of the poor is either the workhouse, or crime, or slow starvation ; in ancient Israel, the destitute became slaves. Indeed, the class corresponding to the great bulk of our poorer workers for wages, both domestic and industrial, was the slave - class. Hence the article Slave deals with the condition of the greater portion of the poor. There were, however, slaves whose position was much more honourable and comfortable than that of English labourers, and there were poor who were not slaves. The existence of slavery added to the resouices.of the poor man by enlarging his credit: he and his family could offer their persons as security for loans. Again, the mere lack of means, if it did not amount to absolute destitution, was far less distressing than with us, because so little was needed in the way of house, furniture, clothes, firing, or even food. The classes of the poor most often mentioned are widows and orphans, and the genm, or resident aliens. The former suffered because the family ties were not as real as they were supposed to be, the latter because they had no actual family ties, and the bond of hospitality was soon strained to breaking point (Lv 1910, Dt 1429, Ps 94«, Jer 223, Zee 710, Mai 35). See art. Ger. As regards poverty, however, the conditions were very different in the four great periods of OT history. (1) The N omadic period. In a nomad tribe there were richer and poorer and slaves; but the bond of brotherhood in the tribe was kept alive by the constant necessity of mutual help and defence ; and distressful poverty was possible for the individual only when the fortunes of the whole tribe were at a very low ebb. (2) The Judges and the Early Monarchy.— During this period the clan and family system maintained a great, though perhaps diminishing, vitality ; and its influence, as we have said, was against the growth of poverty. The great majority of free Israelite families held land; they might suffer from bad seasons, and from invasion, oi the oppression of powerful fellow-countrymen ; * whole families might be swept away by plague or famine,. carried away captive by the enemy, or reduced to slavery by native oppressors ; but with certain exceptions (see below) there was little permanent poverty. Gideon says (Jg 61S) ' My clan [lit. 'thousand') is the poorest (^n) in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house'; but the context shows that Gideon was fairly well off. It is probably not a mere accident that the first mention in history of a class of poor freemen comes soon after the establishment of the Monarchy. 1«S 222 tells us that there resorted unto David ' every one that was in distress (b"sj piso), or in debt, or discontented.' In this period, however, certain classes of landless poor seem to have arisen. When the frontier receded through the successful attack of a neighbouring tribe, the Israelite refugees would seek shelter amongst their brethren. They could not always be provided with land, and probably formed a large portion of the gerim, the ger in this case being an Israelite settled in a strange tribe. In this period, too, the Levites are apparently both landless and poor, e.g. Micah's Levite, Jg 17. 18, and the Levite of Jg i9, both of whom were genm ; cf. LEVI. The scant references to the poor in the older (JE) legislation, the Ten Commandments, the Book of the Covenant, etc., e.g. Ex 2226 236, indicate that poverty was not very widespread in this period. (3) The Later Monarchy.—We learn from the prophets of the 8th cent, that as the Israelite kingdoms advanced in wealth and civilization, pauperism developed. The rich added ' house to house, and field to field' (Is 58), and the landless poor multiplied. The growth in luxury led to an increase of the artisan class and the town population generally. When the tide of prosperity ebbed, these classes bore the brunt of bad times. The prophets tried to keep the land for the peasant farmers, but their efforts were futile. Deuteronomy shows that poverty was a serious and widespread evil (1017"19 1428.29 15. 2319-20 241"-212612"15), and frequently refers to the Levites as an impoverished class (12la- 1B 18). The Deuteronomic legislation attempted to remedy the evil, but it came too late. (4) After the Exile.—The community in Palestine was poor as a whole, and Neh 5 shows that the nobles and priests profited by the misfortunes of the peasants to absorb their land. The general tone of the Psalms, and the use of the term 'dnaw, 'lowly,' for the pious Jews, suggest that the bulk of the people were permanently poor. See art. Poor. The Priestly Code shows great consideration for the poor (Lv 57-u etc. 19lJ-15 2322 25). As the Jews passed from the rule of the Persians to that of the Greek kings of Egypt and Syria, the bulk of the people, whether in the Dispersion or in Syria, became subject, in a measure, to the general conditions of social life ; and the information as to the poor in the ancient classical world will apply to that extent to the scattered Jews. But in riiost cities, as in Alexandria, and in many country districts, the Jews formed communities bound by racial and religious ties. Such ties are very real, especially in small societies, when those who own them are in the midst of aliens of another faith. Poverty might be prevalent, but would be much alleviated by mutual helpfulness. In Jewish Galilee and Judah there were the agricultural settlements, where social conditions were comparatively simple; and the intensely Jewish city of Jerusalem, whose size implies a large poor popula- * Cf. Nathan's parable, in which the rich man robbed his pocr neighbour (2 S 121-6). POVERTY POWER 29 tion. The Bk. of Sirach, the work of a Jerusalem Jew, implies a measure of poverty and emphasizes the helplessness of the poor before the oppression of the rich (73a 1030-31 13s-18 216 2922 3513 412); but conveys the impression that the wrongs and sufferings of the poor about B.C. 200 were far less grievous than in the time of Amos and Isaiah. As regards provision for the poor, there was first of all, perhaps most efficacious of all, the possibility of finding sustenance in slavery, a fate probably regarded with less horror, and carrying with it less disgrace, than the modern workhouse. Before this, the poor might have recourse to their family or clan. In early times, when each clan inhabited its own district, the claims of poorer members commanded recognition ; but as time went on, and the clan system broke up, this resource became less and less to be relied on. The successive codes sought to remedy the evil by various enactments. In Ex 2226"27 loans are to be without interest, so also Dt 157-8 2410-13, Lv 2535-37 ; cf. Ps 156 etc. ; and in Ex2311the poor are to have the produce of the land in Sabbatical years, so also Lv 25 . In Deuteronomy tithes »re to be given to the poor (142S 2612-13); who are to be entertained at the great Feasts (1611-14; cf. Neh 810); to be allowed to glean, and to have something left to glean, to have the right to take what grew in the corners of fields, and any sheaves that might be forgotten (2419-21); cf. Lv 199-10, Ku 22. The most serious attempt to deal with poverty was the Law of the Jubilee Year in the Priestly Code (Lv 252S"54; cf. Dt 1512'15), which, if carried out, would have secured the periodical restoration of the landless poor to freedom and their return to the land, but this law remained an ideal. These various provisions were supplemented by Almsgiving (which see). B. In New Testament.—The term 'poverty, irrioxda, paupertas, inopia, is used only in 2 Co 82- 9, Kev 29, where it has a general or figurative sense ; but the ' poor,' tt^pt/s (2 Co 99), ircvtxpfc (Lk 212), irruxis (frequently, especially in the Gospels and Ja 2), pauper, etc., are often mentioned. As regards poverty, the NT period did not differ in any essential features from the Greek period. On the one hand, the exactions of the Herodian and Roman officials were probably more severe than those of the Greek rulers; on the other, the duty of almsgiving was more diligently inculcated as a religious duty which would be richly rewarded. In this respect the Christian Church followed in the steps of the synagogue. The Church at Jerusalem made an abortive experiment in communism (Ac 2** 432), which probably aggravated its poverty; and gave opportunity for the collection for 'the poor saints at Jerusalem' which St. Paul organized amongst his Gentile converts (Eo 1526, Gal 210). The early Christian Churches followed the example of the synagogues in holding it a duty to provide for their poor (Ro 1213, 1 Ti 618, 1 Jn 3lr etc.; cf. art. 'Alms' in Smith and Cheetham's Diet, of Christian Antiquities). But Ja 22"6 shows that this duty was often neglected. In later times the Jews have usually set an example to Christendom by their care for their poor co-religionists. "While we read that 'the common people (6 vo\is Sx^oi, Mk 1237, cf. Jn 129) heard' Jesus ' gladly,' we are not told that His actual disciples were poor; they rather seem to have belonged to the lower middle class—fishermen owning boats, tax-collectors, etc. The early Church included many poor, and few rich, powerful, or distinguished members (1 Co I26) ; but Prof. Orr, in his Neglected Factors in the Study of the Early Progress of Christianity, maintains that the strength of the Church lay in the middle classes. Cf. Almsgiving, Family, Gleaning, Sabbatical Year, Tithes. W. H. Bennett. POWER (chiefly ^n, rji, ry; Sivafus, <£ovo-ia). *— 1. All the (tower in the universe is traced in Scripture to a spiritual source. God created all things by His word; and the word being the expression of the will, it is the spiritual God Himself who is the ground and origin of all that is (Gn 1. 2, Ps 339 1486, Pr 8-"!-, Is 40I2ff-, Jer 3217, Jn I3- u). While God is the Creator of the world, and continually rules all the agents in it for His own ends, there is real power made over to nature. There is no pantheistic identification of nature's power with God's. According to Gn 1, the earth has the function assigned to it of bringing forth grass and herbs, and the trees and all the living creatures bring forth fruit 'after their kind': nature follows its own laws (cf. He 6'). Or, again, the sea has a place and power which are definitely fixed, indeed, But are thereby proved to be real (Job 3811, Pr $"' %>). In like manner there is true power, though it is derivative, committed to man. He was made 'in the image of God' (Gn I26'-), and so his original endowment includes the gift of power like God's. It is proved by his exercising dominion over the other living creatures (I28), and by his possessing freedom of choice (216(-). The power of man is lost by sin (Gn 217, 1 S 2820, Ro 7WS- etc.). Nevertheless, "he is treated in every condition as a rational and moral being; the wicked are commanded on almost every page of Scripture to bestir themselves, to repent and turn to God. 2. God continually upholds the world by His power in Providence, i.e.' (a) in the preservation, (b) in the government of the creation, (a) The fact of the world's persistence amid change, and while everything in it is characterized by transiency, is referred to the direct action of the Divine Will (Gn 822, Ps 10429f- 139, Jer 1422, Ac 1728, He la etc.). Then (b) God's government of the world consists in His guiding all its processes for certain predetermined ends. Thus He causes grass to grow ' for the cattle,' and herb ' for the service of man' (Ps 10414(-). Human success is due to the favouring presence and power of God, and serves for the fulfilment of the Divine purposes, both as respects the earthly life (Jos I11*-) and the higher life of the soul (Ro S28*-, Ph 2J3). All the ways of men are justly recompensed by the Almighty (Jer 3219). Wickedness is overruled and brought to naught on the earth, a feature of God's providential action which is naturally emphasized in OT. God fulfils His purpose of love in spite of all opposing agents, whether visible or invisible, angelic or Satanic (Ro 838'1). 3. Special displays of power made by the Almighty. Israel was often saved by God from its enemies, the signal deliverance from Egyptian bondage which He effected for His people ' by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm' being the type of these supernatural interventions (Dt 515). The chosen people were guided in their career, and kept together as a nation, a remnant at least being preserved. God revealed His laws and ordinances; and these, duly honoured, were calculated to realize the highest good to the nation, to impart the blessing of ' life' and all that that implies (Dt 28'ff- 3015ff-, Ps 197ff-, Pr 3). These influential manifestations of the Divine Will lead up to the completed revelation in Christ, who is superior to every world-power, and whose gospel is ' the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth' (Ro I1"). The full manifestation of His power occurs when ' the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ: and he shall reign for ever and ever' (Rev II15). The personality of Jesus in the * Broadly speaking, SCyapi; in NT is power, and ilovtria. authority to wield it. See Mason, Conditions of Our Lord's Life on Earth, p. 98 f.; Lightfoot on Col 1"; Swete on Mk 21". 30 POWER POWER OF THE KEYS Gospels presents throughout the characteristics of spiritual power. He exhibits the unequalled power of perfect righteousness and love, e.g. in drawing disciples to Himself with a few words (Mt 418B-, Mk 214), refuting learned and influential adversaries, so that they could not answer Him a word or venture to question Him (Mt 2246, Mk 1231, Lk 146 204U), driving out of the temple a crowd of those who dishonoured the building (Mt 2112), working miracles in kindness to men and for the furtherance of faith (Mt II5 etc.), extending pity and forgiveness to penitent sinners, and thereby raising them to a new and better life (Lk 747ar-). These qualities of holiness and love in Jesus appear at their best when He is under trial; His endurance of the cross proves them to be stronger than death. Hence it is when He is ' lifted up' that He ' will draw all men' unto Him (Jn 1232). Then the resurrection of Christ proves His power over death and His glory as the triumphant Son of God (Ac 2, etc.). &. Power restored in man. God works in man for the restoration of the soul's own power, and hence the believer should ' work out his own salvation with fear and trembling' (Ph 2la). At length the full power of the soul is recovered through the aid of the Holy Spirit (Ro 816\ Gal 5l6ff-). See Holy Spirit. For the attainment of this end in man we have thus (a) the activity on God's side, and (b) the activity of man. {a) There is a providential leading or drawing by the Father before men can come to Christ (Jn 6"). Then through the death of Christ believers become dead to the power of sin : there is a breach with it in principle (Ro 6), or sanctification is begun. ' Not that anything in human nature was actually changed as by magic in the moment when Christ died, but in the completion of this holy life there was established a universal and personal principle of victory (a 6iW/i«s crorrriplas), which is able wherever it is received to break sin in the a&p% and kill the natural selfishness, so that the man may walk no longer Karb. ) is to permit. Lightfoot says that 'thousands of examples' of this usage might be produced. One instance may suffice. ' Concerning the moving of empty vessels [on the Sabbath day], of the filling of which there is no intention ; the school of Shammai binds it, the school of Hillel loosethit' (Hieros. Shabb. fol. 16, 2, quoted by Lightfoot, Exercit. upon St. Matt. p. 238). It is the power of laying down the law for his fellow-disciples, like a true Rabbi, which is thus bestowed upon St. Peter. Or perhaps it is more exact to say that it is the power of interpreting in detailed application the law which God has laid down in general terms. Authority is given him to say what the law of God allows, and what it forbids; and the promise is added that his ruling shall be upheld in heaven,—and is consequently to be regarded as binding upon the consciences of Christians. The power of binding and loosing is in fact the power of legislation for the Church. POWEE OF THE KEYS POWEE OF THE KEYS 31 The gift of ' the keys' is not expressly bestowed on any one else besides St. Peter, but the legislative power is afterwards extended to others (Mt 18'8). It is not certain who are the persons there addressed. ' The disciples' mentioned in v.1 are doubtless the apostles, or at any rate include some of the apostles; but it is not easy to prove that the power of binding and loosing is there bestowed upon them exclusively. That opinion, however ancient and however widely held, involves the further conclusion that the promises which follow, and upon which the binding and loosing power is made to depend, are to be similarly restricted. It is, according to this interpretation, to the apostles alone that Christ promises that the prayer of two of them.shall be heard, and that where two or three are gathered in His name, He •will be there. This is difficult to suppose. We must accordingly conclude that the binding and loosing power first bestowed upon St. Peter is not represented in NT as an exclusive privilege of the apostles. It is the common privilege of the Christian society—even of a small branch of it—when acting in agreement (v.1") and solemnly assembled in (or ' to') Christ's name as its ground of union (v.20). In this case, however, the power appears to be connected with judicial discipline over individual members of the society. The ' binding and loosing' are not, in this case any more than elsewhere, to be interpreted as the absolving and retaining of sins; they seem to mean the prescribing what the offender is to do and not to do. But, in case of his refusal to comply with these requirements of 'the Church,' he is to be treated as ' a heathen man and a publican,' i.e. as excommunicate; and the resistance to the authority' of the Church is to be considered as resistance to the will of Heaven. The prayer of the slighted Church will be heard, fi,r Christ Himself is present at the gathering, and Heaven will give its sanction to the sentence (see interesting parallels in Wiinsche, p. 218). There is, accordingly, a close connexion between the authority to bind and loose and the authority to absolve and retain sins (Jn 2023). The discipline which prescribes what the sinner must do, on pain of encountering a sentence at once earthly and heavenly, cannot but involve a' power of the keys' in the (inaccurate) sense which that term has borne in the Church since patristic times. Christians of all ages have rightly seen a signal instance of St. Peter's use of the keys in the admission of Cornelius to the Church. He thus ' opened' the door indeed to the Gentiles, ' and no man' has ever since ' shut' it to them. But there is no reason to think that this one act was all that was in our Lord's mind when He made the promise ; nor is it likely that He referred only to the authority to baptize at discretion exercised by the apostle. The whole of his chief-stewardship was included in the promise ; and both in his appointments of other Christians to sacred offices, in the administration of the Christian sacraments at large, and in his expositions of Christian truth, he was exercising the power of the keys. An equally signal instance of 'binding and loosing' on a large scale is the regulation laid down by St. Peter, along with 'the apostles and the elders,' for the discipline of the Gentile Christians in regard to meats and manner of life (Ac 1528). They 'loosed' for them all other kinds of food ; they ' bound ' for them ' things offered to idols, and blood and things strangled, and fornication.' Similarly, at a later time, St. Paul at Corinth ' loosed even the eating of things offered to idols,—though he 'bound' it in certain circumstances (1 Co 102M-),— and laid down various rules concerning marriage (1 Co 7), and concerning public worship (1 Co 11-14). 'So ordain I in all Churches' is his formula (1 Co 7"). Of 'binding and loosing'in relation to the individual, the case which we are able to follow with the greatest degree of clearness is that of the incestuous man at Corinth; which recalls with remarkable exactness the language of Mt 18I8f\ St. Paul was evidently surprised that the Church of Corinth had not dealt with the case on its own responsibility. It ought to have'mourned,'with a view to the removal of the offender (1 Co 53). The ' mourning' he would have expected was clearly a public and united humiliation of the Church before God, to the intent that God might ' take away' the man who had done the deed (see Godet, ad loc). In answer to the solemn and concerted prayer, a stroke from heaven would have fallen upon him, as upon Ananias and Sapphira, or, without such prayer, vipon the profaners of the Eucharist at Corinth itself (1 Co II30). Probably this appeal to God would have been preceded or accompanied by an act of formal separation from the sacramental fellowship of the Church ; certainly by an exclusion of the sinner from social intercourse with the brethren (1 Co 5U). As the Corinthian Church had not thus acted, the apostle informs them of his own intended procedure, with which he demands that they should co-operate. Though absent from them in body, he calls upon them to assemble; he himself will spiritually be present in the assembly, armed with 'the power (not merely with the authority) of our Lord Jesus.' The sentence which he has already passed upon the man ' in the name of the Lord Jesus' will then be formally pronounced. He will be ' delivered unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.' Delivery to Satan was not a rabbinical formula for excommunication in any form (Lightf. Exercitations, ad loc.). The phrase is probably derived from Job I12 26. St. Paul seems to have intended that either by a judicial death, or by some wasting disease, the man should be so punished as to bring him to repentance (cf. 1 Ti I20). The discipline seems to have had the desired effect. The majority of the Corinthian Church (2 Co 26) administered a 'rebuke' to the man,— which was probably excommunication in its less severe form (' reproof with the Babylonian writers was the same with excommunication,' Lightf. p. 183). The man was overwhelmed with sorrow,—so much so that the apostle feared lest the excess of it should be fatal to his soul (2 Co 27). He bids the Corinthians therefore ' forgive and comfort him.' He himself, acting as Christ's representative (ev TT/poo-iiTTif) Xpurrov) has already forgiven him, though he will not consider his forgiveness as absolute (el n Kexdpurnui) until the Corinthian Church has joined in it. The solemn gathering ' in the name of the Lord,' the confidence that His ' power' would be present to ratify what was done by His representatives upon earth, the punishment and the release, all appear to be directly based upon the language of our Lord recorded by Mt. Of the exercise of discipline in less unusual cases we naturally have scantier evidence in NT. Perhaps the most interesting reference to it is that in Ja 5uf\ The sick man is there advised to call for the presbyters of the Church, who are to pray over him, ' anointing him with oil in the name.' In answer to this action of the Church represented by its local heads, the writer says that the sick man will recover (for to interpret aei and i-^epel otherwise seems impossible in the context), and adds that 'if he have committed sins,' i.e. obviously, grave and marked sins, 'he shall be forgiven' {k\v afiaprtas rj TeiroiyKtbs, d'pe&^a'erat aim£). That the dpfftfai, airy is a promise of what God will do in 32 POWER OF THE KEYS PR^TORIUM answer to the prayer of the presbyters, and not an instruction to the presbyters themselves, seems to be required by the structure of the sentences. It is parallel in sense to er6s); 2 Ch 2312 of king Joash. (2) The object is once a false god : Jg 1624 of the Philistines praising (ufipeiv) Dagon ; (3) very frequently God (D\-Sx or mn<): Ps 69s4 (where 'heaven and earth, the seas, and everything that moveth therein' are called on to praise Him; cf. Ps 148); often of public worship in the sanctuary: Is 629, cf. 6411 (ei\oyeu>), Ps 2222 (ifweir, cf. v.26 o firawds fiov) 3518 844 10732 109301462 1493. Sometimes the object is ' the name of Jahweh or of God' (iTi.T Dp or D'ijSj} dz», to gco/ut toD Seov): Ps 6930 7421 1452 14^ ji 2sti ; % or His word (t9,) Uyos> ^aj. Ps 564 (tortuveiv) I0Ws [v.10b may be an editorial addition, so Hupfeld, Cheyne et al.]; or the object may be unexpressed : Jer 31 [Gr. 38] 7, Ps 635 (eirai-veir). The expression 'praise ye Jah' (Hallelujah, in Ps 1353 n;iWn [alveire rbv 'Kipiov], elsewhere always as one word b;^^?, 'AXhrjkovi& [once Ps 10435 3;^C, LXX omits here]) has generally a liturgical application and is mostly confined to late psalms. It occurs at the beginning of Ps 106. 111. 112. 113. 135. 146. 147. 148. 149, and at the end of 104. 105. * Mommsen denies that iripxrml&f%*s (AV captain of the guard), found Ac 2816 in some authorities (cf. Blass, ad loc), but omitted by WH, Tisch., and RV, could have been applied to a prcefectus prcetcrrio. This reading is evidently 'Western,' and Mommsen finds in the text of the Stockholm Latin MS (' Gigas'), princeps peregrinorum, at least a 2nd cent, interpretation of it, one which confirms his inference that the eaetra peregrinorum had been established in Rome in St. Paul's time. Positive evidence, however, for the existence of this corps and camp, under this name, appears only in the time of Severus, and the Latin MS may interpret the Gr. text before it by the light of later custom ; while trrpccrez-shap%r,s itself was evidently a popular title, and really supplies no information as to who took charge of the apostle. PRAISE IN OT PEAISE IN OT 106. 113. 115. 116. 117. 135. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. See, further, art. Hallklujah. Instead of the direct object, VVn is generally followed, in the writings of the Chronicler, by mrr1*, in the account of the technical Levitical (or priestly) function of praising Jahweh : 1 Ch 164 23s-3» 25\ 2 Ch 51S 2019 29SI) (ifwety) 3021 (ica9iyu>eji>), Ezr 3U ; but the simple nin1 occurs in Ezr 310, as it does also in Neh 513 (Nehemiah's own Memoirs). The object is unexpressed in Neh 12* (Chronicler), cf. 1 Ch 235, 2 Ch 76 ('when David praised by their ministry,' LXX iv fyuxui AauelS Sib, x«P°* otfTwv) 814 2313 (' the singers also played on instruments of music and led the singing of praise' dti'id? Tsftt 'i??3 nTliBftfrf) V^n^>, LXX ol qdovres ev rots 6pydvois, ifiSol /col bfivovvTes aliov) 312, in all of which ^Vrr has its technical sense. —Similarly, the passive sense 'be praised' is conveyed by the Pual, and once (Pr 31s0) by the Hithpael: (1) of human subjects and things: Pr 128 ' a man shall be praised (AV ; KV ' commended,' LXX eyKufuiieirScu) according to his wisdom'; Ps 7863' their maidens were not praised' (in marriage-song; see Cheyne ad toe), so Aquila oi% bjiv^^av, Symm. and Iheod. oin iirrivtdriaav, but LXX ovk iirivdriirav, ' did not raise the dirge'; Ezk 2617 of Tyre the' praised (AV; RV 'renowned') city' (LXX i) ir6Xis i] iirtuverl)); (2) of God, only in ptcp. (^Vni?) with gerundive force ='to be praised,''' worthy of praise ' : 2 S 224 (alvtrbv &ri/ca\6ro/[tai Ktipiov) = Ps 183 (alvdii tmKa\t Pr 2721 ' the fining pot is for silver and the furnace for gold, and a man [is to be estimated] according to his praise,' where ibbqp '? %? probably means 'according to his reputation' [so Toy et al., cf. LXX dp-ijp Si SoKin&fcTat 8to crro/iaros 4yKiiifua^6vTUv ainbv ; see Oxf. Heb. Lex. for other possible explanations]). The word n^rt? is used (1) of praise offered to J", sometimes individual, but more frequently general and public: Ps 341 4810 (both alvens) 651 ('unto Thee stillness is praise [n;pi i^ nVrip], O God, in Zion,' but text and tr. are both doubtful; LXX Sol vpiirei (ijuvos, ' praise is a fitting tribute to thee'; see Comm. ad loc, and Driver, Par. Psalter), 716 (B/u^cks), 8 (aiWts), 1004 (0/j.voi.) ; particularly of praise as sung : Ps 223 (' O Thou that sittest [throned] upon the praises of Israel,' an imitation of D'?n?o itfv, the idea perhaps being that the praises, ascending like clouds of incense, form, as it were, the throne upon which J" sits [so Kirkpatrick et al., but see Duhm ad loc, and cf. the LXX aii Sk iv 07(01$ /carot/cets, 6 t-ircuvos 'laparfk]), 331 (aiVecrts), 403 (Cjnvos), 10612 Neh 1246 (both aft-ecris), Is 4210 (Sojafere ro Ivo/m atirov). (2) The word nj?ni? is used for a song of praise in the title of Ps 145 (oEpecrts); of. the New Heb. name for the Book of Psalms, mWii? njp or D'V"! 'a, or I'1?')?. (3) It is used of qualities, deeds, etc., of J" which demand praise : Ex 15U niWip ktij ' terrible in praises' {i.e. in attributes that call for praise; LXX Bav/j.aol''!) in *ue house of Baal-berith. 2. The root nr whose primary sense is ' throw or east.' The only occurrence of the Qal is in Jer 50 [Gr. 27]14' shoot at her' (Babylon; n'^x it, LXX To&icrare iir' airffv), but perhaps we should read here rv. This sense is borne also by the Piel in the only two passages where this stem occurs, namely, La 353 ('? RtPtl ' and they cast stone(s) at me,' LXX ral 4Tr£6-qtcav \l6ov 4t' 4/iot) and Zee 24 [Eng. I21] (nyian rtj-iirn^i nii-3, LXX, by confusion with the Heb. word for ' hands,' reads els x"Pas avT&v to Tiaaapa Kipara). All the other occurrences of the root show the Hiphil and Hithpael (the latter only in P, the Chronicler, and Daniel) stems, which have the sense of ' praise' or ' confess,' a sense which it is somewhat difficult to connect with the primary signification, although it has been suggested that the connecting link may be found in gestures accompanying the act of praise. The Hiph. rnin (cf. Palmyrene mo 'render thanks,' frequent in votive inscriptions) is used1 occasionally of praising men: Gn 49s of Judah [with play upon name, ' Judnh, thee shall thy brethren praise' (jodHkha), LXX aivebi]; Ps 4517 of the king (AV 'praise,' RV 'give thanks'); 4918 ' men praise thee when thou doest well to thyself' (both (io^okoyuaBai.) ; Job 40u of Job, spoken ironically by the Almighty (LXX 6fio\oyeiv, AV and RV'confess'). This sense of 'confess'is borne by the Heb. word also in 1 K 833-35=2Ch 624 (all ^Ojito^eix), 26 (alveh), Ps 325 (itdyopetav), Pr 2813 (i£T)ye?tr$ai) ; cf. [in Hithp.] Ezr 101 (irpoaa.yoptiet.v), Neh Is 98-3 (all itayopeieiv), Dn 94 (LXX and Theod. i^oixoKoyutrdtu)20 (LXX igo/ioXcrycurdat, Theod. e£a7op-eiW), Lv 55 1621 2640, Nu 57 (all ilayopeieiv).— Much more frequently the object of praise is God: Gn 29s5 where J explains the name Judah (which he takes as=' praised,' as if from Hoph. of fir) by the saying he puts in the mouth of Leah, ' this time will I praise (Heb, '6deh) the Lobd ' (^0/40X07^0-0^01 Kvplif); very frequently, especially in Ps and Ch, of praise offered in the ritual worship, the object being Jahweh explicitly or implicitly: e.g. Is 121 (ei\oyeiv),4 {&nve?v), 38181' (aivelv, ei\oyetv), Jer 33 [Gr. 40] ", Ps 717 91 309-12 32s- u (all i(ono\oyeuT$ai). Ps 7610' surely the wrath of man shall praise Thee, the residue of wrath shalt Thou gird upon Thee' (AV and RVm ' restrain') is doubtful. The MT reads "iSns nan nnxs* i^n o^ njn '?, LXX tin ivdifuov clp&P&tov ^|o/ioXo7TjO"eTof cot, /cat ^p/cardXijit/xa iv&vfiXov PEAISE IN OT PRAISE IN" OT 33 iopritrei ift$, in the last clause; on nan he remarks that by this word the pious are meant, but that the pronunciation and the meaning of the word are quite uncertain. Ps 13914 reads ' I will praise (BV 'give thanks unto') Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made' (lit. 'fearfully wondrous,' there being no ' made' in the Hebrew [Driver, Par. Psalter]). The LXX (BA ti-ofuiKoyrfaofial coi Sri ), the Syr. and the Vulg. (quia terribiliter magniflcatus es) have 'Thou are fearfully wondrous,' and this is adopted by Wellh. in SBOT, i.e. rt-brj for •*'!??}. The more radical emendations proposed by Duhm appear to be uncalled for.—In other instances the object is the name of God: Is 251 (A/web), Ps 448 54" 9931382 1427 ; or His wonders (lejg, ra Bav/xAina) Ps 895 (all ££ofi.o\oyeur9i5 iji^ (ttj firf/iy rijs aym/rivy? adrov) Ps 304 97la (AV 'at the remembrance of His holiness,' RV 'to His holy name,' both ££ofu>\oye?), cf. Jer 33 [Gr. 40]". It will be observed that very frequently both AV and RV render min by ' give thanks to' instead of 'praise,'and in many instances (2Ch73"6 2021, Ps 7* 91 332 448 45" 52» 546 57" 108s 10930 1111 11819-21 1197 1381-2 13914 1427 14510, Is 121-4, Jer 33"), although not uniformly, RV substitutes 'give thanks to' for AV 'praise.' It might be well to adopt this rendering in all instances where mi describes a religious exercise, except those in which 'confess' is the appropriate sense, and to retain • praise' for Wn. The noun from this root is nnin 'praise,' 'thanksgiving.' It is used of giving praise to J" by confession of sin : Jos 719 JE; rnin iS-fn, Sis t^v $o/io-\6yi}ltrts), Jon 2s (atvefis Kal ^onoMyrja-is), Neh 1227 (K i!-otw\6yi)j(ns) AV has 'praise,' RV 'thanksgiving.' — The word rnto is used in Neh 1231-38-40 of the 'two companies that gave thanks' (rnin 's^, Sio wepl oWo-ews), and possibly a similar sense ('choirs') is intended in Jer 30 [Gr. 37]19 (AV and RV 'out of them shall proceed thanksgiving,' LXX B Qfiovres). In several instances .TriB means a thank-offering: Am 45 (&fio-\oyla), Lv 712-18-15 {Bvirla [t^s] alviaeut) 2229 (frrtfrnjj, Bvala eixi), 2 Ch 2931 3316 (both aXvent), Ps 5014--a (the latter verse reads in AV 'whoso offereth praise glorifieth Me,' RV 'whoso offereth the sacrifice of thanksgiving,' Driver [Par. Psalter] 'he that sacrificeth thanksgiving,' LXX Bvalts, alviaews Sofdtret /u) 56la 10722 11617, Jer 172B (all afcecris) 33U (Swpa). A doubtful form occurs in Neh 128 'Mattaniah who was over the thanksgiving,' AV and RV; AVm 'i.e. the psalms of thanksgiving'; RVm ' or the choirs.' The Hebrew is nhjn-i'v, for which LXX, evidently by a confusion with the Heb. word for 'hands, gives 4irl rCiv Xcp&"; the Vulg. has super hymnos. Ewald, Bertheau, Keil, and Oettli read the abstract noun nn.'rt, Olshausen reads the infin. nhin. It is not improbable that Jeduthun (which see) also belongs to this root, and that it was originally a musical term and not a proper name. As ' give thanks to' was suggested above as the most suitable rendering for ny\n in its liturgical • sense, 'thanksgiving' might be adopted for rnin, and 'praise' retained for n^rm. 3. In two instances, Jg 52 and Ps 72", where AVhas 'praise,' RV substitutes 'bless,'which is the more exact rendering of T3, the verb employed (LXX in both eiXoyew). i. tot, only in Piel. According to Hupfeld (Psalmen, 1862, iy. 421 f.), the original reference of this root# (which in the Heb. literature known to us is used either of playing or singing [cf. Lat. canere]) is to the hum of a stringed instrument, and "top, used in 57 titles as a designation of psalms, would be, properly, a song sung to a musical accompaniment. It is this word itojp which the LXX reproduces by $a\fi6s (whence psalm) from iftdWa, the usual LXX equivalent for 121, and in Cod. Alex. (A) the Book of Psalms is entitled ipa\-ri)ptov (whence Psalter). The word 121, with two exceptions (Jg 5s, in the Song of Deborah, ' I will sing praise [^o\] 476 ('to our king') 664 712af- ('to Thee,' II Ilix) 7510 (II tkt) 1462 (II ^n); once -^ instead of 7, Ps 5918' unto Thee, O my strength, will I sing praises'; or with eg*? 'to the name of God': Ps 18M=2 S 22-w (|| spite) 922 (|| nninj>) 1353 (|| mhhn); —(6) with an object, either a pronominal suffix, 'sing Thee,' 'praise Thee in song': Ps 3033 5710 1084 1381 (all || >rriK) j-or an accusative, God or the Lord : Ps 47' 68s3 (|| Tir) 1471; His name: 718 (II iitik) 93 619 664 685 (|| fa); the glory of His name : 66a ; His power (n"3«3): 2114 (|| fa); once the accusative of the song: 478 (Wsra 'i?l 'make ye melody with a skilful strain,' LXX fdXare avverus);—(c) absolutely : 578 (II tb») 98" (II yn, nss, pi) 1082 (|| rtr). Instrumental accompaniment to the song appears in 1088, and the word is used directly of playing upon an instrument in 33= 7122 98s 14491477149s. Two nouns (besides "flop) from the root tdi are found in the OT.—(1) rfjoi, which is used of instrumental music in Am 5P, where 'the melody of thy harps' (T^J nipt, \//a\/iiv 6pyivuv a-ov) is || 'the noise of thy songs' {Tff |io^, fix0" v8&y <">"); but of singing in Is 51s (.TJP! ^pj '"ifw, &o/u>\6yr)crii> Kal uvi)v alviatus), and prob. in Ps 81s (rrjipnx'p 'take up the melody,' X&pere yf/a\/n6v) and 985 (.TIP! Sip ' the voice of melody,' Quvy faX/iov). In both the last instances, however, there is, in any case, an instrumental accompaniment implied.—Like n?n? and min (see above), nisi is used also for the subject of song: Ex 152, Is 123, Ps US14 a; On-jDi; -?V 'Jahweh is my strength and my [theme of] melody.' It may be noted that while MT is exactly the same in all three passages, LXX reads in Exodus [6 Ktipios] ftorjBbs Kal (ncejraoTjjs, in Isaiah il 561-a /iov Kal i) atve<rls /iov Kiptot, in Psalms l<rxvs «o» * Its relation, if any, to 1D1 Qal = 'trim or prnne' is obsenrs (see Hupfeld, Psalmen, loo. cit. supra, footnote). It ia uncer> tain whether in Oa 2"! Tp»0 R'J. means ' the time of the singing (of birds)' or 'the time of the pruning (of vines).1 The LXS (xxifK rit n/if,t) and other versions take the latter view. 36 PRAISE IN OT PRAISE IN OT nal !}fi,vi)trls /xov o Kijpios.—(2) A by-form of the same word is vpi. Its occurrences are: 2 S 231 [in the epithet applied to David ^xiy-. nhp; D'yj, AV and RV ' the sweet psalmist of Israel,' RVni ' pleasant in the psalms of Israel'; on the construction see Driver on 2 S 810. H. P. Smith, who renders ' the Joy of the songs of Israel' (cf. Cheyne, OP 22, 'the darling of Israel's songs'), thinks the translation 'the sweet singer of Israel' can hardly he , obtained from the Heb. expression. The LXX has einrpevets \j/a\/iol 'IcrpaijX]; Job 3510 [' none saith, Where is God my Maker, who giveth songs in the night'?, i.e. perhaps (Dillm., Dav. ; differently Duhm), who by sudden acts of deliverance gives occasion for songs of triumph in the midst of the night of trial; LXX, reading or interpreting differently, 6 KarardiriTuv ntv t& Tpiawirov airod iv &fo,aoXoYij(r«)] ; 119s4 [' Thy statutes have been (the subject of) melodies to me' (Tijn 'Wn nit?); LXX ^aXrd. ij) II 'I will bless Thee' (s|f]?ij) and 'I will lift up my hands' (, where the singers are included among the Levites, do not belong to the Memoirs of Nehemiah, at least in a pure form, and their account approximates to the condition of things represented in 1 Ch 15I6ff- 233"6, 2 Ch 2926 etc. (cf. Ezr 310, where 'the Levites the sons of Asaph' is the phrase of the Chronicler). The guild of Asaph at a later period shared the musical service with the Korahites (cf. 2 Ch 2019 and the titles of Ps 42-49 and 84. 85. 87. 88), who, by the time of the Chronicler, have become porters and doorkeepers (1 Ch 919 261-19 etc.). The Chronicler himself is acquainted with three guilds,—Heman, Asaph, and Jeduthun or Ethan (1 Ch e33-89-44 1517 1641'- 25lff>)> to whom a Levitical origin is attributed, Heman being descended from Kohath, Asaph from Gershom, and Ethan from Merari (1 Ch 6s3-47). These three the Chronicler characteristically represents as choirmasters appointed by David, to whom the whole organization of the service of praise is attributed, and who is said to have divided the singers into 24 courses (1 Ch 63iff. x5«-ib 164 25lff-, 2 Ch 5la 29s4, cf. Sir 479). When we pass to the question of the use of a hymnal or similar forms in the Temple service, we encounter fresh uncertainties. Whatever view be taken of the contents of the Psalter (and there is a growing tendency to increase the proportion not only of post-exilic but of Maccabsean psalms), it will be generally admitted that, in its present form, the whole collection bears marks of having been intended for use in the second Temple. To what extent it may contain older (possibly even Davidic) psalms, which have been adapted for later congregational use, to what extent Nehemiah found the work of collecting already done for him, and how far a later hand, say that of Simon the Maceabee (Cheyne, OP 12 and passim), is responsible for the book as we now have it, are questions that cannot be said to be yet finally decided. Even so cautious a scholar as W. R. Smith was inclined to think that certain ' facts seem to indicate that even Book I. of the Psalter did not exist during the Exile, when the editing of the historical books was completed, and that in psalmody as in other matters the ritual of the second Temple was completely reconstructed' (OTJC* 219). ' It would be absura to maintain that there were no psalms before the Exile. But it is not absurd to question whether Temple-hymns can have greatly resembled those in the Psalter' (Cheyne, OP 213 f.). It is a fair question whether praise was not • This guild gives its name to one of the collections in the Psalter, consisting of Ps 50 and 73-83. offered in the Synagogue as well as in the Temple. This is usually denied (see Gibson, Expositor, July 1890, pp. 25-27, and cf. Schurer, HJP II. ii. 76, where the parts of the Synagogue service are enumerated), but Cheyne (OP 12, 14, 363) urges forcible considerations in favour of a different conclusion. There is all the less difficulty in conceiving of the Psalter as a manual of praise in the Synagogue when we observe that, even in post-exilic times, praise might be offered at other times and places than public worship. Thus, not only was Ps 118 sung in the Temple on high festival days (as on the eight successive days of the Feast of Booths arid that of the Dedication), but the Hallel (Ps 113-118), of which it forms a part, was sung in two sections (113. 114. and 115-118) in every dwelling-place where the Passover was celebrated. It is to the singing of the second part of the Hallel over the fourth and last cup that the ilivfyavTes of Mt 26s0, Mk 1426 refers. Again, the •Songs of the Ascents' (Ps 120-134) are perhaps most plausibly explained as ' Songs of the Pilgrimages,' i.e. songs with which the caravans of pilgrims enlivened their journey to the stated festivals. See, further, Duhm, ' Psalmen' (Hclcom.), p. xxiv. How far in post-exilic times the general body of the people took part in the public service of praise is not clear, but the analogy of other parts of the ritual suggests that they participated in it to a very limited extent. In Sir 5016* (referring to the time of Simon the high priest) the people ' fell down upon the earth on their faces to worship the Lord' and ' besought the Lord Most High in prayer' (cf. Lk I10, Ac 3l). It is of the sons of Aaron that it is said that they 'shouted and sounded the trumpets of beaten work,' while ' the singers also praised him with their voices.' This corresponds closely with 2 Ch 73 'all the people . . . bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement and worshipped and gave thanks unto the Lord (mn'j rrnirn nqe?:i, ical vpoaeniviriaav ko.1 %grow t<? Kvplif), saying, For he is good, for his mercy endureth for ever.' Even this last formula appears to be in this instance not so much the language of praise as of prayer. A similar remark applies to 1 Mac 465 ' all the people fell upon their faces and worshipped and gave praise (yVKbyriaev) unto heaven, winch had given them good success.' So in 2 Ch 2928' all the congregation worshipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpets sounded' (on all these passages see Biichler, as cited in the Literature below). On the other hand, that some part in the service of praise was taken by the people is clear from such a liturgical direction as 'let all the people say Amen, Hallelujah' (Ps 10648, cf. 1 Ch 16s", where the citation of this Psalm is followed by the affirmation, ' and all the people said Amen, and praised the Lord'). Moreover, it is extremely probable that, in antiphonal psalms like Ps 118, the congregation as well as the Levitical choirs took part. Buchler (ZATW xix. [1899] p. 103 n.) will have it that the call in Ps 1503 ' praise him with the sound of the trumpet' (shdphar, ' horn,' mainly a secular instrument, whereas the official sacred trumpet is hdzugerah, cf. Driver, Joel and Amos, p. 144 f.) is addressed not to the Levites but to the congregation. He compares Ps 813f% and Jth 16lm where Judith leads off and all the people take up the song. Many psalms, e.g. 95. 96. 98. 99. 100, not to speak of the Hallelujah psalms (which are all post-exilic), were evidently composed from the first for liturgical use, and others may have been transformed from a more private and individual use to be the expression of the church-nation's praise. It is of course only to a limited extent that the Talmudic accounts of the service of praise in the Temple can be accepted as correct even for the 38 PRAISE IN NT PEAYER closing period of OT history, bat there is good reason to believe that the list given in Tamid (vii. 4) of the psalms that were sung on each day of the week, at the morning sacrifice, is an ancient one. These psalms were as follows: Sunday 24 (B ttjs /Mas aa.pfl6.Twv), Monday 48 (B Sevripq. <7a/3/3dTou), Tuesday 82, Wednesday 94 (B rerpAdi (rappdruv), Thursday 81, Friday 93 (B els rty ij/xipay tov ir/>o-aapfjirov tire KaTt$icurr) plays a large part in the NT, both the praise of God by angels and by men, and the praise of man by God and his fellow-man. i. The praise of God is the work of the angels (Lk 213- 14-a» 1938), and also of man. The chief object of the existence of the redeemed is to show forth the praises of Him who called them out of darkness into ligjht (1 P 2l°): Gentiles join now in the work of praise (Ro 159"11); and all, Jew and Gentile alike, exist to the praise of the glory of His grace (Eph I3-", Ph 1", 2 Th I10, 1 P 2"): Christians offer their sacrifice of praise to God (He 1315): universal praise will be the characteristic of the last day (Key 198): whereas failure to give God praise for His mercies is the note of heathenism (Ro I21, Rev 11" 14' 16s, cf. Ac II23). The subjects of praise are God's intrinsic excellences i&per&s, 1P 210, where see Hort); His universal gifts of creation, of providence, of redemption (Rev 153-4, Ac 244 and passim); His promises to individuals (Ro 420); His blessings to individuals, especially for the miracles of our Lord[s lifetime (Lk 1843 1937, cf. 2 Co Is). One idiomatic phrase in the mouth of the ' Jews' Sbs 56(av tv 9ey (Jn 924 'Give God the praise' AV, ' Give glory to God' RV) is remarkable, meaning, 'Confess thy sins' (cf. Joshua's words to Achan in Jos 718), and implying that truthful confession of the real facts of life brings glory to God. The tone of praise to God is specially marked in the Gospel of St. Luke, the Acts, the Ep. to the Ephesians, and the Apocalypse. It finds its expression in semi-rhythmical language and formal hymns (see Hymn), and also in doxologies. The latter were primarily liturgical (cf. 2 Co I20 dV avroi ro 'Afity ti} 0e irpbs S6!-av Si ii/j,Qv), and are adaptations from existing Jewish liturgies. The fountain-head of them may perhaps be traced to 1 Ch 2910, from which originated two types—(a) beginning with the wora 'Blessed' {eiXoyriros, i.e. bless-worthy, worthy of receiving blessing), implying 'an intelligent recognition of His abiding goodness, as made known in His past or present acts,' Lk I63, 2 Co I3 11", Ro I26 9», Eph Is (where see Lightfoot), 1 P I3 (where see Hort); (b) ascribing to God glory (power, might, dominion) for ever. This is the commoner type in the NT and in subsequent Christian liturgies: the simplest form ifi ii 861-a els tovs cUCivas' i/iiv (Ro II36) is varied by the several writers to suit the exact context (Gal 1», Ro 16s7, Ph 42», Eph 321, 1 Ti 1" 616, 2 Ti 418, He 1321 [see Westcott, Additional Note], 1 P 4" 5", 2 P 31S, Jude 25, Rev I6 513 712), and it left its ultimate mark on the Lord's Prayer in the addition of the doxology, perhaps originally made On praise as a part of public worship, see art. Church in vol. i. p. 428", art. Hymn in vol. ii., and cf. the preceding article. . ii. ' The idea of man as praised by God is not distinctly recognized in the OT' (Hort on 1 P 1'). There God is spoken of as well pleased with men ; but the NT goes beyond this in the word 'praise,' which implies not only moral approbation, but the public expression of it. The difference may have arisen from our Lord's life; He had moved about amojig men, accepting praise and homage where it was simple and genuine (Mt 2116); giving His own praise without stint to John the Baptist (Mt II11). to all acts of faith (Mt 810 9221528168, Lk 79), to good and loyal service (Mt 2521-23, Lk 19"), to all generosity of gift(Mk 1243 146), to self-devotion (Lk 1041), to prudence (Lk 168). Hence the ascended Lord is represented as sending His messages of praise as well as of blame to the Seven Churches of Asia (Rev I4); and the praise of God is the ultimate verdict to which Christians appeal (1 P I7), which will correct hasty judgments of men, and be the true praise exactly appropriate to each man's actions (1 Co 41"6 6 tirauros): the true Jew, who bears rightly the name of Judah ( = 'praised'), is he whose praise comes from God not from men (Ro 2!9, where see Giflbrd in 'Speakers' Com.). The praise of man by his fellow-men is naturally of more doubtful value. On the one hand it is liable to be unreal, shallow, flattering, and to lead to a false self-satisfaction; our Lord avoided the shallow praise of the crowds, and of individuals who did not weigh the meaning of their words (Lk 1819); He warned His followers against the desire for such praise (Mt 6l, Lk 626); He traced the rejection of the truth by the Pharisees to the fact that they sought honour from each other, and did not seek the honour that comes from the only God (Jn 541"44, cf. 1243): St. Paul refused to seek glory from men (1 Th 26), and was ever on his guard against pleasing men (Gal I10). On the other hand, St. Paul appeals to the consideration of any praise of men as a proper incentive to Christians (el tis ?irai»os, Ph 48): the proper function of human government is the praise of well-doers (Ro 13s, 1 P 214): St. Paul praises whole Churches for their virtues (1 Co ll2and/>am»»): he lavishes the highest praises on each of his fellow-workers (1 Co 4!7 and passim): their praise runs through all the Churches (2 Co 818): his aim is, and that of all Christians should be, to provide things honest in the sight of men as well as of God (2 Co 82\ Ro 1217). Praise of men is treated as a danger when it stands in antithesis to the praise of God; but when it reflects the piaise of God in the mirror of the Christian's conscience, it is a welcome incentive to good. W. Lock. PRAYER.—An attempt will be made to treat the subject historically, keeping separate the evidence supplied by different portions of the Bible as to numan practice and Divine teaching on the subject of Prayer. With regard to the OT, it will be assumed, for the purpose of the article, that the books which it contains, whatever their respective dates may be, are on the whole trustworthy guides as to the religious beliefs and practices of the periods which they describe.* • It can scarcely be denied, however, that a writer like the Chronicler is apt to antedate the beliefs and practices of bil own age. PEAYER PEAYEE 39 I. In the Old Testament.—i. Prefatory.—It will first be necessary to limit the subject of inquiry. Prayer (n)>)tf) may be understood widely, so as to include every form of address from man to God, whatever its character. Hannah's song (1 S 2) is a thanksgiving, yet it is introduced by the words ' Hannali prayed and said,' and the prayer of Hab 3 is a psalm. But address by way of petition must form the main subject of this article, though it is impossible to isolate this division of prayer, see, e.g., Is 637-6413, where praise, thanksgiving, pleading, confession, and supplication are blended. Certain axioms with regard to prayer are taken for granted, viz. (1) God hears prayer ; (2) God is moved by prayer; (3) prayer may be not merely a request, but a pleading, or even an expostulation. It may here be added that OT prayer is little occupied with what becomes the main subject of prayer in NT, viz. spiritual and moral needs. This remark, however, applies only partially to the Psalms. The terms for ' prayer' must next be considered. The verbs are : li ds*3 nib (Gn 426, where see Dill-mann's note), or simply tr® ; this is the oldest and simplest phrase. It is perpetuated in NT (itnKa-\ei24. For strongly marked transitions see 576"11 6930-36. There is a sense that God has heard, and that is equivalent to His granting the petition, cf. 1 Jn 516. Yet this answer sometimes fails, and psalms from which it is absent strike us as abnormal, e.g. Ps 88. Here we come near what is frequent in Job, prayer struggling in the darkness, without a reply. It is that ' shutting out' of prayer which is described in La 3s. (3) National una personal prayer, how far can they be distinguished? Some prayers in the Psalter are evidently national, e.g. 60. 79. 80. But while 44 is no less evidently national, ' I' and ' me' occur in vv.° and 16. Hence it is evident that the 1st pers. sing, is no proof that a psalm, e.g. 102, is personal. It may well be an expression of the complaint and needs of the nation. It may almost be said that the psalmist never felt himself alone, but always connected his personal joys or griefs with those of the nation. Cheyne (OP 276) quotes a Eab-binic saying, ' In prayer a man should always unite himself with the community.' The question then will generally be which of the two elements predominates, not which is exclusively present. (4) Material and external blessings are the principal subjects of prayer in the Psalms. Account must be taken, in considering this matter, of changes which have taken place in the meaning of words by the legitimate spiritualizing effect of Christian use. ' Say unto my soul, I am thy salvation' (353) is a good instance of how a prayer for temporal deliverance has come to acquire the appearance of being a prayer for spiritual blessing. But although the Psalms are far more largely occupied with temporal and material than with spiritual needs, yet there are distinctly spiritual topics of prayer which fill a considerable place in them. These are: (a) Communion with God, prayer for the intercourse of prayer, as in 63. (b) Forgiveness of sins, besougnt with the greatest earnestness in 51 for its own sake, but more frequently taking the form of prayer for that deliverance from suffering and chastisement which was held to mark the forgiveness of sin (see art. SlN IN OT). (c) Ps 119 stands on a different footing. It contains much prayer for a knowledge of God's will. The prayer for quickening ('quicken' occurs 11 times) seems distinctly to have a spiritual sense. The ' He' division, with its initial verbs in Hiphil, is almost entirely prayer. The development of prayer in a spiritual direction has been carried some way in the Psalms, and prayer for external blessings has been cast in a form which will lend itself afterwards to spiritual interpretation. We must not, however, suppose that prayer of this kind differentiates the Psalms from the prayers of all other religions. Prstyer for spiritual and moral gifts is found elsewhere (Tylor, Prim. Culture, vol. ii. pp. 373, 374). (5) Urgency of Prayer. There is a feeling that God must be induced to hear. This comes out in the anthropomorphic phrases which speak to Him as though He needed to be awakened, urged, or persuaded. We can scarcely, suppose that this is, all of it, no more than a sacred irony. While NT put aside the thought of awakening Him, it retained that of pleading. On this subject see Ps 281-4423, and in correction of these Ps 121 throughout. (6) Prayer of imprecation, for vengeance. This is both frequent and urgent. It occurs in the highest strains of devotion, e.g. Ps G922"28, as well as in psalms of a lower level, e.g. 59. tt reaches its extreme point in 109. In this Psalm attempts have been made to explain it away, but here no separate dealing is possible with a conception which enters into the tissue of so many psalms. It is certainly remarkable that the phrase which above any expresses the absorption of the psalmist in prayer (' I am prayer,' 1094) should occur where it does. Various considerations may help us to bear with this feature, but one is sufficient here. The devout Israelite of that day believed deeply in God, was perhaps more closely conscious of Him than we are, and yet looked out on a world of treachery, cruelty, and lust. The vision which we have before us of a future retribution in another life was entirely shut out from him. If his sense of justice was not dead, how could he help crying out for some manifestation of Divine righteousness by way of retribution, even apart from human instinct for revenge? An inspiration which ran counter to such desires would have disturbed the very foundations of his faith. See, further, art. Psalms, p. 160. Proverbs.—Only two points need be noticed : (1) Three passages in which the character of the person praying determines the acceptance of the prayer, 15s- "• 289. This feeling, legitimate as it is, and admitted in the formularies of to-day, would tend to grow into that mistaken view of the matter which is corrected in the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. (2) The prayer of Agur (307'9), with its modest request for the middle state on account of the effect of riches and poverty on his relation with God. Cf. the prayer of Socrates (Plato, Phmdrus, sub fin., and also Thorn. Aquinas, Summa, ii. 2, lxxxiii. 5). Job.—The earlier part of the book is in the form of a dialogue between Job and his friends; but in fact, when his friends pause, it is often the case that Job, instead of answering them, turns away to God, and lets his address to God stand as PRAYER PRAYER an answer to them. Thus, much of the book is prayer. See chs. 6. 7. 9. 10. 13. 14. The boldest of these is 10. Though full of doubt, rebelliousness, and half-way to renouncing God, it is nevertheless prayer. These chapters are, in fact, prayer for what at times is the most urgent of all needs, some explanation of pain and suffering. It is prayer for wisdom. So, long afterwards, St. James, writing to those who have fallen into manifold trials, bids them ask wisdom from God, that they may understand the purpose of His discipline (Ja I2"5). To sum up, the axioms stated at the outset have been abundantly justified. It has plainly appeared that God hears and is moved by prayer, especially by persistent pleading prayer. This was the conviction not only of the mass of the nation, but also of a large number of highly gifted persons. Their experience of prayer, as attested by their writings, must always constitute an important element in that portion of the evidences for the being of God which is drawn from human consciousness. In the spiritual sphere it corresponds to the testimony which St. John gives to God manifest in the flesh, 1 Jn I1"". II. In the Apocrypha.—The Apocr. as a whole confirms strongly what has been said as to the increased prominence of prayer after the Exile. The Apocr. books incorporate, or even consist of prayers. The Additions to Esther are mainly two long prayers of Esther and Mordecai. See also Bar l15-38; the Prayer of Azarias (Abednego) prefixed to the Song of the Three Children; and the Prayer of Manasses: the two narratives Tobit and Judith both attest the power of prayer. In Tobit the miraculous interpositions and the happy issue of the story are entirely the result of the simultaneous prayers of Tobit and Sarah recorded in To 3, see esp. 316. And the place given to prayer in an ideal Jewish family is shown by the paternal injunctions of To 419. The Book of Tobit, although a fiction, engages respect and interest by its high moral tone ; but the same cannot be said of the Book of Judith, in which the prayer of the heroine is tainted with the treachery which is glorified throughout the book. Her prayer in Jth 910 is prayer for the success of deceit, and it would be hard to find anything baser in conception than her pretended scheme of inquiring by prayer as to the sins of her countrymen, that she may tell Holofernes when to attack them, Jth II17-18. The necessity of washing, before prayer, for those living among the heathen appears in Jth 127-8. In 1 Mac we pass from fiction to history. As Ezr-Neh showed prayer in men of action, so also 1 Mac, e.g. 4s0"33 5s3 and II71"72, prayer was the secret of the MaccabEean victories. That it was so, is nowhere better expressed than in 2 Mac lo27, ' contending with their hands and praying unto God with their hearts.' The notice of Mizpeh in 1 Mac 340 as an ancient place of prayer, links the prayer and victory of Judas with those of Samuel in former time, and is proof of the surviving holiness of the ancient sanctuaries. 2 Mac does but renew in legendary guise the evidence of 1 Mac as to the frequency of prayer in the great patriotic struggle. But it contains two passages which favoured, if ithey did not suggest, later developments in Cliris-"tian times. With 2 Mac 1240"45 before them as canonical Scripture, it is no wonder that men thought they had ample justification for offering sacrifice (in the Mass) on behalf of the dead. And the vision of Onias and Jeremiah (2 Mac 1512-14) was a c]ear testimony to the intercession of saints on behalf of the living. Cf. also Bar 34 if the text be correct. The sapiential books of the Apocr. should next be considered. The Book of Wisdom from 91 onward is a continuous address to God, and may be regarded as a prayer, though the character of supplication is not clearly discernible beyond the end of ch. 9. But 1627> ^ contains a beautiful illustration with regard to prayer. As manna had to be gathered at daybreak, lest it should melt in the heat of the sun, so we must rise at daybreak to gather spiritual food by prayer. If the Book of Wisdom contributes little, Sirach compensates, as might be expected from the respective origin of the two books. It contains prayers, e.g. 2227-236 (personal); 361'17 (national); 5032-24 paryy thanksgiving, the source of Rinkart's famous hymn, ' Nun danket alle Gott.' Sir 710>" 283"4 prepare the way for our Lord's teaching on prayer, and may have been present to His mind : 389"" was certainly in St. James' mind when he wrote Ja 514"16. Sir 3S34 may perhaps be the source of the proverb, ' Laborare est orare.' Taking the book generally, it is remarkable that the principal subject of prayer in Sirach is the forgiveness of sins, thus advancing the movement begun in OT to spiritualize the aims of prayer. One more book of Apocr. requires notice, an apocalypse, the so-called 2 Esdras. Though chs. 3-14 inclusive are certainly post-Christian, and therefore do not, like the books hitherto considered, illustrate inter - Testamental Jewish thought, there is much that is of great interest in them, and not least in regard to prayer. The question is raised in I1"!-1"! (RV text) whether the intercession of prophets and leaders which had played so great a part in the history of Israel will not also be availing in the day of judgment, and the answer is a twice-repeated negative. III. In the New Testament.—It will be convenient to state at once the main points in which the doctrine of prayer makes advance in NT. (1) Further development of prayer for spiritual blessings. It is the light here thrown on the possibilities of a higher life by the example and teaching of Christ which enlarges and raises the scope of prayer. (2) Extension of the guidance of the Holy Spirit to all believers, enables them for prayer. Power in prayer was a characteristic of the prophets in the OT, because they had the Spirit. Now all can pray, because all have the Spirit. (3) Prayer in the name of Jesus. This is absolutely new (Jn 1624). The verse just cited gives the turning-point in the history of prayer. It does not divert prayer from the Father to the Son, but gives new access to the Father. Thus the normal idea of prayer is to pray in the Spirit, through the Son, to the Father. NT words for ' prayer' must be briefly noticed. 1. Prayer to God with implication of worship is vpjxreixecrdai. 2. etix&T0ai barely exceeds an earnest wish, and needs irpbs rbv debv to give it the sense of prayer as in 2 Co 137. Its subst. (ixfi means a vow except in Ja 515. 3. Sioiuu, dh)ao. It does not necessarily imply public prayer, for two persons are enough. The effect 01 this saying appears in the frequent mention of united prayer m Acts. (5) Last discourses.—As in all other respects these discourses give new and distinctive teaching, 44 PRAYER PRAYER so in respect of prayer. It is henceforth to be in Jesus' name. ' Thus is given not a mere devotional form, but a new ground on which the worshipper stands, a new. plea for the success of his petitions ; and, in fact, a wholly new character to prayer, since it must be brought into unison with the mind of Him in whose name it is presented' (T. D. Bernard, Central Teaching of Jesus Christ, p. 156; and see preceding page). As this teaching was not possible in the early days when the Lord's Prayer was given, ' in Jesus' name' was not added to it. But that prayer being His, and in accordance with His will, is a prayer in His name, without the addition of ' through Jesus Christ,' which the Church has never presumed to make. This instance shows that the direction is not to be taken in a narrow, verbal way. (3) Finally, the Gospels afford us teaching on prayer given in an entirely different way. Under (1) the Lord's example was considered on its human side, teaching about prayer by His own prayer. But even during His ministry the Divine nature, though in a certain sense hidden, began to show itself, and He is the recipient of prayer from those who need His help. Their requests are not described by the highest term Tpwretixo/iai, but by S4o/i.ai, 56/cm. But since these requests were made to the Son of God, His way of dealing with them instructs all who pray, (a) Requests are granted where there is faith. ' Believe ye that I am able to do this ?' (6) Granting requests is delayed to produce importunity and test character (Mk 727). A saying of Seneca's well illustrates the difference between what the Stoic thought of the attitude of importunate prayer and the way in which Christianity regards it: ' Nihil carius emitur quam quae precibus emta est.' Christianity would substitute 'nihil dulcius.' (c) Man's ignorance in prayer is insisted on in the case of the sons of Zebedee, Mt 202a ; and it is shown by experience in the case of St. Peter, whose request is granted that he may learn that it was presumptuous, Mt 1428"31, cf. Ko 8a6. Here it may be added that the disciples who had asked Jesus daily and hourly for help and guidance while He was with them in the flesh, evidently continued to do so after God had ' exalted him to be a Prince and a Saviour.' St. Stephen says, ' Lord Jesus, receive my spirit'; and Christians are described by St. Paul as those who ' call upon (or invoke in prayer) the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,' 1 Co I2, if. Ac 914 2216. It is therefore going too far to say with Origen (de Orat. 15) that all prayer must be offered to the Father. Yet it is the case that Jesus teaches His disciples to pray, not to Himself, but to the Father in His name. Liddon (Hampton Lectures, note F) appears to press his argument further than a consideration of the whole evidence will justify. ii. Acts.—The teaching and guidance given by our Lord manifests its results in the Acts and Kpistles. Acts will show its external results in the Church as a whole, not, however, without some evidence of private practice. The Epp. will give its inward effect on the devotional life of individuals, especially of St. Paul, but here also something may be gathered as to external and corporate usages. (1) Acts supplies notices of times and places of prayer. St. Peter observes the sixth hour (Ac 109), and he and St. John go up to the temple at the ninth hour, which is described as the hour of prayer (Ac 31). It is probable that the gathering described in Ac 21 was for worship, and this is fixed by 215 as having taken place at the third hour, so we have recognition of all the three Jewish hours of prayer. In the matter of prayer, as in most other exter-nar matters, the Christian body remained at first within the pale of Judaism. To ordinary observers they were only a new sect (a'lpeiris) or Judaism. They had their private worship (Ac 242), but they did not on that account forsake the temple; and it is possible that they still attended the synagogues, though there is no evidence on this point beyond the practice of St. Paul on his missionary journeys (in which case he had a special object in view), and Ja 22 (where 'synagogue' may mean a distinctively Christian assembly, cf. He 1025). But with regard to the private worship of Christians, there is ample evidence in Acts, e.g. 423"30 where the actual prayer used is recorded, and 12la the assembly for prayer in the house of Mary the mother of Mark. Two farewell prayers from St. Paul's life may be added—the one at Miletus with tears and embraces (Ac 2036), the other on the beach at Tyre (Ac 216). In both these cases they knelt in prayer. Kneeling is also the attitude of St. Stephen (Ac 760), St. Peter (Ac 9*>), and St. Paul (Eph 314). On the other hand, our Lord's words had authorized standing to pray (Mk II25). (2) Fulfilment of prayer.—Acts is remarkably strong in its testimony on this point. There are : the release of St. Peter (Ac 12), the sending of St. Peter to Cornelius (104), the preservation of the crew and passengers who sailed with St. Paul (2724). And there are the cases in which prayer is recorded as the means of working miracles (940 28s). Passing to the Epp. we may take here the great instance of non-fulfilment of believing prayer, the thrice-repeated prayer of St. Paul to be delivered from the thorn in the flesh (2 Co 128-9). Yet the prayer was not frustrate; what was granted was the power to rejoice in the infirmity. (3) Prayer in connexion with laying on of hands. —In Acts there are mentioned three more or less distinct uses of the laying on of hands : (a) in healing as by Ananias (917), St. Paul (288); (0) as a complement to baptism by St. Peter and St. John at Samaria (8") and St. Paul at Ephesus (196); (7) on appointment to ministries (66 133). Now in each of these three classes of instances, though not in every instance, there is a distinct mention of prayer, as though to show that those who use the form are not in possession of the gift so as to transfer it at their will, but rather have authority to ask for it to be given. See, further, art. Laying on of Hands. (4) The passages in which prayer accompanies the appointment to ministries naturally raise another question. In Ac 133 1423 fasting accompanies prayer, cf. Lk 231. The connexion between fasting and prayer has already been observed in OT, but was it continued in the Apostolic Church ? These two passages go in that direction, and it would be natural that the Christians should not abandon a practice in which as Jews they had been trained, and which appeared to have a possible sanction from Mt 91B. But, in considering fasting as subsidiary to prayer, it should be observed that in four passages where it appears in that light in AV, viz. Mt 172', Mk Q39, Ac 1U3», 1 Co 75, RV, following textual evidence, omits all mention of the subject. See, further, art. FASTING. (5) One other point of interest from Acts is that prayer here bears out what was said under OT of prayer as colloquy with God. Such is the prayel in the visions of Ananias (Ac 913"16) and St. Paul (Ac_2217-21). iii. The Epistles and Apocalypse.—(1) St. James. —This Ep. takes up and applies to daily life the teaching of the gospel, and is especially related to Mt. Hence there is much as to prayer. The need of faith in prayer, and the fatal effect of doubting (Ja I6'8, observe same word [SiaKplvonai] for ' doubt' as in Mt 21'J1); the neglect of prayer, and character of wrong prayer (Ja 42-3), are put in a practical way. PEAYER PREACHING 45 But the most important passage is Ja 513"18. There in an emphatic position almost at the close of the Epistle we have the recommendation of a particular act of prayer on the part of the elders of the congregation, accompanied with the use of oil (in accordance with the early apostolic practice described Mk 613). This prayer is not only to effect bodily but also spiritual healing. The sufferer's sins will be forgiven. And then the power of prayer is still further urged, and the example of Elijah given. Intercession for one another is to be the rule of the Church (cf. 1 Jn 516). (2) Epp. of St. Paul.—Only a few points can be noticed, (a) The co-operation of the Holy Spirit in prayer comes out clearly. In Ro 815 the Spirit enables us to cry 'Abba, Father,' and in v.26 intercedes for' us (virepenTvyxdi'et) along with our defective prayers. There is a special fitness in the use of irrvyxdvu (and its compound) with regard to the Spirit (as here) and the Son (v.34 and He 7s5), as it signifies close approach. For the help of the Spirit in prayer see also Eph 618 and Jude 20. Further, the gift of tongues was used in prayer as well as in praise (1 Co 1414-16). The distinction which St. Paul here draws between the office of his (own) spirit and his mind in prayer is well illustrated by Thorn. Aquin. ii. 2. lxxxiii., who says that prayer is 'rationis actus.' There must be some arrangement of petitions (ordinatio), and for this the mind must take part, (fl) The re-ciprocal prayer of St. Paul and his converts. He constantly prays for them, he tells them so, and they pray for him. His prayer for them is sometimes in anxiety and sometimes with joy (Ph I4). It included mention of persons by name, e.g. Timothy and Philemon, and no doubt countless others. He looks on this reciprocal prayer as a bond. He begins and often closes his Epp. with mentipn of it. He regards the circumstances of his own life and his movements as in part determined by the prayers of the saints (2 Co lu, Philem a2). (7) Prayer is striving, an dytliv (like Jacob's wrestling), see Ho 1530, Col 21 and 4i2. (5) Some light is given as to the prayers of the congregation. There is the injunction in 1 Ti 21, where we find the rudiments of a fixed order of prayer. Clem. Rom. 61 shows how this command was obeyed. The chapter above quoted, 1 Ti 2, gives negatively in v.8 the same conditions of acceptable prayer ' without wrath and doubting' as are given positively in Mk II26,' where forgiveness and faith are required for prayer. ' Wrath' here means refusal to forgive; such a condition condemns a literal use of the Imprecatory Psalms, (e) In the Pastoral Epp. prayer has already become the special duty of a certain class (1 Ti 5s). (3) Ep. to Hebrews.—The great lesson here is freedom of access to God in prayer. This Christ has obtained for us (He 416 1022). The latter verse reminds us that the baptized no longer need the ritual washing of their bodies before prayer (see above on prayer in Apocrypha). (4) Epp. of St. John.—Here again is the same thought as in He 416, expressed by the same word (wafifrqala). But in 1 Jn there is no question of entrance and approach (efooSos, irpoaipx^Om); we are already near. Thus wajip'ritrla has more distinctly its primary sense of ' freedom of utterance' in prayer. See 1 Jn 321g 22, where the promises of the certain fulfilment of prayer given m Jn 1413-14 157-le 1623'u are concentrated and dwelt upon. The still stronger repetition of this assurance in 1 Jn 514.15 explains any difficulty that might attach to it, by substituting ' according to His will' for 'in His name.' These two conditions are really equivalent. We cannot truly associate ourselves with, Christ in prayer (in His name) without His spirit of entire submission to the Father's will. (5) The Apocalypse.—-Here the prayer for vengeance (Rev 610) is an echo of Lk 181"8, but it is the prayer of the dead (cf. Bar 34). In Rev 5s and 83 the prayers of the saints are offered to God, but this is the prayer of the living which ascends from the earth. This prayer is mediated, being offered in one case by the elders, and in the other haying incense added to it by angels. For this idea (common among the Jews) cf. To 1212-15. The passages in Revelation are clearly symbolical, and do not warrant man in addressing angels for such a purpose. The mistranslation of Vulg. (Job 51) probably encouraged the error. For the connexion of prayers and incense see above, p. 39b. Lastly, the Apocalypse ends with a prayer from the highest level of Christian faith and hope befitting the place assigned to it at the end of the Canon. It is a threefold prayer. It is the prayer of the Spirit, which animates all faithful prayer under the NT (2217). It is the prayer of the Bride, i.e. the Church (ib.). It is also the prayer of the individual, the writer of the book (2220). All other prayer resolves itself at last into prayer for the coming of the Lord Jesus, which will accomplish all desires. Literature.--Jerus. Talmud, Bcrakhoth, tr. Schwab; Onsen, de Oratione Libellus; the artt. in Herzog on 'Gebet,' 'Gebet bei den Hebraern'; Bp. Monrad, World of Prayer, tr. Banks. The standard works on Biblical Theology, e.g Oehler, Schultz, Beyschlag, have very scanty references to Prayer. Modern works on the efficacy of Prayer are not mentioned, being outside the scope of the present article. J£, JJ. BERNARD. PRAYER OF MANASSES. — See Manasses (Prayer of). PREACHER.—See Ecclesiastes. PREACHING (Heb. nKHj?, Jon 32, from so.,? 'cry out,' ' proclaim'; Gr. Ktfpvy/j.a, ' the message proclaimed,' from Kripiao-a, 'declare as a herald,' ' preach'; in NT used in marked distinction from SiSaxti, ' teaching,' and SiBdaicui, ' teach,' and always preserving in some degree the idea of the root-word k»J/>u{, ' herald'). — Strictly speaking, Christian preaching is the proclamation of the gospel, which is to be followed by the more elaborate but less startling process of teaching. This limitation is observable in the NT accounts of our Lord's ministry where He first appears preaching, i.e. proclaiming the advent of the kingdom of God {e.g. Mt 417), following on the1 preaching of John the Baptist (e.g. Mt 31-2), and then proceeds to teach the nature and laws of the kingdom {e.g. Mt 5s). The word eiayyeXlfa is frequently used for Christian preaching, as the declaration of glad tidings (e.g. Lk 318). But although the NT words rendered 'preaching' have this limitation of meaning, it would be undesirable to confine the consideration of the subject of preaching to the cases in which they are strictly applicable, that subject, as we now understand it, including all instruction in religion which takes the form of popular discourse, and especially that which is associated with public worship. i. Jewish Preaching.—Of the two streams of religious life and practice that are seen in the history of Israel—the priestly and the prophetic— preaching attaches itself to the latter. The sumptuous pageantry of the sacrifices spoke to the eye and taught by dramatic representation. The prophet was emphatically the preacher. In the earlier periods, indeed, his teaching is usually by means of the brief oracle. But the great 8tn cent, prophets composed and delivered elaborate discourses. They were preachers before they were writers, falling back on the pen only when the living voice was silenced : in the case of Jeremiah, for the preservation of the warnings which his 46 PEEACHING PREACHING contemporaries refused to hear (Jer 302); in the case of Ezekiel, because the circumstances of the Exile compelled the prophet to resort to literary channels for making his message known. Still even Ezekiel's prophecies may have been originally spoken (see Sniend, Der Prophet Ezechiel, xxii.). On the other hand, Ewald held that Ezekiel wrote his oracles instead of speaking them because he felt agdecay of the prophetic spirit (Prophets of the OT, iv. 2, 9). For the most part, at all events, the prophecies contained in OT are written discourses which had been preached or which were intended for preaching. Still there are two important differences between this preaching of the prophets and what we understand by the term to-day. (1) The preaching of the prophets was not a normal function of public worship taking its place in the ritual of the sanctuary. It was aii utterance demanded by special crises, or prompted by a special revelation, and spoken in the court or the market-place, wherever the prophet could find the audience he was urged to address. (2) For the most part it dealt with public questions, national sins, judgments, and deliverances, rather than with individual conduct and need (see W. R. Smith, Prophets of Israel, Lect. II.). In Ezekiel, on the other hand, more personal preaching appears (see Cornill, Der Prophet JEzechiel, pp. 51, For a closer approach to what is commonly understood as preaching, we must come to the period of the return from the Captivity. The law is now the centre of the religion of Israel, and the law is now popularized in public teaching. The very meaning of the word rendered law (rnin instruction) points in this direction. Accordingly, the Divine instruction given through priests or prophets at an earlier period is called by the same name (Hos 46, Am 24 [see Driver's note]). With the rise of the synagogue, preaching becomes a recognized function of public worship. The need of translating the Heb. text into the vernacular introduced the interpreter, who followed the reader sentence by sentence in the case of the law, but with a division into longer passages with the prophets (Schilrer, HJP II. ii. 81; Megilla, iv. 4, 6, 10). The Targum thus originated prepared for the more lengthy exposition. While the Halacha is didactic and suited to the schools, the Haggada contains the legends and allegories which would be more acceptable to the popular audience in the synagogue service. In the time of Philo the popular discourse was the chief part of the service (see Schurer, II. ii. 76). There was no one appointed preacher. According to Philo, ' some (ns) priest who is present (o irapiiv), or some one of the elders, reads the sacred laws to them, and expounds (4%T)yciTcu) each of them separately till eventide' (Fragm. in Euseb. Prcep. Evang. viii. 7). Indeed we learn from the same authority that any competent person (dxaorAs ns ruv ipireipoTdTwv) could take this part of the service (ae Septentario, c. 6, Mang. ii. 282). From the latter passage it would seem that the preacher stood up to speak, the word Avaffrds being used. But possibly Philo is thinking only of his act of rising to present himself before the people and offer his discourse. In delivering his sermon the preacher was seated in an elevated place (Lk 420; Zunz, Die gottesdienst-lichen Vortrdge, p. 337; Delitzsch, Ein Tag in Capernaum, p. 127 f.). ii. Christian Preaching.—John the Baptist was acknowledged as a prophet, and he revived the prophet's mission of preaching to the people apart from the normal religious services. His work consisted chiefly in preaching and baptizing, though with the necessary addition of private conversation with inquirers (Lk 310'14). The burden of his message was the call to repentance, and the announcement of the approach of the kingdom of God, with a promise of the forgiveness of sins (Mt 31, Mk I4). This was the burden of the earlier preaching of Jesus (Mk I14-15). This earlier preaching of our Lord was carried on in the synagogues of Galilee (Mk I39). The incident in the Nazareth synagogue of which we have a full account, indicates that our Lord's method was to found His discourse on the portion of Scripture He had previously read (Lk 4l6t). This would be in accordance with the custom at the Sabbath meeting. When He preached in the open air it was under freer circumstances. Then, though He would frequently appeal to the OT in confirmation of His words, and especially in arguing with the scribes in the form of an argumentum ad homines, He did not adopt the method of the exposition of Scripture; He would start immediately from His great topic 'the kingdom of God,' and expound that. The evangelists are careful to point out the transition from this public teaching to the private training of the inner circle of disciples. His method was not the same in the two cases. It cannot be said that He had any esoteric doctrine which He deliberately withheld from the uninitiated, although His language on one occasion seemed to indicate this (Mk 411-12), because He always invited all capable hearers (e.g. Mk 49-23- 23). The public discourse more often took the form of parable; the private instruction was more direct and conversational. But even when delivering a public discourse Jesus was always liable to interruption, and this would frequently develop into discussion. Moreover, the reports of our Lord's discourses preserved in the Gospels appear to be abbreviated in some cases, or perhaps we have salient points, memorable epigrams, etc., selected from His discourses rather than full reports of 'them. Sometimes, as in the case of the Sermon on the Mount, it may be that we have a number of the sayings of Jesus uttered on various occasions collected and strung together by the reporter (perhaps Matthew in his Logia; see Matthew). In Lk we more often meet with utterances springing out of incidents, the event and the saying being both given by the third evangelist. For these reasons we cannot look to the Gospel accounts of the teachings of Jesus to furnish us with typical sermons. Still those accounts not only contain the teachings themselves, they illustrate our Lord's method of preaching—(1) His freshness and originality (StSax^I Kaai-fi, Mk I27); (2) His tone of authority (us Qovalav ?XWI/. Mk I22); (3) His winning grace — a point characteristically noted by the third evangelist (idatipat;ov. M tois \t>yois rijs x&PIT0Sj Us 422); (4) His graphic picturesqueness in illustration (Mk 43S). The Book of Acts supplies several specimens of apostolic preaching. In the earliest instances the text and starting-point are found in some event, e.g. the 'tongues1 at Pentecost (Ac 214'-), the healing of the lame man at the gate of the temple (Ac 312'-). The OT is appealed to for the confirmation of what is said (e.g. Ac 214-25-« 742 832). With his marvellous versatility St. Paul employed the same method when speaking to pagans at Athens, illustrating his words by a citation from classic literature (Ac 1728), though personally he attached unique importance to the inspiration of the OT, and cited this to Jews in the manner of the other apostles (e.g. Ac 1340-47 1516). In substance the preaching of the apostles to Jews was a declaration of the Messiahship of Jesus with the confirmation of two arguments—(1) The resurrection; (2) the OT predictions. On this followed promises of the forgiveness of sins (e.g. Ac 2s8 319), and salvation through Christ (e.g. 412j. The essential genuineness of the early speeches in Acts is proved by the PEEDESTINATION" PKEDESTINATIOJST fact that they do not contain the Pauline doctrine of the Atonement, which was not developed at the time in which they are dated (Lechler, Apost. and post-Apost. Times, i. 266 f.). They refer to the death of Christ, charging the Jews with the crime, pointing out that it was predicted by the prophets, and therefore was foreknown by God and in His counsels, and showing that in spite of it the resurrection proved Jesus to be Christ. The apostolic preaching to the heathen, represented especially by St. Paul, exposes the absurdity of anthropomorphic polytheism (e.g. Ac 1415), idolatry (1729), and sorcery (1919); declares the spirituality and fatherhood of God (17s"'); denounces sin, and warns of judgment to come through one whom God has appointed (1731); offers deliverance through faith in Jesus Christ (1631). The allusions to the definite preaching of Jesus Christ are very brief. But it is evident that there must have been some account of His life, death, and resurrection in St. Paul's preaching. Gal 31 plainly points to this. Similarly, if the second Gospel is St. Mark's record of ' the preaching of Peter, it is plain that that apostle preached the facts of the life of Jesus. In the churches of NT times great freedom of utterance was allowed. The right to preach depended on gifts, not on offices. At Corinth, in particular, the gift of prophecy, to which St. Paul assigns the first place (1 Co 141), was found among the private members, and was freely exercised in the assembly (v.si). Nevertheless, the duty; of admonishing the assembly rests especially with the leading authorities {e.g. 1 Th 512). The chief functions of the elders or bishops was, not preaching, but the administration of practical affairs. But ability to teach is recognized, at all events, by the time of the Pastoral Epistles as the one necessary qualification of a bishop (1 Ti 32) which is not also snared by the deacon. In course of time it was considered improper for a presbyter to preach in the presence of the bishop, universally so in the West (Possid. Vit. 8. Aug. v.; Cone. Hisp. ii. (A.D. 619) can. 7), but not universally in the East, only in quibiisdam ecclesiis (Jerome, ad Nepot. Epist. 2). W. F. Adeney. PREDESTINATION.— i. The Terms. ii. Predestination in OT. 1. Fundamental OT ideas. 2. Cosmical Predestination in OT. S. Soteriological Predestination in OT. lii. Predestination among the Jews. iv. Predestination in NT. 1. The Teaching of Jesus. 2. The Teaching of the Disciples. 3. The Teaching of St. Paul. V. The Bible Doctrine of Predestination, literature. i. THE Teems.—The words 'predestine,' 'predestinate,' ' predestination' seem not to have been domiciled in English literary use until the later period of Middle English (they are all three found in Chaucer : Troylus and Cryseyde, 966; Orisoune to the Holy Virgin, 69; tr. of Boetkius, b. 1, pr. 6, 1. 3844; the Old English equivalent seems to have been ' forestihtian,' as in vElfric's Homilies, ii. 364, 366,, in renderings of Ro I4 830). ' Predestine,' ' predestination' were doubtless taken over from the French, while ' predestinate ' probably owes its form directly to the Latin original of them all. The noun has never had a place in the English Bible, but the verb in the form 'predestinate' occurs in every one of its issues from Tindale to AV. Its history in the English versions is a somewhat curious one. It goes back, of course, ultimately to the Latin 'prwdestino' (a good: classical but not pre-Augustan word; while the noun ' pradestinatio' seems to ,be of Patristic origin), which was adopted by the Vulgate as its regular rendering of the Gr. irpoopifa, and occurs, with the sole exception of Ac428(Vulg. decerno), wherever the Latin translators found that verb in their text (Ro I4 8W-30, 1 Co 27, Eph I5- "). But the Wyclifite versions did not carry ' predestinate' over into English in a single instance, but rendered in every case by ' before ordain' (Ac 428 ' deemed'). It was thus left to Tindale to give the word a place in the English Bible. This he did, however, in only one passage, Eph I11, doubtless under the influence of the Vulgate. His ordinary rendering of wpooplfa is 'ordain before' (Ro 8*>, Eph I6; cf. 1 Co 27, where the ' before' is omitted apparently only on account of the succeeding preposition into which it may be thought, therefore, to coalesce), varied in Ro 830 to ' appoint before'; while, reverting to the Greek, he has ' determined before' at Ac 42S and, following the better reading, has ' declared' at Ro I4. The succeeding Eng. versions follow Tindale very closely, though the Genevan omits ' before' in Ac 4s8 and, doubtless in order to assimilate it to the neighbouring Eph lu, reads ' did predestinate' in Eph I5. The larger use of the word was due to the Rhemish version, which naturally reverts to the Vulg. and reproduces its prmdestino regularly in 'predestinate' (Ro I4 8*>-», 1 Co f, Eph I6-" ; but Ac 428 'decreed'). Under this influence the AV adopted ' predestinate' as its ordinary rendering of irpooplfr (Ro 8W- *>, Eph I6-"), while continuing to follow Tindale at Ac 4^ 'determined before,' 1 Co 27 'ordained,' as well as at Ro I4 ' declared,' m. ' Gr. determined.' Thus the word, tentatively introduced into a single passage by Tindale, seemed to have intrenched itself as the stated English representative of an important Greek term. The RV has, however, dismissed it altogether from the English Bible and adopted in its stead the hybrid compound 'foreordained' (cf. art. Foreknow, Fokeohdain) as its invariable representative of vpoopi^o, (Ac 428, Ro 8*>-so, 1 Co 27, Eph 16-"),—in this recurring substantially to the language of Wyclif and the preferred rendering of Tindale. None other than a literary interest, however, can attach to the change thus introduced : ' foreordain' and ' predestinate' are exact synonyms, the choice between which can be determined only by taste. The somewhat widespread notion that the 17th cent, theology distinguished between them, rests on a misapprehension of the evidently carefully-adjusted usage of them in the Westminster Confession, iii. 3 ft". This is not, however, the result of the attribution to the one word of a ' stronger' or to the other of a ' harsher' sense than that borne by its fellow, but a simple sequence of a current employment of ' predestination ' as the precise synonym of ' election,' and a resultant hesitation to apply a term of such precious associations to the foreordination to death. Since then the tables have been quite turned, and it is questionable whether in popular speech the word ' predestinate' does not now bear an unpleasant suggestion. That neither word occurs in the English OT is due to the genius of the Hebrew language, which does not admit of such compound terms. Their place is taken in the OT, therefore, by simple words expressive 6$ purposing, determining, ordaining, with more or less contextual indication of previousness of action. These represent a variety of Hebrew words, the most explicit of which is perhaps -is; (Ps 13918, Is 2211 3720 46"), by the side of which must be placed, however, ra; (Is 2424.2e.27 1912 1917 239, Jer 492° 5045), whose substantival derivative n»s (Job 382 423, Jer 2319, Pr 1921, Ps 33" 107", Is 1425- * 461"-«, Ps 10613, Is 519 19", Jer 4920 5045, Mic 412) is doubtless the most precise Heb. term for the Divine plan or purpose, 48 PKEDESTINATION PREDESTINATION although there occurs along with it in much the same sense the term rgtfn? (Is 18" 29" 49s" 5046 658, Jer 5129, Mic 412, Ps 926); a derivative of ntfij (Gn 5020, Mic 2s, Jer 18" 26s 29U 363 49KI 5045, La 28). In the Aramaic portion of Daniel (417-w) the common later Hebrew designation of the Divine decree (used especially in an evil sense) .ttj^ occurs : and ph is occasionally used with much the same mean-ins (Ps 27, Zeph 22, Ps 10510 = I Ch 16", Job 2314). Other words of similar import are doi (Jer 428 5112, La 719, Zee I6 814-16) with its substantive mp,n (Job 422, Jer 2320 3024 51"); m (Ps 1153 1356, Pr 211, Is 5511, Jon I14, Jg 1325, La 225, Is 5316) with its substantive y$n (Is 4610 4428 4814 5310) ; rsj (Job 14°, Is 1022-23 2S22, Dn92«- 27 11»»); HCO (Dn924)'; V'Nin (IS 1232, 1 Ch 1727, 2S 729). To express that special act of predestination which we know as ' election,' the Hebrews commonly utilized the word in} (of Israel, Dt 46' 76-' 1015 142, Is 418- 9 4310- 20 441-2 454, Jer 3324; and of the future, Is 141 65'-16- 22; of Jehovah's servant, 42l 49' ; of Jerusalem, Dt 1214. 18. 28 1426 J520 167. 15. 18 178. 10 186 3^ JQS g27; 1 K 814-is II13-32-6S 1421, 2 K 217 25-7) with its substantive vnj (exclusively used of Jehovah's ' elect,' 2 S 216, 1 Ch 1613, Ps 894 1056- «> 1068-23, Is 421 4320 454 659'15-22), and occasionally the word jn; in a pregnant sense (Gn'1819, Am 32, Hos 136, cf. Ps 1« 317 37;8, Is 583, Neh I7); while it is rather the execution of this previous choice in an act of separation that is expressed by ^*i?n (Lv 2024 2026, 1 K 863). In the Greek of the NT the precise term irpoopifu (Ac 428, 1 Co 27, Ro 829-30, Eph I6-11) is supplemented by a number of similar compounds, such as TrpoTtWw (Ac 1726); v^orW^iu. (Eph I9) with its more frequently occurring substantive, vpidetns (Ro 828 9U, Eph I11 3", 2Ti I9); a-poeroiMiw (Ro 9*>, Eph 210) and perhaps 7rpo/3Wirw in a similar sense of providential pre-arrangement (He II40), with which may be compared also vpaeiSov (Ac 231, Gal 38); irpoyiyviio-Kw (Ro 8s9 II2, 1 P I20) and its substantive vpbyvums (IP I2, Ac 223) ; jrpox«p(fu (Ac 2214 328) and TpoxeipoTov4u (Ac 441). Something of the same idea is, moreover, also occasionally expressed by the simple optfw (Lk 222i, Ac 1726- 31 223, He 47, Ac 1042), or through the medium of terms designating the will, wish, or good-pleasure of God, such as /9oiAi} (Lk 730, Ac 223 428 1338 2027, Eph I11, He 6", cf. /3oi)\Wa Ro 919 and jSoi)\o/«u He 617, Ja I18, 2 P 39), B4\wm (e.g. Eph I5- *>•", He 107, cf. B H 24 B4 R 91822) idd (Lk 2 ), w (g p , , . iw» He 24, B4\a, e.g. Ro 918-22), eidoda (Lk 214, Eph I6-9, Ph 213, cf. ctSoKiu Lk 1232, Col I19, Gal I15, 1 Co I21). The standing terms in the NT for God's sovereign choice of His people are iKKeyeaffai, in which both the compos, and voice are significant (Eph I4, Mk 1320, Jn 1516-16-19, 1 Co I27-27, Ja 2s; of Israel, Ac 13" ; of Christ, Lk 935; of the disciples, Lk 613, Jn 670 1318, Ac I2; of others, Ac I24 157), 4k\ckt6s (Mt [2016] 2214 2622-24-31 Mk 1320-22-27, Lk 187, Ro 8s3, Col 312 2 Ti 210 Tit IS 1 P I1 [29], Rev 1714; of individuals, Ro 1613, 2 Jn !• » ; of Christ, Lk 2335, Jn 1318 ; of angels, 1 Ti 5'21). in\oy/i (Ac 915, Ro 9U ll'-'-a", 1 Th I4, 2 P I10),—words which had been prepared for this NT use by their employment in the LXX —the two former to translate in? and Tij|. In 2 Th 213 alp{o/uu is used similarly. ii. Predestination in OT.—No survey of the terms used to express it, however, can convey an adequate sense of the place occupied by the idea of predestination in the religious system of the Bible. It is not too much to say that it is fundamental to the whole religious consciousness of the Biblical writers, and is so involved in all their religious conceptions that to eradicate it would transform the entire scriptural representation. This is as true of the OT as of the NT, as will become sufficiently manifest by attending briefly to the nature and implications of such formative elements in the OT system as its doctrines of God, Providence, Faith, and the Kingdom of God. 1. Fundamental OT ideas implying Predestination.—Whencesoever Israel obtained it, it is quite certain that Israel entered upon its national existence with the most vivid consciousness of an almighty personal Creator and Governor of heaven and earth. Israel's own account of the clearness and the firmness of its apprehension of this mighty Author and Ruler of all that is, refers it to His own initiative : God chose to make Himself known to the fathers. At all events, throughout the whole of OT literature, and for every period of history recorded in it, the fundamental conception of God remains the same, and the two most persistently emphasized elements in it are just those of might and personality : before everything else, the God of Israel is the Omnipotent Person. Possibly the keen sense of the exaltation and illimitable power of God which forms the very core of the OT idea of God belongs rather to the general Semitic than to the specifically Israelitish element in its religion; certainly it was already prominent in the patriarchal God-consciousness, as is sufficiently evinced by the names of God current from the beginning of the OT revelation,— El, Eloah, Elohim, El Shaddai,—and as is illustrated endlessly in the Biblical narrative. But it is equally clear that God was never conceived by the OT saints as abstract power, but was ever thought of concretely as the all-powerful Person, and that, moreover, as clothed with all the attributes of moral personality,—pre-eminently with holiness, as the very summit of His exaltation, but along with holiness, also with all the characteristics that belong to spiritual personality as it exhibits itself familiarly in man. In a word, God is pictured in the OT, and that from the beginning, purely after the pattern of human personality,—as an intelligent, feeling, willing Being, like the man who is created in His image in all in which the life of a free spirit consists. The anthropomorphisms to which this mode of conceiving God led were sometimes startling enough, and might have become grossly misleading had not the corrective lain ever at hand in the accompanying sense of the immeasurable exaltation of God, by which He was removed above all the weaknesses of humanity. The result accordingly was nothing other than a peculiarly pure form of Theism. The grosser anthropomorphisms were fully understood to be figurative, and the residuary conception was that of an infinite Spirit, not indeed expressed in abstract terms nor from the first fully brought out in all its implications, but certainly in all ages of the OT development grasped in all its essential elements. (Cf. the art. God). Such a God could not be thought of otherwise than as the free determiner of all that comes to pass in the world which is the product of His creative act; and the doctrine of Providence (^9) which is spread over the pages of the OT fully bears out this expectation. The almighty Maker of all that is is represented equally as the irresistible Ruler of all that He has made: Jehovah sits as King for ever (Ps 2910). Even the common language of life was affected by this pervasive point of view, so that, for example, it is rare to meet with such a phrase as ' it rains' (Am 47), and men by preference spoke of God sending rain (Ps 659t-, Job S&" 3826). The vivid sense of dependence on God thus witnessed extended throughout every relation of life. Accident or chance was excluded If we read here and there of a rrjpij it is not thought of as happening apart from God's direction (Ru 23, 1 S 69 2026, Ec 214, cf. 1 K 22s4, 2 Ch 1833), and accordingly the lot was an accepted means of ob- FKEDESTIN/ATICXN" PKEDESTINATION 49 taining the decision of God (Jos 71614218", 1 S 1019, Jo.i I'), and is didactically recognized as under His control (Pr 1633). All things without exception, indeed, are disposed by Him, and Hia will is the ultimate account of all that occurs. Heaven and earth and all that is in them are the instruments through which He works His ends. Nature, nations, and the fortunes of the individual alike present in all their changes the transcript of His purpose. The winds are His messengers, the flaming fire His servant: every natural occurrence is His act: prosperity is His gift, and if calamity falls upon man it is the Lord that has done it (Am3s-6, La 333-38, Is 47', Ec 7", Is 54M). It is He that leads the feet of men, wit they whither or not; He that raises up and casts down; opens and hardens the heart; and creates the very thoughts and intents of the soul. So poignant is the sense of His activity in all that occurs, that an appearance is sometimes created as if everything that comes to pass were so ascribed to His immediate production as to exclude the real activity of second causes. It is a grave mistake, nevertheless, to suppose that He is conceived as an unseen power, throwing up, in a quasi-Pantheistic sense, all changes on the face of the world and history. The virile sense of the free personality of God which dominates all the thought of the OT would alone have precluded such a conception. Nor is there really any lack of recognition of 'second causes,' as we call them. They are certainly not conceived as independent of God : they are rather the mere expression of His stated will. But they are from the beginning fully recognized, both in nature—with respect to which Jehovah has made covenant (Gn 8«- *", Jer 3135-» 33s0- *», Ps 1486, cf. Jg S22, Ps 1049, Job SS1"-83 145), establishing its laws (nipn JobZS23*8, Is 4012, Job 388-11, Pr 829, Jer5a, Ps iO48 33', Jer 4026)—and equally in the higher sphere of free spirits, who are ever conceived as the true authors of all their acts (hence Gods proving of man, Gn 221, Ex 164 2020, Dt 82-" 13s, Jg 31-4, 2 Ch 323i). There is no question here of the substitution of Jehovah's operation for that of the proximate causes of events. There is only the liveliest perception of the governing hand of God behind the proximate causes, acting through them for the working out of His will in every detail. Such a conception obviously looks upon the universe teleologically: an almighty moral Person cannot be supposed to govern His universe, thus in every detail, either unconsciously or capriciously. In His government there is necessarily implied a plan; in the all-pervasiveness and perfection of His government is inevitably implied an all-inclusive and perfect plan : and this conception isr not seldom explicitly developed (cf. art. Providence). It is abundantly clear on the face of it, of course, that this whole mode of thought is the natural expression of the deep religious consciousness of the OT writers, though surely it is not therefore to be set aside as' merely' the religious view of things, or as having no other rooting save in the imagination of religiously-minded men. In any event, however, it is altogether natural that in the more distinctive sphere of the religious life its informing principle of absolute dependence on God should be found to repeat itself. This appears particularly in the OT doctrine of faith, in which there sounds the keynote of OT pietj-,—for the reliRion of the OT, so far from being, as Hegel, for example, would affirm, the religion of fear, is rather by way of eminence the religion of trust. Standing over against God, not merely as creatures, but as sinners, the OT saints found no ground of hope save in the free initiative of the Divine love. At no period of the development of OT religion was it permitted to be imagined that blessings might be wrung from the hands of an unwilling God, or gained in the strength of man's own arm. Rather it was ever inculcated that in this sphere, too, it is God alone that lifts up and makes rich, He alone that keeps the feet of His holy ones ; while by strength, it is affirmed, no man shall prevail (1 S 29). ' I am not worthy of the least of all thy mercies' is the constant refrain of the OT saints (Gn 32">) ; and from the very beginning, in narrative, precept and prophetic declaration alike, it is in trust in the VOL. IV.—4 unmerited love of Jehovah alone that the hearts of men are represented as finding peace. Self-sufficiency is the characteristic mark of the wicked, whose doom treads on his heels ; while the mark of the righteous is that he lives by his faith (Hah 2*). In the entire self-commitment to God, humble dependence on Him for all blessings, which is the very core of OT religion, no element is more central than the profound conviction embodied in it of the free sovereignty of God, the God of the spirits of all nesh, in the distribution of His mercies. The whole training of Israel was directed to impressing upon it the great lesson enunciated to Zerubbabel, 'Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts' (Zee 46)—that all that comes to man in the spiritual sphere, too, is the free gift of Jehovah (cf. art. Faith). Nowhere is this lesson more persistently emphasized than in the history of the establishment and development of the kingdom of God, which may well be called the cardinal theme of the OT. For the kingdom of God is consistently represented, not as the product of man's efforts in seeking after God, but as the gracious creation of God Himself. Its inception and development are the crowning manifestation of the free grace of the Living God working in history in pursuance of His loving purpose to recover fallen man to Himself. To this end He preserves the race in existence after its sin, saves a seed from the destruction of the Flood, separates to Himself a family in Abraham, sifts it in Isaac and Jacob, nurses and trains it through the weakness of its infancy, and gradually moulds it to be the vehicle of His revelation of redemption, and the channel of Messianic blessings to the world. At every step it is God, and God alone, to whom is ascribed the initiative; and the most extreme care is taken to preserve the recipients of the blessings consequent on His choice from fancying that these blessings come as their due, or as reward for aught done by themselves, or to be found in themselves. They were rather in every respect emphatically not a people of their own making, but a people that God had formed that they might set forth His praise (Is 4$&). The strongest language, the most astonishing figures, were employed to emphasize the pure sovereignty of the Divine action at every stage. It was not because Israel was numerous, or strong, or righteous, that He chose it, but only because it pleased Him to make of it a people for Himself. He was as the potter, it as the clay which the potter moulds as he will; it was but as the helpless babe in ita blood cast out to die, abhorred of man, which Jehovah strangely gathers to His bosom in unmerited love (Gn 121-3, Dt 76-8 94-6 1016.16, IS 1222, Is 41s-9 4320 489J1, Jer 18'f- 318, Hos 22°, Mai 12-s). There was no element in the religious consciousness of Israel more poignantly realized, as there was no element in the instruction they had received more insisted on, than that they owed their separation from the peoples of the earth to be the Lord's inheritance, and all the blessings they had as such received from Jehovah, not to any claim upon Him which they could urge, but to His own gracious love faithfully persisted in iu spite of every conceivable obstacle (cf. art. Kinhdom of God). In one word, the sovereignty of the Divine will as the principle of all that comes to pass, is a primary postulate of the whole religious life, as well as of the entire world-view of the OT. It is implicated in its very idea of God, its whole conception of the relation of God to the world and to the changes which take place, whether in nature or history, among the nations or in the life-fortunes of the individual; and also in its entire scheme of religion, whether national or personal. It lies at the basis of all the religious emotions, and lays the foundation of the specific type of religious character built up in Israel. 2. Cosmical Predestination in Or.—The specific teaching of OT as to predestination naturally revolves around the two foci ol that idea which may be designated general and special, or, more properly, cosmical and soteriological predestination ; or, in other words, around the doctrines of the Divine Decree and the Divine Election. The former, as was to be expected, is comparatively seldom adverted to—for the OT is fundamentally a soteriological book, a revelation of the srrace of God to sinners; and it is only at a somewhat late period that it is made the subject of speculative discussion. But as it is implied in the primordial idea of God as an Almighty Person, it is postulated from the beginning and continually finds more or less clear expression. Throughout the OT, behind the processes of nature, the march of history and the fortunes of each individual life alike, there is steadily kept in view the governing hand of God working out His preconceived plan— a plan broad enough to embrace the whole universe of things, minute enough to concern itself with the smallest details, and actualizing itself with inevitable certainty in every event that comes to pass. Naturally, there is in the narrative portions but 50 PREDESTINATION PREDESTINATION little formal enunciation of this pervasive and all-controlling Divine teleology* But despite occasional anthropomorphisms of rather startling character (as, e.g., that which ascribes 'repentance' to God, Gn 6", Jl 213, Jon 4s, Jer 188-10 2t>3-13), or rather, let us say, just because of the strictly anthropomorphic mould in which the OT conception of God is inn, according to which He is ever thought of as a - personal spirit, acting with purpose like other personal spirits, but with a wisdom and in a sovereignty unlike that of others because infinitely perfect, these narrative portions of the OT also bear continual witness to the universal OT teleology. There is no explicit statement in the narrative of the creation, for example, that the mighty Maker of the world was in this process operating on a preconceived plan; but the teleology ot creation lies latent in the orderly sequence of its parts, culminating in man for whose advent all that precedes to obviously a preparation, and is all but expressed in the Divine satisfaction at each of its stages, as a manifestation of His perfections (cf. Ps 10431). Similarly, the whole narrative of the Bk. of Genesis is so ordered—in the succession of creation, fall, promise, and the several steps in the inauguration of the kingdom of God—as to throw into a very clear light the teleology of the whole world-history, here written from the Divine standpoint and made to centre around the developing Kingdom. In the detailed accounts of the lives of the patriarchs, in like manner, behind the external occurrences recorded there always lies a Divine ordering which provides the real plot of the story in its advance to the predetermined issue. It was not accident, for example, that brought Kebecca to the well to welcome Abraham's servant (Gn 24), or that sent Joseph into Egypt (Gn 458 5020; ' God meant [ivri] it for good'), or guided Pharaoh's daughter to the ark among the flags (Ex 2), or that, later, directed the millstone that crushed Abimelech's head (Jg 963), or winged the arrow shot at a venture to smite the king in the joints of the harness (1 K 22*1). Every historical event is rather treated as an item in the orderly carrying out of an underlying Divine purpose; and the historian is continually aware of the presence in history of Him who gives even to the lightning a charge to strike the mark (Job 3632). In the Psalmists and Prophets there emerges into view a more abstract statement of the government of all things according to the good pleasure of God (Ps 33", Jer 10" 5115). All that He wills He does (Ps 11531356), and all that comes to pass has preexisted in His purpose from the indefinite past of eternity ('long ago' Is 22U, 'of ancient times' Is 3726=1 K 192s), and it is only because it so preexisted in purpose that it now comes to pass (Is 1424.27 461^ £ec l^, Job 422, Jer 2320, Jon I14, Is 4010). Every day has its ordained events (Job 14", Ps 13916). The plan of God is universal in its reach, and orders all that takes place in the interests of Israel—the OT counterpart to the NT declaration that all things work together for good to those that love God. Nor is it merely for the national good of Israel that God's plan has made provision ; He exercises a special care over every one of His people (Job 51M-, Ps 91. 121. 653 37. 2710-u 13916, Jon 35, Is 4s, Dn 121). Isaiah especially is never weary of emphasizing the universal teleology of the Divine operations and the surety of the realization of His eternal purpose, despite the opposition of every foe (1424-27 312 4Oi3 588-")—whence he has justly earned the name of the prophet of the Divine sovereignty, and has been spoken of as the Paul, the Augustine, the Calvin of the OT. It is, however, especially in connexion with the OT doctrine of the 'Wisdom {m?V}) of God, the chief depository of which is the so-called llohh/mah litera- ture, that the idea of the all-inclusive Divine purpose (fiyy. and n'uvqs) in which lies predetermined the whole course of events—including every particular in the life of the world (Am 37) and in the life of every individual as well (Ps 13914-16, Jg I5)— is speculatively wrought out. According to this developed conception, God, acting under the guidance of all His ethical perfections, has, by virtue, of His eternal wisdom, which He ' possessed in the beginning of his way' (Pr 822), framed ' from everlasting, from the beginning,' an all-inclusive plan embracing all that is to come to pass; in accordance with which plan He now governs His universe, down to the least particular, so as to subserve His perfect and unchanging purpose. Everything that God has brought into Deing, therefore, He has made for its specific end (Pr 164, cf. 319-20, Job 2823 38. 41, Is 4012'-, Jer 10"-13) ; and He so governs it that it shall attain its end,—no chance can escape (Pr 16s3), no might or subtlety defeat His direction (Pr 2130-3i 1921 169, cf. Is 1424-*7, Jer 10's), which leads straight to the goal appointed by God from the beginning and kept steadily in view by Him, but often hidden from the actors themselves (Pr 20-4, cf. 3s 161"9 1921, Job 382 423, Jer 1023), who naturally in their weakness cannot comprehend the s>yeep of the Divine plan or understand the place within it of the details brought to their observation —a fact in which the OT sages constantly find their theodicy. No different doctrine is enunciated here from that which meets us in the Prophets and Psalmists,—only it is approached from a philosophical-religious rather than from a national-religious view-point. To prophet and sage alike the entire world—inanimate, animate, moral—is embraced in a unitary teleological world-order (Ps 1933 33s 104241488, Job 941218 37); and to both alike the central place in this comprehensive world-order is taken by God's redemptive purpose, of which Israel is at once the object and the instrument, while the savour of its saltness is the piety of the individual saint. The classical term for this all-inclusive Divine purpose (nya) is accordingly found in the usage alike of prophet, psalmist, and sage,— now used absolutely of the universal plan on which the whole world is ordered (Job 382 42s, cf. Delitzsch and Budde, in loc), now, with the addition of ' of Jehovah,' of the all-comprehending purpose, embracing all human actions (Pr 1921 and parallels; cf. Toy, in loc), now with explicit mention of Israel as the centre .around which its provisions revolve (Ps 33n 107", cf. Delitzsch, in loc. ; Is 1426 251 4610-n), and anon with more immediate concern with some of the details (Ps 10613, Is 519 1917, Jer 4920 5045, Mic 4U). There seems no reason why a Platonizing colouring should be given to this simple attributing to the eternal God of an eternal attribute to the Biblical writers, especially of the ffokhmuh and the latter portion of Isaiah, a doctrine of the pre-existence of all things in an ideal world, conceived as standing eternally before God at least as a pattern if not even as a quasi-objective mould imposing their forms on all His creatures, which smacked more of the Greek Academics than of the Hebrew sages. As a matter of course^ the Divine mind was conceived by the Hebrew sages as eternally contemplating all possibilities, and we should not do them injustice in supposing them to think of its ' ideas' as the causa exewjplaris of all that occurs, and of the Divine intellect as the prmdpium dirigens of every Divine operation. Eut it is more to the point to note that the conceptions of the OT writers in regard to the Divine decree run rather into the moulds of ' purpose' than of ' ideas,* and that the roots of their teaching are planted not in an'abstract idea of the Godhead, but in the purity of their concrete theism. It is because they think of God as a person, like other persons purposeful in His acts, but unlike other persons all-wise in His planning and all-powerful in His performing, that they think of Him as predetermining all that shall come to pass in the universe, which is in all its elements the product of His free activity, and which must in its form and all its history, down to the least detail, correspond with His >urpose in making it. It is easy, on the other hand, to attribute ioo little ' philosophy' to the Biblical writers. The conception PREDESTINATION PREDESTINATION 51 of God in His relation to the world which they develop is beyond question anthropomorphic; but it is no unreflecting anthropomorphism that they give us. Apart from all question of revelation, they were not children prattling on subjects on which they had expended no thought; and the world-view they commend to us certainly does not lack in profundity. The subtleties of language of a developed scholasticism were foreign to their purposes and modes of composition, but they tell us as clearly as, say, Spanheim himself (Deead. Theol. vi. § 5), that they are dealing with a purposing mind exalted so far above ours that we can follow its movements only with halting steps, —whose thoughts are not as our thoughts, and whose ways are not as our ways (Is 658; cf. 4013- <® 2829, Job lire; Ps 92» 139i«. 1473, Ec 31'). Least of all in such a theme as this were they liable to forget that infinite exaltation of God which constituted the basis on which their whole conception of God rested. Nor may they be thought to have been indifferent to the relations of the high doctrine of the Divine purpose they were teaching. There is no scholastic determination here either; but certainly they write without embarrassment as men who have attained a firm grasp upon their fundamental thought and have pursued it with clearness of thinking, no less in its relations than in itself; nor need we go astray in apprehending the outlines of their construction. It is quite plain, for example, that they felt no confusion with respect to the relation of the Divine purpose to the Divine foreknowledge. The notion that the almighty and all-wise God, by whom all things were created, and through whose irresistible control all that occurs fulfils the appointment of His primal plan, could govern Himself according to a foreknowledge of things which—perhaps apart from His original purpose or present guidance—might haply come to pass, would have been quite contradictory to their most fundamental conception of God as the almighty and all-sovereign Euler of the universe, and, indeed, also of the whole OT idea of the Divine foreknowledge itself, which is ever thought of in its due relation of dependence on the Divine purpose. According to the OT conception, God foreknows only because He has predetermined, and it is therefore also that He brings it to pass; His foreknowledge, in other words, is at bottom a knowledge of His own will, and His works of providence are merely the execution of His all-embracing plan. This is the truth that underlies the somewhat incongruous form of statement of late becoming rather frequent, to the effect that God's foreknowledge is conceived in the OT as 'productive.' Dillmann, for example, says (AT Theologie, p. 251): 'His foreknowledge of the future is a productive one; of an otiose foreknowledge or of a prteseientia media . . . there is no suggestion.' In the thought of the OT writers, .however, it is not God's foreknowledge that produces the events of the future; it is His irresistible providential government of the world He has created for Himself: and His foreknowledge of what is yet to be rests on His prearranged plan of government. His ' productive foreknowledge' is but a transcript of His will, which has already determined not only the general plan of the world, but every particular that enters into the whole course of its development (Am 37, Job 2826.27), and every detail in the life of ever}' individual that comes into being (Jer 18, Ps 13914-18, Job 2313-M). That the acts of free agents are included in this 'productive foreknowledge,' or rather in this all-inclusive plan of the life of the universe, created for the OT writers apparently not the least embarrassment. This is not because they did not believe man to be free,—throughout the whole OT there is never the least doubt expressed of the freedom or moral responsibility of man,—but because they did believe God to be free, whether in His works of creation or of providence, and could not believe He was hampered or limited in the attainment of His ends by the creatures of His own hands. How God governs the acts of free agents in the pursuance of His plan there is little in the OT to inform us; but that He governs them in even their most intimate thoughts and feelings and impulses is its unvarying assumption : He is not only the creator of the hearts of men in the first instance, and knows them altogether, but He fashions the hearts of all in all the changing circumstances of life (Ps 33"); forms the spirit of man within him in all its motions (Zee 121); keeps the hearts of men in His hands, turning them whithersoever He will (Pr 211); so that it is even said that man knows what is in his own mind only as the Lord reveals it to him (Am 418). The discussion of any antinomy that may be thought to arise from such a joint assertion of the absolute rule of God in the sphere of the spirit and the freedom of the creaturely will, falls obviously under the topic of Providential Government rather than under that of the Decree (see Providence) : it requires to be adverted to here only that we may clearly note the fact that the OT teachers, as they did not hesitate to affirm the absolute sway of God over the thoughts and intents of the human heart, could feel no embarrassment in the inclusion of the acts of free agents within the ail-embracing plan of God, the outworking of which His providential government supplies. Nor does the moral quality of these acts present any apparent difficulty to the OT construction. We are never permitted to imagine, to be sure, that God is the author of ein, either in the world at large or in any individual soul—that He is in any way implicated in the sinfulness of the acts performed by the perverse misuse of creaturely freedom. In all God's working He shows Himself pre-eminently the Holy One, and prosecutes His holy will, His righteous way. His all-wise plan : the blame for all sinful deeds rests exclusively on the creaturely actors (Ex 927 1018), who recognize their own guilt (2 S 2410-17) and receive its punishment (Ec 119 compared with 11*). But neither is God's relation to the sinful acts of His creatures ever repre- sented as purely passive: the details of the doctrine of eoneursui were left, no doubt, to later ages speculatively to work out, but its assumption underlies the entire OT representation of the Divine modes of working. That anything—good or evil— occurs in God's universe finds its account, according to the OT conception, in His positive ordering and active concurrence; while the moral^ quality of the deed, considered in itself, is rooted in the moral character of the subordinate agent, acting in the circumstances and under the motives operative in each instance. It is certainly going beyond the OT warrant to speak of the 'all-productivity of God,' as if He were the only efficient cause in nature and the sphere of the free spirit alike; it is the very delirium of misconception to say that in the OT God and Satan are insufficiently discriminated, and deeds appropriate to the latter are assigned to the former. Nevertheless, it remains true that even the evil acts of the creature are so far carried back to God that they too are affirmed to be included in His all-embracing decree, and to be brought about, bounded and utilized in His providential government. It is He that hardens the heart of the sinner that persists in his sin (Ex 421 73 101. 27 14*148, Dt2S», Jos II20, Is 69io 6317); it is from Him that the evil spirits proceed that trouble sinners (1 S 16"!, Jg 92», 1 K 22, Job 1); it is of Him that the evil impulses that rise in sinners' hearts take this or that specific form (2 S 16» 241, 1 K 12^). The philosophy that lies behind such representations, however, is not the pantheism which looks upon God as the immediate cause of all that comes to pass; much less the pandaimonism which admits no distinction between good and evil; there is not even involved a conception of God entangled in an undeveloped ethical discrimination. It is the philosophy that is expressed in Is 475 ' I am the Lord, and there is none else; beside me there is no God. ... I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I am the Lord that doeth all these things'; it is the philosophy that is expressed in Pr 16* 'The Lord hath made everything for its own end, vea, even the wicked for the day of evil.' Because, over against all dualistic conceptions, there is but one God, and He is indeed God ; and because, over against all cosmotheistic conceptions, this God is a Persox who acts purposefully; there is nothing that is, and nothing that comes to pass, that He has not first decreed and then brought to pass by His creation or providence. Thus all things find their unity in His eternal plan; and not their unity merely, but their justification as well; even the evil, though retaining its quality as evil and hateful to the holy God, and certain to be dealt with as hateful, yet does not occur apart from His provision or against His will, but appears in the world which He has made only as the instrument by means of which He works the higher good. This sublime philosophy of the decree is immanent in every page of the OT. Its metaphysics never come to explicit discussion, to be sure; but its elements are in a practical way postulated consistently throughout. The ultimate end in view in the Divine plan is ever represented as found in God alone : all that He has mode He has mode for Himself, to set forth His praise; the heavens themselves with all their splendid furniture exist but to illustrate His glory; the earth and all that is in it, and all that happens in it, to declare His majesty; the whole course of history is but the theatre of His self-manifestation, and the events of every individual life indicate His nature and perfections. Men may be unable to understand the place which the incidents, as they unroll themselves before their eyes, take in the developing plot of the great drama: they may, nay, must, therefore stand astonished and confounded before this or that which befalls them or befalls the world. Hence arise to them problems—the problem of the petty, the problem of the inexplicable, the problem of suffering, the problem of sin (e.g. Ec 115). But, in the infinite wisdom of the Lord of all the earth, each event falls with exact precision into its proper place in the unfolding of His eternal plan; nothing, however small, however strange, occurs without His ordering, or without its peculiar fitness for its place in the working out of His purpose; and the end of all shall be the manifestation of His glory, and the accumulation of His praise. This is the OT philosophy of the universe—a world-view which attains concrete unity in an absolute Divine teleology, in the compactness of an eternal decree, or purpose, or plan, of which all that comes to pass is the development in time. 3. Soteriological Predestination in OT.—Special or Soteriological Predestination finds a natural place in the OT system as but a particular instance of the more general fact, and may be looked upon as only the general OT doctrine of predestination applied to the specific case of the salvation of sinners. But as the OT is a distinctively religious book, or, more precisely, a distinctively soteriological book, that is to say, a record of the gracious dealings and purposes of God with sinners, soteriological predestination naturally takes a more prominent place in it than the general doctrine itself, of which it is a particular application. Indeed, God's saving work is thrown out into such prominence, the OT is so specially a record of the establishment of the kingdom of God in the world, that we easily get 52 PREDESTINATION PEEDESTINATION the impression in reading it that the core of God's general decree is His decree of salvation, and that His whole plan for the government of the universe is subordinated to His purpose to recover sinful man to Himself. Of course there is some slight illusion of perspective here, the materials for correcting which the OT itself provides, not only in more or less specific declarations of the relative unimportance of what befalls man, whether the individual, or Israel, or the race at large, in comparison with the attainment of the Divine end; and of the wonder of the Divine grace concerning itself with the fortunes of man at all (Job 223f-356'- 38, Ps 84): but also in the general disposition of the entire record, which places the complete history of sinful man, including alike his fall into sin and all the provisions for his recovery, within the larger history of the creative work of God, as but one incident in the greater whole, governed, of course, like all its other parts, by its general teleology. Relatively to the OT record, nevertheless, as indeed to the Biblical record as a whole, which is concerned directly only with God's dealings with humanity, and that, especially, a sinful humanity (Gn 3s 65 8al, Lv 1824, Dt ff», IK 846, Ps 141 516 1303 1432, Pr 209, Ec 720, Is I4, Hos 41, Job 15" 254 144), soteriological predestination is the prime matter of importance; and the doctrine of election is accordingly thrown into relief, and the general doctrine of the decree more incidentally adverted to. It would be impossible, however, that the doctrine of election taught in the OT should follow other lines than those laid down in the general doctrine of the decree,—or, in other words, that God should be conceived as working in the sphere of grace in a manner that would be out of accord with the fundamental conception entertained by these writers of the nature of God and His relations to the universe. Accordingly, there is nothing concerning the Divine election more sharply or more steadily emphasized than its graciousness, in the highest sense of that word, or, in other terms, its absolute sovereignty. This is plainly enough exhibited even in the course of the patriarchal history, and that from the beginning. In the very hour of man's first shr, God intervenes sua sponte with a gratuitous promise of deliverance ; and at every stage afterwards the sovereign initiation of the grace of God—the Lord of the whole earth (Ex 195)— is strongly marked, as God's universal counsel of salvation is more and more unfolded through the separation and training of a people for Himself, in whom the whole world should be blessed (Gn 123 1818 2218 264 2814): for from the beginning it is plainly indicated that the whole history of the world is ordered with reference to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Dt 328, where the reference seems to be to Gn 11). Already in the opposing lines of Seth and Cain (Gn 425-26) a discrimination is made; Noah is selected as the head of a new race, and among his sons the preference is given to Shem (Gn #5), from whose line Abraham is taken. Every fancy that Abraham owed hiss calling to his own desert is carefully excluded,—he was 'known' of God only that in him God might establish His kingdom (Gn 1819); and the very acme of sovereignty is exhibited (as St. Paul points out) in the subsequent choice of Isaac and Jacob, and exclusion of Ishmael and Esau; while the whole Divine dealing with the patriarchs—their separation from their kindred, removal into a strange land, and the like — is evidently understood as intended to cast them back on the grace of God alone. Similarly, the covenant made with Israel (Ex 19-24) is constantly assigned to the sole initiative of Divine grace, and the fact of election is therefore appropriately set at the head ot the Decalogue (Ex 202; cf. 348-7); and Israel is repeatedly warned that there was nothing in it which moved or could move God to favour it (e.g. Dt 431 7' 817 S4 10", Ezk 161, Am 9'). It has already been pointed out by what energetic figures this fundamental lesson was impressed on the Israelitish consciousness, and it is only true to say that no means are left unused to drive home the fact that God's gracious election of Israel is an absolutely sovereign one, founded solely in His unmerited love, and looking to nothing ultimately but the gratification of His own holy and loving impulses, and the manifestation of His grace through the formation of a heritage for Himself out of the mass of sinful men, by means of whom His saving mercy should advance to the whole world (Ps 87, Is 40. 42. 60, Mic 4\ Am 418 58, Jer 3187, Ezk 1722 3621, Jl 22S). The simple terms that are employed to express this Divine selection —'know' (jn;), 'choose (inj)—are either used in a pregnant sense, or acquire a pregnant sense by their use in this connexion. The deeper meaning of the former term is apparently not specifically Hebrew, but more widely Semitic (it occurs also in Assyrian; see the Dictionaries of Delitzsch and Muss-Arnolt sub voc, and especially Haupt in Beitrage zur Assyriologie, i. 14, 15), and it can create no surprise, therefore, when it meets us in such passages as Gn 1819 (cf. Ps 3718 and also I6 318 ; cf. Baethgen and Delitzsch in loc), Hos 135 (cf. Wiinsche in loc.) in something of the sense expressed by the scholastic phrase, nosse cum affectu et effectu ; while in the great declaration of Am 32 (cf. Baur and Gunning in loc), 'You only have I known away from all the peoples of the earth,' what is thrown prominently forward is clearly the elective love which has singled Israel out for special care. More commonly, however, it is "irn that is employed to express God's sovereign election of Israel: the classical passage is, of course, Dt 76-7 (see Driver in loc, as also, of the love underlying the ' choice,' at 437 78), where it is carefully explained that it is in contrast with the treatment accorded to all the other peoples of the earth that Israel has been honoured with the Divine choice, and that the choice rests solely on the unmerited love of God, and finds no1 foundation in Israel itself. These declarations are elsewhere constantly enforced (eg. 437 1015 14s), with the effect of throwing the strongest possible emphasis on the complete sovereignty of God's choice of His people, who owe their ' separation' unto Jehovah (Lv 2024-26, 1 K 833) wholly to the wonderful love of God, in which He has from the beginning taken knowledge of and chosen them. It is useless to seek to escape the profound meaning of this fundamental OT teaching by recalling the undeveloped state of the doctrine of a, future life in Israel, and the national scope of its election,—as if the sovereign choice which is so insisted on could thus be confined to the choice of a people as a whole to certain purely earthly blessings, without any reference whatever to the eternal destiny of the individuals concerned. We are here treading very close to the abyss of confusing progress in the delivery' of doctrine with the reality of God's saving activities. The cardinal question, after all, does not concern the extent of the knowledge possessed by the OT saints of the nature of the blessedness that belongs to the people of God ; nor yet the relation borne by the election within the election, by the real Israel forming the heart of the Israel after the flesh, to the external Israel: it concerns the existence of a real kingdom of God in the OT dispensation, and the methods by which God introduced man into it. It is true enough that the theocracy was an earthly kingdom, and that a prominent place was given to the promises of the life that now is in the blessings assured to Israel; and it is in this engrossment with earthly happiness and the close connexion of the friendship of God with the enjoyment of worldly goods that the undeveloped state of the OT doctrine of salvation is especially apparent. But it should not be forgotten that the promise of earthly gain to the people of God is not entirely alien to the NT idea of salvation (Mt 6", 1 Ti 48), and that it is in no sense true that in the OT teaching, in any of its stages, the blessings of the kingdom were summed up in worldly happiness. The covenant blessing is rather PKEDESTINATION PREDESTINATION 53 declared to be life, inclusive of all that that comprehensive word is fitted to convey (Dt 3016; c.f. 41 81, Pr 12» 8s6); and it found its best expression in the high conception of 'the favour of God" (Lv 2611, Ps V> 102-6 63«); while it concerned itself with earthly prosperity only as and so far as that is a pledge of the Divine favour. It is no false testimony to the OT saints when they are described as looking for the city that has the foundations and as enduring as seeing the Invisible One: if their hearts were not absorbed in the contemplation of the eternal future, they were absorbed in the contemplation of the Eternal Lord, which certainly is something even better; and the representation that they found their supreme blessedness in outward things runs so grossly athwart their own testimony that it fatrly deserves Calvin's terrible invective, that thus the Israelitish people are thought of not otherwise than as a ' sort of herd of swine which (so, forsooth, it is pretended) the Lord was fattening in the pen of this world' (In»t. u. x. 1). And, on the other hand, though Israel as a nation constituted the chosen people of God (i Oh 16!3, Ps 89* 1056-131066), yet we must not lose from sight the fact that the nation as such was rather the symbolical than the real people of God, and was His people at all, indeed, only so far as it was, ideally or actually, identified with the inner body of the really ' chosen'—that people whom Jehovah formed for Himself that they might set forth His praise (Is 4320 66»-15- 1250 16" 1814-19, Mk II25-26, Lk II13) whose throne is in the heavens (Mt 5s4 23-2), while the earth is but the footstool under His feet. There is no limitation admitted to the reach of His power, whether on the score of difficulty in the task, or insignificance in the object: the category of the impossible has no existence to Him ' with whom all things are possible' (Mt 920, Mk 1027, Lk 1827, Mt 222a, Mk 1224 1436), and the minutest occurrences are as directly controlled by Him as the greatest (Mt lO2"- *>, Lk 127). It is from Him that the sunshine and rain come (Mt 5*°); it is He that clothes with beauty the flowers of the field (Mt 638), and who feeds the birds of the air (Mt 626); not a sparrow falls to the ground without Him, and the very hairs of our heads are numbered, and not one of them is forgotten by God (Mt 1029, Lk 122). There is, of course, no denial, nor neglect, of the mechanism of nature implied here; there is only clear perception of the providence of God guiding nature in all its operations, and not nature only, but the life of the free spirit as well (Mt 66 813 2422 77, Mk II23). Much less, however, is the care of God thought of as mechanical and purposeless. It was not simply of sparrows that our Lord was thinking when He adverted to the care of the heavenly Father for them, as it was not simply for oxen that God was caring whsn He forbade them to be muzzled as they trod out the corn (1 Co 99); it was that they who are of more value than sparrows might learn with what confidence they might depend on the Father's hand. Thus a hierarchy of providence is uncovered for us, circle rising above circle,—first the wide order of nature, next the moral order of the world, lastly the order of salvation or of the kingdom of God,—a preformation of the dogmatic schema of prnvidentia generalis, specialis, and specialissima. All these work together for the one end of advancing the whole world-fabric to its goal; for the care of the heavenly Father over the works of His hand is not merely to prevent the world that He has made from falling into pieces, and not merely to preserve His servants from oppression by the evil of this world, but to lead the whole world and all that is in it onwards to the end which He has appointed for it,—to that ira\iyyeve 5*4 640-54 812). Thus, what the dogmatists call gratia prmveniens is very strikingly taught; and especial point is given to this teaching in the great declarations as to the new birth recorded in Jn 3, from which we learn that the recreating Spirit comes, like the wind, without observation, and as He lists (38), the mode of action by which the Father ' draws' men being thus uncovered for us. Of course this drawing is not to be thought of as proceeding in a manner out of accord with man's nature as a psychic being; it naturally comes to its manifestation in an act of voluntary choice on man's own part, and in this sense it is ' psychological' and not 'physical'; accordingly, though it be God that ' draws,' it is man that ' comes' (321 G35-41 14°). There is no occasion for stumbling therefore in the ascription of 'will' and 'responsibility' to man, or for puzzling over the designation of 'faith,' in which the ' coming' takes effect, as a ' work' of man's (629). Man is, of course, conceived as acting humanly, after the fashion of an intelligent and voluntary agent; but behind all his action there is ever postulated the all-determining hand of God, to whose sovereign operation even the blindness of the unbelieving is attributed by the evangelist (1239f-), while the receptivity to the light of those who believe is repeatedly in the most emphatic way ascribed by Jesus Himself to God alone. Although with little use of the terminology in which we have been accustomed to expect to see the doctrines of the decree and of election expressed, the substance of these doctrines is here set out in the most impressive way. 56 PREDESTINATION PREDESTINATION From the two sets of data provided by the Synoptista and St. John, it is possible to attain quite a clear insight into the conception of predestination as it lay in our Lord's teaching. It is quitt certain, for example, that there is no place in this teaching for a ' predestination' that is carefully adjusted to the foreseen performances of the creature; and as little for a 'decree' which may be frustrated by creaturely action, or an ' election' which is given effect only by the creaturely choice: to our Lord the Father is the omnipotent Lord of heaven and earth, according to whose pleasure all things are ordered, and who gives the Kingdom to whom He will (Lk 1232, Mk 1128, Lk 1021). Certainly it is the very heart of our Lord's teaching that the Father's good pleasure is a good pleasure, ethically right, and the issue of infinite love; the very name of Father as the name of God by preference on His lips is full of this conception; but the very nerve of this teaching is, that the Father's will is all-embracing and omnipotent. It is only therefore that His children need be careful for nothing, that the little flock need not fear, that His elect may be assured that none of them shall be lost, but all that the Father has given Him shall be raised up at the last day. And if thus the elective purpose of the Father cannot fail of its end, neither is it possible to find this end in anything less than 'salvation' in the highest sense, than entrance into that eternal life to communicate which to dying men our Lord came into the world. There are elections to other ends, to be sure, spoken of : notably there is the election of the apostles to their office (Lk 613, Jn 6TO); and Christ Himself is conceived as especially God's elect one, because no one has the service to render which He has (Lk £» 2835). But the elect, by way of eminence; ' the elect whom God elected,' for whose sake He governs all history (Mk 132°); the elect of whom it was the will of Him who sent the Son, that of all that He gave Him He should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day (Jn 639); the elect whom the Son of Man shall at the last day gather from the four winds, from the uttermost parts of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven (Mk IS2?): it would be inadequate to suppose that these are elected merely to opportunities or the means of grace, on their free cultivation of which shall depend their undecided destiny; or merely to the service of their fellow-men, as agents in God's beneficent plan for the salvation of the race. Of course this election is to privileges and means of grace; and without these the great end of the election would not be attained: for the ' election' is given effect only by the ' call,' and manifests itself only in faith and the holy Jife. Equally of .course, the elect are 'the salt of. the earth' and ' the light of the world,' the few through whom the many are blessed; the eternal life to which they are elected does not consist in or with the silence and coldness of death, but only in and with the intensest activities of the conquering people of God. But the prime end of their election does not ' lie in these, things, and to place exclusive stress upon them is certainly to gather in the mint and anise and cummin of the doctrine. That to which God's elect are elected is, according to the teaching of Jesus, all that is included in the idea of the Kingdom of God, in the idea of eternal life, in the idea of fellowship with Christ, in the idea of participation in the glory which the Father has given His Son. Their choice, and the whole development of their history, according to our Lord's teaching, is the loving work of the Father: and in His keeping also is the consummation of their bliss. Their segregation, of C' >urse, leaves others not elected, to whom none of their privileges are granted ; from whom none of their services are expected; with whom their glorious destiny is not shared. This, too, is of God. But this side of the matter, in accordance %with Jesus' mission in the world as Saviour rather than as Judge, is less dwelt upon. In the case of neither class, that of the elect as little as that of those that are without, are the purposes of God wrought out without the co-operation of the activities of the subjects; but in neither case is the decisive factor supplied by these, but is discoverable solely in the will of God and the consonant will of the Son. The ' even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight' (Mt 1126, Lk 1021), j9 to our Lord, at least, an all-sufficient theodicy in the face of all God's diverse dealings with men. 2. The Teaching of the Disciples.—The disciples of Jesus continue His teaching in all its elements. We are conscious, for example, of entering no new atmosphere when we pass to the Epistle of James. St. James, too, finds his starting-point in a profound apprehension of the exaltation and perfection of God,—defining God's nature, indeed, with a phrase that merely repeats in other words the penetrating declaration that 'God is light' (1 Jn Is), which, reflecting our Lord's teaching, sounds the keynote of the beloved dixciple's thought of God (Ja 1"),— and particularly in a keen sense of dependence on God (415 57), to which it was an axiom that every good thing is a gift from Him (I17). Accordingly, salvation, the pre-eminent good, comes purely as His gift, and can be ascribed only to His will (I18); and its exclusively Divine origin is indicated by the choice that is made of those who receive it— not the rich and prosperous, who have somewhat perhaps which might command consideration, but ;he poor and miserable (26). So little does this Divine choice rest on even faith, that it is rather in order to faith (25), and introduces its recipients into the Kingdom as firstfruits of a great harvest to be reaped by God in the world (I18). Similarly, in the Book of Acts, the whole stress in the matter of salvation is laid on the grace of God (11» 1343 143-26 1540 18v7); and to it, in the most pointed way, the inception of faith itself is assigned (18-7). It is only slightly varied language when the increase in the Church is ascribed to the hand of the Lord (II21), or the direct act of God (1427 1810). The explicit declaration of 247 presents, therefore, nothing peculiar, and we are fully prepared for the philosophy of the redemptive history expressed in 1348, that only those 'ordained to eternal life' believed—the believing that comes by the grace of God (1827), to whom it belongs to open the heart to give heed to the gospel (1614), being thus referred to the counsel of eternity, of which the events of time are only the outworking. The general philosophy of history thus suggested is implicit in the very idea of a promissory system, and in the recognition of a predictive element in irophecy, and is written large on the pages of the historical books of the NT. It is given expression in every declaration that this or that event came to pass 'that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets,'—a form of statement in which our Lord had Himself betrayed His teleological view of history, not only as respects details (Jn 1525 1712), but with the widest reference (Lk 2122), and which was taken up cordially by His followers, particularly by Matthew (I22 215- » 4" 817 1217 1338 214 26s6, Jn 123" 189 19*1-28-36). Alongside of this phrase occurs the equally significant ' Set of the Divine decree,' as it has been appropriately called, by which is suggested the necessity which rules over historical sequences. It is used -with-a view now to % Jesus' own plan of redemption (by Jesus Himself, Mt 85\ Lk 248 4** 922 13s1 1725 247, Jn 314 10161234; by the evangelist, Mt 1621), now to the underlying plan of God (by Jesus, Mt 246, Mk 137-lu, Lk 219; by the writer, Mt 1710, Mk 911, Ac 321 916), anon to the prophetic declaration as an indication of the underlying plan (by Jesus, Mt 26M, Lk 2237 24s6- * % ; by the writer, Jn 20", Ac I16 17s). This appeal, in either form, served an important apologetic purpose in the first proclamation of the gospel; but its fundamental significance is rooted, of course, in the conception of a Divine ordering of the whole course of history to the veriest detail. Such a teleological conception of the history of the Kingdom is manifested strikingly in the speech of St. Stephen (Ac 7), in which the developing plan of God is rapidly sketched. But it is in such declarations as those of St. Peter recorded in Ac 2-b 428 that the wider philosophy of history comes to its clearest expression. In them everything that had befallen Jesus is represented as merely the emerging into fact of what had stood beforehand prepared for in ' the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God,' so that nothing had been accomplished, by whatever agents, except what 'his hand and his counsel had foreordained to come to pass.' It would not be easy to frame language which should more explicitly proclaim the conception of an all - determining decree of God governing the entire sequence of events in time. Elsewhere in the Petrine discourses of Acts the speech is coloured by the same ideas: we note in the immediate context of these culminating passages the high terms in which the exaltation or God is expressed (424'-), the sharpness with which His sovereignty in the 'call' (irpoGKakioiMii) is declared (2s9), and elsewhere the repeated emergence of the idea of the necessary correspondence PKEDESTINATION PKEDESTINATION 5J of the events of time with the predictions of Scripture (I16 2s4 321). The same doctrine of predestination meets us in the pages of St. Peter's Epistles. He does, indeed, speak of the members of the Christian community as God's elect (I I1 2s 513, II I1'), in accordance with the apostolic habit of assuming the reality implied in the manifestation ; but this is so far from importing that election hangs on the act of man that St. Peter refers it directly to the elective foreknowledge of God (I I2), and seeks its confirmation in sanctification (II I10), —even as the stumbling of the disobedient, on the other hand, is presented as a confirmation of their appointment to disbelief (I 28). The pregnant use ot the terms ' foreknow' (irpoyivibanu)) and ' foreknowledge ' {Tp6yv), where they certainly convey the sense of a loving, distinguishing regard which assimilates them to the idea of election, is worthy of note as another of the traits common to him and St. Paul (Ro 8W II2, only in NT). The usage might be explained, indeed, as the development of a purely Greek sense of the words, but it is much more probably rooted in a Semitic usage, which, as we have seen, is not without example in OT. A simple comparison of the passages will exhibit the impossibility of reading the terms of mere prevision (cf. Cremer sub voc, and especially the full discussion in K. Mailer's Die Gottliche Zuvorersehung und Ertvdh-lung, etc. pp. 38f., 81f.; also Gennrich, SK, 1898, 382-395; Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum, 289, Paulin-ismus, 268; and Lorenz, Lehrsystem, etc. 94). The teaching of St. John in Gospel and Epistle is not distinguishable from that which he reports from his Master's lips, and need not here be reverted to afresh. The same fundamental viewpoints meet us also in the Apocalypse. The emphasis there placed on the omnipotence of God rises indeed to a climax. There onlyin NT (except 2 Co 618), for example, is the epithet iraPToapdrap ascribed to Him (I8 4811" 153167-1419B-15 2122, cf. 153 610) j and the whole purport of the book is the portrayal of the Divine guidance of history, and the very essence of its message that, despite all surface appearances, it is the hand of God that really directs all occurrences, and all things are hastening to the end of His determining. Salvation is ascribed unvaryingly to the grace of God, and declared to be His work (1210191). The elect people of God are His by the Divine choice alone : their names are from the foundation of the world written in the Lamb's Book of Life (13s 178 2012"15 2122), which is certainly a symbol of Divine appointment to eternal life revealed in and realized through Christ; nor shall they ever be blotted out of it (35). It is difficult to doubt that the destination here asserted is to a complete salvation (199), that it is individual, and that it is but a single instance of the completeness of the Divine government to which the world is subject by the Lord of lords and King of kings, the Ruler of the earth and King of the nations, whose control of all the occurrences of time in accordance with His holy purposes it is the supreme object of this book to portray. Perhaps less is directly said about the purpose of God in the Epistle to the Hebrews than in any other portion of NT of equal length. The technical phraseology of the subject is conspicuously absent. Nevertheless, the conception of the Divine counsel and will underlying all that comes to pass (210), and especially the entire course of the purchase (617, cf. lO5"1" 2») and application (II39-*1 915) of salvation, is fundamental to the whole thought of the Epistle; and echoes of the modes in which this conception is elsewhere expressed meet us on every hand. Thus we read of God's eternal counsel {fivk'fi, 6") and of His precedent will (flAwui, 1010) as underlying His redemptive acts; of the enrolment of the names of His children in heaven (1228); of the origin in the energy of God of all that is good in us (1321); and, above all, of a 'heavenly call' as the source of the whole renewed life of the Christian (31, cf. 915). When our Lord spoke of 'calling' (xtkiu, Mt 913, Mk 2", Lk 632, and, parabolioally, Mt 222-4- 5.\ Lk 14s. 9.10.12. u. 16.17. M; Xi Mt 22" [2016J) th t d i th di ss n, pay, \ ; xXrfi;, Mt 22" [2016J) the term was used in the ordinary sense of ' invitation,' and refers therefore to a much broader circle than the 'elect' (Mt 22"); and this fundamental sense of ' bidding' may continue to cling to the term in the hands of the evangelists (Mt 421, Mk 120, cf. Lk 147, jn 22), while the depth of meaning which might be attached to it, even in such a connotation, may be revealed by such a passage as Rev 199 ' Blessed are they which are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb.' On the lips of the apostolic writers, however, the term in its application to the call of God to salvation took on deeper meanings, doubtless out of consideration of the author of the call, who has but to speak and it is done (cf. Eo 417). it occurs in these writers, when it occurs at all, as the synonym no longer of 'invitation,' but rather of 'election' itself; or, more precisely, as expressive of the temporal act of the Divine efficiency by which effect is given to the electing decree. In this profounder sense it is practically confined to the writings of St. Paul and St. Peter and the Epistle to the Hebrews, occurring elsewhere only in Jude 1, Rev 1714, where the children of God are designated the ' called,' just as they are (in various collocations of the term with the idea of election) in Ro 1«-?, 1 Co I2, Ro 823, i Co I2d (cf. Ro 11,1 Co I1). K;wit«, as used in these passages, does not occur in the Epistle to the Hebrews, but in 31 x'Kv.vit occurs in a sense indistinguishable from that which it bears in St. Paul (Ro 1129, 1 Co l2i, Eph II8 41- 4, Ph 3", 2 Th 1", 2 Ti 19) and St. Peter (2 P I"!) ; and in 91° (cf. special applications of the same general idea, 64 II8), «" *!" bears the same deep sense expressed by it in St. Paul (Ro 8s0- 30 9"-24, 1 Co 19 715.^7.18.18. 20T21. i2. 22.44, Gal 1«-15 58-13, Eph 41- * Col 315, 1 Th 212 47 52*, 2 Th 2", 2 Ti 1») and in St. Peter (1115 2»-21 39 510, HIS, cf. *r«w*«J.£«», Ac 239, and in the language of St. Luke, Ac 132 igio). The contrast into which the ' called' (31) are brought in this Epistle with the ' evangelized' (42- 6), repeating in other terms the contrast which our Saviour institutes between the 'elect' and 'called' (Mt22i4), exhibits the height of the meaning to which the idea of the ' call' has climbed. It no longer denotes the mere invitation,—that notion is now given in ' evangelize,'—but the actual ushering into salvation of the heirs of the promise, who are made partakers of the heavenly calling, and are called to the everlasting inheritance Just because they have been destined thereunto by God (1"), and are enrolled in heaven as the children given to the Son of God (213). 3. The Teaching of St. Paul.—-It was reserved, however, to the Apostle Paul to give to the fact of predestination its fullest NT presentation. This was not because St. Paul exceeded his fellows in the strength or clearness of his convictions, but because, in the prosecution of the special task which was committed to him in the general work of establishing Christianity in the world, the complete expression of the common doctrine of predestination fell in his way, and became a necessity of his argument. With him, too, the roots of his doctrine-of predestination were set in his general doctrine of God, and it was fundamentally because St. Paul was a theist of a clear and consistent type, living and thinking under the influence of the profound consciousness of a personal God who is the author of all that is and, as well, the upholder and powerful governor of all that He has made, according to whose will, therefore, all that comes to pass must be ordered, that he was a predesti-narian ; and more particularly he too was a pre-destinarian because of his general doctrine of salvation, in every step of which the initiative must be taken by God's unmerited grace, just because man is a sinner, and, as a sinner, rests under the Divine condemnation, with no right of so much as access to God, and without means to seek, much less to secure, His favour. But although possessing no other sense of the infinite majesty of the almighty Person in whose hands all things lie, or of the issue of all saving acts from His free grace, than his companion apostles, the course of the special work in which St. Paul was engaged, and the exigencies of the special controversies in which he was involved, forced him 58 PREDESTINATION PREDESTINATION to a fuller expression of all that is implied in these convictions. As. he cleared the whole field of Christian faith from the presence of any remaining confidence in human works; as he laid beneath the hope of Christians a righteousness not self-wrought but provided by God alone; as he consistently offered this God-provided righteousness to sinners of all classes without regard to anything in them by which they might fancy God could be moved to accept their persons,—he was inevitably driven to an especially pervasive reference of salvation in each of its elements to the free grace of God, and to an especially full exposition on the one hand of the course of Divine grace in the several acts which enter into the saving work, and on the other to the firm rooting of the whole process in the pure will of the God of grace. From the beginning to the end of his ministry, accordingly, St. Paul conceived himself, above everything else, as the bearer of a message of undeserved grace to lost sinners, not even directing his own footsteps to carry the glad tidings to whom he would (Ro I10, 1 Co 419, 2 Co 212), but rather led by God in triumphal procession through the world, that through him might be made manifest the savour of the knowledge of Christ in every place—a savour from life unto life in them that are saved, and from death unto death in them that are lost (2 Co 215- M). By the ' word of the cross' proclaimed by him the essential character of his hearers was thus brought into manifestation, •—to the lost it was foolishness, to the saved the power of God (1 Co I18): not as if this essential character belonged to them by nature or was the product of their own activities, least of all of their choice at the moment of the proclamation, by which rather it was only revealed ; but as finding an explanation only in an act of God, in accordance with the working of Him to whom all differences among men are to be ascribed (1 Co 47)— for God alone is the Lord of the harvest, and all the increase, however diligently man may plant and water, is to be accredited to Him alone (1 Co 35'-). It is naturally the soteriological interest that determines in the main St. Paul's allusions to the all-determining hand of God,—the letters that we have from him come from Paul the evangelist,—but it is not merely a soteriological conception that he is expressing in them, but the most fundamental postulate of his religious consciousness ; and he is accordingly constantly correlating his doctrine of election with his general doctrine of the decree or counsel of God. No man ever had an intenser or more vital sense of God,—the eternal (Ro 1626) and incorruptible (I23) One, the only wise One (1627), who does all things according to His good-pleasure (1 Co 1538 1218, Col I19-1B), and whose ways are past tracing out {Ro II33); before whom men should therefore bow in the humility of absolute dependence, recognizing in Him the one moulding power as well in history as in the life of the individual (Ro 9). Of Him and through Him and unto Him, he fervently exclaims, are all things (Ro II36, cf. 1 Co 86); He is over all and through all and in all (Eph 46, cf. Col I16); He worketh all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph 1"): all that is, in a word, owes its existence and persistence and its action and issue to Him. The whole course of history is, therefore, of His ordering (Ac 14" 1726, Ro ll8f- 3'J5 9-11, Gal 3. 4), and every event that befalls is under His control, and must be estimated from the view-point of His purposes of good to His people (Ro 8*, 1 Th 5"-ls), for whose benefit the whole world is governed (Eph I22 1 Co 2', Col I18). The figure that is employed in Ro 922 with a somewhat narrower reference, would fairly express St. Paul's world-view in its relation to the Divine activity :'God is the potter, and the whole world with all its contents but as the plastic clay which He moulds to His own ends ; so that whatsoever comes into being, and whatsoever uses are served by the things that exist, are all alike of Him. In accordance with this world - view St. Paul's doctrine of salvation must necessarily be interpreted; and, in very fact, he gives it its accordant expression in every instance in which he speaks of it. There are especially three chief passages in which the apostle so fully expounds his fundamental teaching as to the relation of salvation to the purpose of God, that they may fairly claim our primary attention. (a) The first of these—Ro 829130— emerges as part of the encouragement which the apostle offers to his readers in the sad state in which they find themselves in this world, afflicted with fears within and fightings without. He reminds them that they are not left to their weakness, but the Spirit comes to their aid: ' and we know,' adds ' tne apostle,—it is no matter of conjecture, but of assured knowledge,—' that with them that love God, God co-operates with respect to all things for good, since they are indeed the called according to [His] purpose.' The appeal is obviously primarily to the universal government of God: nothing takes place save by His direction, and even wnat seems to be grievous comes from the Father's hand. Secondarily, the appeal is to the assured position of his readers within the fatherly care of God : they have not come into this blessed relation with God accidentally or by the force of their own choice ; they have been ' called' into it by Himself, and that by no thoughtless, inadvertent, meaningless, or changeable call; it was a call 'according to purpose,' — where the anar-throusness of the noun throws stress on the pur-posiveness of the call. What has been denominated 'the golden chain of salvation' that is attached to this declaration by the particle 'because' can therefore have no other end than more fully to develop and more firmly to ground the assurance thus quickened in the hearts of the readers: it accordingly enumerates the steps of the saving process in the purpose of God, and carries it thus successively through the stages of appropriating foreknowledge,—for 'foreknow' is undoubtedly used here in that pregnant sense we have already seen it tp bear in similar connexions in NT,—predestination to conformity with the image of God's Son, calling, justifying, glorifying ; all of which are cast in the past tense of a purpose in principle executed when formed, and are bound together aa mutually implicative, so that, where one is present, all are in principle present with it. It accordingly follows that, in St. Paul's conception, glorification rests on justification, which in turn rests on vocation, while vocation comes only to those who had previously been predestinated to conformity with God's So,n, and this predestination to character and destiny only to those afore chosen by God's loving regard. It is obviously a strict doctrine of predestination that is taught. This conclusion can be avoided only by assigning a sense to the ' foreknowing ' that lies at the root of the whole process, which is certainly out of accord not merely with its ordinary import in similar connexions in the NT, nor merely with the context, but with the very purpose for which the declaration is made, namely, to enhearten the struggling saint by assuring him that he is not committed to his own power, or rather weakness, but is in the sure hands of the Almighty Father. It would seem little short of absurd to hang on the merely contemplative foresight of God a declaration adduced to support the assertion that the lovers of God PKEDESTINATION PKEDESTINATION 59 are something deeper and finer than even lovers of God, namely, ' the called according to purpose,' and itself educing the joyful cry, ' If God is for us, who is against us?' and grounding a confident claim upon the gift of all things from His hands. (6) The even more famous section, Ro 9.10.11, following closely upon this strong affirmation of the suspension of the whole saving process on the predetermination of God, offers, on the face of it, a yet sharper assertion of predestination, raising it, moreover, out of the circle of the merely individual salvation into the broader region of the historical development of the kingdom of God. The problem which St. Paul here faces grew so directly out of his fundamental doctrine of justification by faith alone, with complete disregard of all question of merit or vested privilege, that it must have often forced itself upon his attention,— himself a Jew with a high estimate of a Jew's privileges and a passionate love for his people. He could not but have pondered it frequently and deeply, and least of all could he have failed to give it treatment in an Epistle like this, which undertakes to provide a somewhat formal exposition of his whole doctrine of justification. Having shown the necessity of such a method of salvation as he proclaimed, if sinful men were to be saved at all (lls-320), and then expounded its nature and evidence (321-531), and afterwards discussed its intensive effects (B'-S39), he could not fail further to explain its extensive effects—especially when they appeared to be of so portentous a character as to imply a reversal of what was widely believed to have been God's mode of working heretofore, the rejection of His people whom He foreknew, and the substitution of the alien in their place. St. Paul's solution of the problem is, briefly, that the situation has been gravely misconceived by those who so represent it; that nothing of the sort thus described has happened or will happen; that what has happened is merely that.in the constitution of that people whom He has chosen to Himself and is fashioning to His will, God has again exercised that sovereignty which He had previously often exercised, and which He had always expressly reserved to Himself and frequently proclaimed as the principle of His dealings with the people emphatically of His choice. In his exposition of this solution St. Paul first defends the propriety of God's action (i)6"24), then turns to stop the mouth of the objecting Jew by exposing the manifested unfitness of the Jewish people for the kingdom (EP-IO21), and finally expounds with great richness the ameliorating circumstances in the whole transaction (II1"36). In the course of his defence of God's rejection of the mass of contemporary Israel, he sets forth the sovereignty of God in the whole matter of salvation—'that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth'—with a sharpness of assertion and a clearness of illustration which leave nothing to be added in order to throw it out in the full strength of its conception. We are pointed illustratively to the sovereign acceptance of Isaac and rejection of Ishmael, and to the choice of Jacob and not of Esau before their birth and therefore before either had done good or bad ; we are explicitly told that in the matter of salvation it is not of him that wills, or of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, and that has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens; we are pointedly directed to behold in God the potter who makes the vessels which proceed from His hand each for an end of His appointment, that He may work out His will upon them. It is safe to say that language cannot be chosen better adapted to teach predestination at its height. We are exhorted, indeed, not to read this language in isolation, but to remember that the ninth chapter must be interpreted in the light of the eleventh. Not to dwell on the equally important consideration that the eleventh chapter must likewise be interpreted only in the light of the ninth, there seems here to exhibit itself some forgetfulness of the inherent continuity of St. Paul's thought, and, indeed, some misconception of the progress of the argument through the section, which is a compact whole and must express a much pondered line of thought, constantly present to the apostle's mind. We must not permit to fall out of sight the fact that the whole extremity of assertion of the ninth chapter is repeated in the eleventh (II4-10); so that there is no change of conception or lapse of consecution observable as the argument develops, and we do not escape from the doctrine of predestination of the ninth chapter in fleeing to the eleventh. This is true even if we go at once to the great closing declaration of 1132, j0 which we are often directed as to the key of the whole section—which, indeed, it very much is : ' For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all.' On the face of it there could not readily be framed a more explicit assertion of the Divine control and the Divine initiative than this ; it is only another declaration that He has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and after the manner and in the order that He will. And it certainly is not possible to read it as a declaration of universal salvation, and thus reduce the whole preceding exposition to a mere tracing of the varying pathways along which the common Father leads each individual of the race severally to the common goal. Needless to point out that thus the whole argument would be stultified, and the apostle convicted of gross exaggeration in tone and language where otherwise we find only impressive solemnity, rising at times into natural anguish. It is enough to observe that the verse cannot bear this sense in its context. Nothing is clearerjthan that its purpose is not to minimise but to magnify the sense of absolute dependence on the Divine mercy, and to quicken apprehension of the mystery of God's righteously loving ways; and nothing is clearer than that the reference of the double 'all' is exhausted by the two classes discussed in the immediate context,—so that they are not to be taken individualistically but, so to speak, racially. The intrusion of the individualistie-universalistie sentiment, so dominant in the modern consciousness, into the interpretation of this section, indeed, is to throw the whole into inextricable confusion. Nothing could be further from the nationalistic-universalistic point of view from which it was written, and from which alone St. Paul can be understood when he represents that in rejecting the mass of contemporary Jews God has not cast off His people, but, acting only as He had frequently done in former ages, is fulfilling His promise to the kernel while shelling off the husk. Throughout the whole process of pruning and ingrafting which he traces in the dealings of God with the olive-tree which He has once for all planted, St. Paul sees God, in accordance with His promise, saving His people. The continuity of its stream of life he perceives preserved throughout all its present experience of rejection (lH-io); the gracious purpose of the present confinement of its channel, he traces with eager hand (II11-1'); he predicts with confidence the attainment in the end of the full breadth of the promise (1115-32),—all to the praise of the glory of God's grace (1133-36). There is undoubtedly a uniyersalism of salvation proclaimed here ; but it is an eschatological, not an individualistic universalism. The day is certainly to come when the whole world—inclusive of all the Jews and Gentiles alike, then dwelling on the globe—shall know and serve the Lord; and God in all His strange work of distributing salvation is leading the course of events to that great goal; but meanwhile the principle of His action is free, sovereign grace, to which alone it is to be attributed that any who are saved in the meantime enter into their inheritance, and through which alone shall the final goal of the race itself be attained. The central thought of the whole discussion, in a word, is that Israel does not owe the promise to the fact that it is Israel, but conversely owes the fact that it is Israel to the promise,—that' it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God, but the children of the promise that are reckoned for a seed' (98). In these words we hold the real key to the whole section; and if we approach it with this key in hand we shall have little difficulty in apprehending that, from its beginning to its end, St. Paul has no higher object than to make clear that the inclusion of any individual within the kingdom of God finds its sole cause in the sovereign grace of the choosing God, and cannot in any way or degree depend upon his own merit, privilege, or act. Neither, with this key in our hand, will it be possible to raise a question whether the election here expounded is to eternal life or not rather merely to prior privilege or higher service. These too, no doubt, are included. But by what right is this long section intruded here as a substantive part of this Epistle, busied as a whole with the exposition of ' the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first and also to the Greek,' if it has no direct concern with this salvation ? By what chance has it attached itself to that noble grounding of a Christian's hope and assurance with which the eighth chapter closes ? By what course of thought does it reach its own culmination in that burst of praise to God, on whom all things depend, with which it concludes? By what accident is it itself filled with the most unequivocal references to the saving grace of God 'which hath been poured out on the vessels of his mercy which he afore prepared for glory, even on us whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles'? If such language has no reference to salvation, there is no language in the NT that need be interpreted of final destiny. Beyond question this section doea 60 PREDESTINATION PREDESTINATION explain to us some of the grounds of the mode of Ood's action in gathering a people to Himself out of the world; and in doing this, it does reveal to us some of the ways in which the distribution of His electing grace serves the purposes of His kingdom on earth; reading it, we certainly do learn that God has many ends to serve in His gracious dealings with the children of men, and that we, in our ignorance of His multifarious purposes, are not fitted to be His counsellors. But by all this, the fact is in no wise obscured that it is primarily to salvation that He calls His elect, and that whatever other ends their election may subserve, this fundamental end will never fail; that in this, too, the gifts and calling of God are not repented of, and will surely lead on to their goal. The difficulty which is felt by some in following the apostle's argument here, we may suspect, has its roots in part in a shrinking from what appears to them an arbitrary assignment of men to diverse destinies without consideration of their desert. Certainly St. Paul as explicitly affirms the sovereignty of reprobation as of election,—if these twin ideas are, indeed, separable even in thought: if he represents God as sovereignly loving Jacob, he represents Him equally as sovereignly hating Esau; if he declares that He has mercy on whom He will, he equally declares that He hardens whom He will. Doubtless the difficulty often felt here is, in part, an outgrowth of an insufficient realization of St. Paul's basal conception of the state of men at large as condemned sinners before an angry God. It is with a world of lost sinners that he is representing God as dealing; and out of that world building up a Kingdom of Grace. Were not all men sinners, there might still be an election, as sovereign as now; and there being an election, there would still be as sovereign a rejection: but the rejection would not be a rejection to punishment, to destruction, to eternal death, but to some other destiny consonant to the state in which those passed by should be left. It is not indeed, then, because men are sinners that men are left unelected; election is free, and its obverse of rejection must be equally free: but it is solely because men are sinners that what they are left to is destruction. And it is in this universalism of ruin rather than in a universalism of salvation that St. Paul really, roots his theodicy. When all deserve death it is a marvel of pure grace that any receive life ; and who shall gainsay the right of Him who shows this miraculous mercy, to have mercy on whom He will, and whom He will to harden? (See Reprobate). (c) In Eph 11-12 there is, if possible, an even higher note struck. Here, too, St. Paul is dealing primarily with the blessings bestowed on his readers, in Christ, all of which he ascribes to the free grace of God; but he so speaks of tlvse blessings as to correlate the gracious purpose of God in salvation, not merely with the plan of operation which He prosecutes in establishing and perfecting His kingdom on earth, but also with the all-embracing decree that underlies His total cosmical activity. In opening this circular letter, addressed to no particular community whose special circumstances might suggest the theme of the thanksgiving with which he customarily begins his letters, St. Paul is thrown back, on what is common to Christians ; and it is probably to this circumstance that we owe the magnificent description of the salvation in Christ with which the Epistle opens, and in which this salvation is traced consecutively in its preparation (vv.4-6), its execution (6-7), its publication (8'10), and its application ("-14), both to Jews ("•12) and to Gentiles (1S- '*). Thus, at all events, we have brought before us the whole ideal history of salvation in Christ from eternity to eternity—from the eternal purpose as it lay in the loving heart of the Father, to the eternal consummation, when all things in heaven and earth shall be summed up in Christ. Even the incredible profusion of the blessings which we receive in Christ, described with an accumulation of phrases that almost defies exposition, is less noticeable here than the emphasis and reiteration with which the apostle carries back their bestowment on us to that primal purpose of God in which all things are afore prepared ere they are set in the way of accomplishment. All this accumulation of blessings, he tells his readers, has come to them and him only in fulfilment of an eternal purpose—only because they had been chosen by God out of the mass of sinful men, in Christ, before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before Him, and had been lovingly predestinated unto adoption through Jesus Christ to Him, in accordance with the good- pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace. It is therefore, he further explains, that to them in the abundance of God's grace there has been brought the knowledge of the salvation in Christ, described here as the knowledge of the mystery of the Divine will, according to His good-pleasure, which He purposed in Himself with reference to the dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in the universe in Christ,—by which phrases the plan of salvation is clearly exhibited as but one element in the cosmical purpose of God. And thus it is, the apostle proceeds to explain, only in pursuance of this all-embracing cosmical purpose that Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, have been called into participation of these blessings, to the praise of the glory of God's grace,—and of the former class, he pauses to assert anew that their call rests on a predestination according to the purpose of Him that works all things according to the counsel of His will. Throughout this elevated passage, the resources of language are strained to the utmost to give utterance to the depth and fervour of St. Paul's conviction of the absoluteness of the dominion which the God, whom he describes as Him that works all things according to the counsel of His will, exercises over the entire universe, and of his sense of the all-inclusive perfection of the plan on which He is exercising His world-wide government—into which world-wide government His administration of His grace, in the salvation of Christ, works as one element. Thus there is kept steadily before our eyes the wheel within wheel of the all-comprehending decree of God: first of all, the inclusive cosmical purpose in accordance with which the universe is governed as it is led to its destined end ; within this, the purpose relative to the kingdom of God, a substantive part, and, in some sort, the hinge of the world-purpose itself; and still within this, the purpose of grace relative to the individual, by virtue of which he is called into the Kingdom and made sharer in its blessings : the common element with them all,being that they are and come to pass only in accordance with the good-pleasure of His will, according to His purposed good - pleasure, according to the purpose of Him who works all things in accordance with the counsel of His will; and therefore, all alike redound solely to His praise. In these outstanding passages, however, there are only expounded, though with special richness, ideas which govern the Pauline literature, and which come now and again to clear expression in each group of St. Paul's letters. The whole do,c-trine of election, for instance, lies as truly in the declaration of 2 Th 213 or that of 2 Ti I9 (cf. 2 Ti 219, Tit 36) as in the passages we have considered from Romans (cf. 1 Co I26"81) and Ephesians (cf. Eph 2"V Col If 312-'«, Ph 4s). It may be possible to trace minor distinctions through the several groups of letters in forms of statement or modes of relating the doctrine to other conceptions ; but from the beginning to the end of St. Paul's activity as a Christian teacher his fundamental teaching as to the Christian calling and life is fairly summed up in the declaration that those that are saved are God's ' workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God afore prepared that they should walk in them' (Eph 210). ' The most striking impression made upon us by a survey of the whole material is probably the intensity of St. Paul's practical interest in the doctrine—a matter fairly illustrated by the passage just quoted (Eph 21°). Nothing is more noticeable than his zeal in enforcing its two chief practical contents—the assurance it should bring to believers of their eternal safety in the faithful hands of God, and the ethical energv it should arouse within them to live worthily of theif vocation. It is one of St. Paul's most persistent exhortations, that believers should remember that their salvation is not committed to their own weak hands, but rests securely on 1h« PBEDESTItfATION PKEDESTINATIOtf 61 faithfulness of the God who has called them according to His purpose (e.g. 1 Th 5^, 1 Co l»f-1013, pn 16). Though the appropriation ol their salvation begins in an act of faith on their own part, which is consequent on the hearing of the gospel, their appointment to salvation itself does not depend on this act of faith, nor on any fitness discoverable in them on the foresight of which God's choice of them might be supposed to be based, but (as 1 Th 213 already indicates) both the preaching of the gospel and the exercise of faith consistently appear as steps in the carrying out of an election not conditioned on their occurrence, but embracing them as means to the end set by the free purpose of God. The case is precisely the same with all subsequent acts ot the Christian life. So far is St. Paul from supposing that election to life should operate to enervate moral endeavour, that it is precisely from the fact that the willing and doing of man rest on an energizing willing and doing of- God, which in turn rest on His eternal purpose, that the apostle derives his most powerful and most frequently urged motive for ethical action. That tremendous 'therefore,' with which at the opening of the twelfth chapter of Romans he passes frofli the doctrinal to the ethical part of the Epistle,—from a doctrinal exposition the very heart , of which is salvation by pure grace apart from all works, and which had just closed with the fullest discussion of the effects of election to be found in all his writings, to the rich exhortations to high moral effort with which the closing chapters of this Epistle are filled,—may justly be taken as the normal illation of his whole ethical teaching. His Epistles, in fact, are sown (as indeed is the whole NT) with particular instances of the same appeal (e.g. 1 Th 212, 2 Th 2W-", Ro 6, 2 Co 5", Col HO, ph 121 212-13, 2 Ti 219). In Ph 212- is it attains, perhaps, its sharpest expression: here the saint is exhorted to work out his own salvation with fear and trembling, just because it is God who is working in him both the willing and the doing because of His * good-pleasure'—obviously but another way of saying,' If God is for us, who can be against us ?' There is certainly presented in this a problem for those who wish to operate in this matter with an irreconcilable 'either, or,' and who can conceive of no freedom of man which is under the control of God. St. Paul's theism was, however, of too pure a quality to tolerate in the realm of creation any force beyond the sway of Him who, as he says, is over all, and through all, and in all (Eph 46), working all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph 1U). And it must be confessed that it is more facile than satisfactory to set his theistic world-view summarily aside as a' merely religious view,' which stands in conflict with a truly ethical conception of the world—perhaps even with a repetition of Fritzsche's jibe that St. Paul would have reasoned better on the high themes of ' fate, freewill, and providence' had he sat at the feet of Aristotle rather than at those of Gamaliel. Antiquity produced, however, no ethical genius equal to St. Paul, and even as a teacher of the foundations of ethics Aristotle himself might well be content to sit rather at his feet; and it does not at once appear why a so-called 'religious' conception may not have as valid a ground in human nature, and as valid a right to determine human conviction, as a so-called ' ethical' one. It can serve no good purpose even to proclaim an insoluble antinomy here: such an antinomy St. Paul assuredly did not feel, as he urged the predestination of God not more as a ground of assurance of salvation than as the highest motive of moral effort; and it does not seem impossible for even us weaker thinkers to follow him some little way at least in looking upon those twin bases of religion and morality—the ineradicable feelings of dependence and responsibility—notas antagonistic sentiments of ahopelessly divided heart, but as fundamentally the same profound conviction operating in a double sphere. At all events, St. Paul's pure theistic view-point, which conceived God as in His providential cancurms working all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph in) in entire consistency with the action of second causes, necessary and free, the proximate producers of events, supplied him with a very real point of departure for his conception of the same God, in the operations of His grace, working the willing and the doing of Christian men, without the least infringement of the integrity of the free determination by which each grace is proximately attained. It does not belong to our present task to expound the nature of that Divine act by which St. Paul represents God as 'calling' sinners ' into communion with his Son,' itself the first step in the realization in their lives of that conformity to His image to which they are predestinated in the counsels of etemitj', and of which the first manifestation is that faith in the Redeemer of God's elect out of which the whole Christian life unfolds. Let it only be observed in passing that he obviously conceives it as an act of God's almighty power, removing old inabilities and creating new abilities of living, loving action. It is enough for our present purpose to perceive that even in this act St. Paul did not conceive God as dehumanizing man, but rather as energizing man in a new direction of his powers ; while in all his subsequent activities the analogy of the eomiurmt of Providence is express. In his own view, his strenuous assertion of the predetermination in God's purpose of all the acts of saint and sinner alike in the matter of salvation, by which the discrimination of men into saved and lost is carried back to the free counsel of God's will, as little involves violence to the ethical spontaneity of their activities on the one side, as on the other it involves unrighteousness in God's dealings with His creatures. He does not speculatively discuss the methods of the Divine providence ; but the fact of its universality —over all beings and actions alike—forms one of his most primary piesuppositions ; and naturally he finds no difficulty in postu- lating the inclusion in the prior intention of God of what is subsequently evolved in the course of His providential government. v. The Bible Doctrine op Predestination. —A survey of the whole material thus cursorily brought before us exhibits the existence of a consistent Bible doctrine of predestination, which, because rooted in, and indeed only a logical outcome of, the fundamental Biblical theism, is taught in all its essential elements from the beginning of the Biblical revelation, and is only more fully unfolded in detail as the more developed religious consciousness and the course of the history of redemption required. The subject of the Decree is uniformly conceived as God in the fulness of His moraj personality. It is not to chance, nor to necessity, nor yet to an abstract or arbitrary will,—to God acting inadvertently, inconsiderately, or by any necessity of nature,—but specifically to the almighty, all-wise, all-holy, all-righteous, faithful, loving God, to the Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, that is ascribed the predetermination of the course of events. Naturally, the contemplation of the plan in accordance with which all events come to pass calls out primarily a sense of the unsearchable wisdom of Him who framed it, and of the illimitable power of Him who executes it; and these attributes are accordingly much dwelt upon when the Divine predestination is adverted to. But the moral attributes are no less emphasized, and the Biblical writers find their comfort continually in the assurance that it is the righteous, holy, faithful, loving God in whose hands rests the determination of the sequence of events and all their issues. Just because it is the determination of God, and represents Him in all His fulness, the decree is ever set forth further as in its nature eternal, absolute, and immutable. And it is only an explication of these qualities when it is further insisted upon, as it is throughout the Bible, that it is essentially one single composite purpose, into which are worked all the details included in it, each in its appropriate place; that it is the pure determination of the Divine will—that is, not to be confounded on the one hand with an act of the Divine intellect on which it rests, nor on the other with its execution by His power in the works of creation and providence; that it is free and unconditional—that is, not the product of compulsion from without nor of necessity of nature from within, nor based or conditioned on any occurrence outside itself, foreseen or unforeseen; and that it is certainly efficacious, or rather constitutes the unchanging norm according to which He who is the King over all administers His government over the universe. Nor is it to pass Deyond the necessary implications of the fundamental idea when it is further taught, as it is always taught throughout the Scriptures, that the object of the decree is the whole universe of things and all their activities, so that nothing comes to pass, whether in the sphere of necessary or free causation, whether good or bad, save in accordance with the provisions of the primal plan, or more precisely save as the outworking in fact of what had lain in the Divine mind as purpose from all eternity, and is now only unfolded into actuality as the fulfilment of His all-determining will. Finally, it is equally unvaryingly represented that the end which the decreeing God had in view in framing His purpose is to be sought not without but within Himself, and may be shortly declared as His own praise, or, as we now commonly say, the glory of God. Since it antedates the existence of all things outside of God and provides for their coming into being, they all without exception must be ranked as means to its end, which 62 PKEDESTINATION PKEDESTINATION can be discovered only in the glory of the Divine purposer Himself. The whole Bible doctrine of the decree revolves, in a word, around the simple idea of purpose. Since God is a Person, the very mark of His being is purpose. Since He is an infinite Person, His purpose is eternal and independent, all-inclusive ana effective. Since He is a moral Person, His purpose is the perfect exposition of all His infinite moral perfections. Since He is the personal creator of all that exists, His purpose can find its final cause only in Himself. Against this general doctrine of the decree, the Bible doctrine of Election is thrown out into special prominence, being, as it is, only a particular application of the general doctrine of the decree to the matter of the dealings of God with a sinful race. In its fundamental characteristics it therefore partakes of all the elements of the general doctrine of the decree. It, too, is necessarily an act of God in His completeness as an infinite moral Person, and is therefore eternal, absolute, immutable—the independent, free, unconditional, effective determination by the Divine will of the objects of His saving operations. In the development of the idea, however, there are certain elements which receive a special stress. There is nothing that is more constantly emphasized than the absolute sovereignty of the elective choice. The very essence of the doctrine is made, indeed, to consist in the fact that, in the whole administration of His grace, God is moved by no consideration derived from the special recipients of His saving mercy, but the entire account of its distribution is to be found hidden in the free counsels of His own will. That it is not of him that runs, nor of him that wills, but of God that shows mercy, that the sinner obtains salvation, is the steadfast witness of the whole body of Scripture, urged with such reiteration and in such varied connexions as to exclude the possibility that there may lurk behind the act of election considerations of foreseen characters or acts or circumstances— all of which appear rather as results of election as wrought out in fact by the providentia special-issima of the electing God. It is with no less constancy of emphasis that the roots of the Divine election are planted in His unsearchable love, by which it appears as the supreme act of grace. Contemplation of the general plan of God, including in its provisions every event which comes to pass in the whole universe of being during al,l the ages, must redound in the first instance to the praise of the infinite wisdom which has devised it all; or as our appreciation of its provisions is deepened, of the glorious righteousness by which it is informed. Contemplation of the particular element in His purpose which provides for the rescue of lost sinners from the destruction due to their guilt, and their restoration to right and to God, on the other hand draws our thoughts at once to His inconceivable love, and must redound, as the Scriptures delight to phrase it, to the praise of His glorious grace. It is ever, therefore, specifically to the love of God that the Scriptures ascribe His elective decree, and theyare never weary of raising our eyes from the act itself to its source in the Divine compassion. A similar emphasis is also everywhere cast on the particularity of the Divine election. So little is it the designation of a mere class to be filled up by undetermined individuals in the exercise of their own determination ; or of mere conditions, or characters, or qualities, to be fulfilled or attained by the undetermined activities of in-dividuals.'foreseen or unforeseen; that the Biblical writers take special pains to carry home to the heart of each individual believer the assurance that he himself has been from all eternity the particular object of the Divine choice, and that he owes it to this Divine choice alone that he is a member of the class of the chosen ones, that he is able to fulfil the conditions of salvation, that he can hope to attain the character on which alone God can look with complacency, that he can look forward to an eternity of bliss as his own possession. It is the very nerve of the Biblical doctrine that each individual of that enormous multitude that constitutes the great host of the people of God, and that is illustrating the character of Christ in the new life now lived in the strength of the Son of God, has from all eternity been the particular object of the Divine regard, and is only now fulfilling the high destiny designed for him from the foundation of the world. The Biblical writers are as far as possible from obscuring the doctrine of election because of any seemingly unpleasant corollaries that flow froni it. On the contrary, they expressly draw the corollaries which have often been so designated, and make them a part of their explicit teaching. Their doctrine of election, they are free to tell us, for example, does certainly involve a corresponding doctrine of preterition. The very term adopted in NT to express it—iKKiyo/xai, which, as Meyer justly says (Eph I4), 'always has, and must of logical necessity have, a reference to others to whom the chosen would, without the iic\oyfi, still belong'—embodies a declaration of the fact that in their election others are passed by and left without the gift of salvation; the whole presentation of the doctrine is such as either to imply or openly to assert, on its every emergence, the removal of the elect by the pure grace of God, not merely from a state of condemnation, but out of the company of the condemned—a company on whom the grace of God has no saving effect, and who are therefore left without hope in their sins; and the positive just reprobation of the impenitent for their sins is repeatedly explicitly taught in sharp contrast with the gratuitous salvation of the elect despite their sins. But, on the other hand, it is ever taught that, as the body out of which believers are chosen by God's unsearchable grace is the mass of justly condemned sinners, so the destruction to which those that are passed by are left is the righteous recompense of their guilt. Thus the discrimination between men in the matter of eternal destiny is distinctly set forth as taking place in the interests of mercy and for the sake of salvation: from tiie fate which justly hangs over all, God is represented as in His infinite compassion rescuing those chosen to this end in His inscrutable counsels of mercy to the praise of the glory of His grace ; while those that are left in their sins perish most deservedly, as the justice of God demands. And as the broader lines of God's gracious dealings with the world lying in its iniquity are more and more fully drawn for us, we are enabled ultimately to perceive that the Father of spirits has not distributed His elective grace with niggard hand, but from the beginning has had in view the restoration to Himself of the whole world; and through whatever slow approaches (as men count slowness) He has made thereto—first in the segregation of the Jews for the keeping of the service of God alive in the midst of an evil world, and then in their rejection in order that the fulness of the Gentiles might be gathered in, and finally through them Israel in turn may all be saved—has ever been conducting the world in His loving wisdom and His wise love to its destined goal of salvation, — now and again, indeed, shutting up this or that element of it unto disobedience, but never merely in order that it might fall, but that in the end He might have mercy upon all. Thus the Biblical writers bid us raise our eyes, not only from the justly condemned PEEDICTION PEEPAEATIOJST DAY 63 lost, that we may with deeper feeling contemplate the marvels of the Divine love in the saving of sinners no better than they and with no greater claims on the Divine mercy; but from the relatively insignificant body of the lost, as but the prumngs gathered beneath the branches of the olive-tree planted by the Lord's own hand, to fix them on the thrifty stock itself and the crown of luxuriant leafage and ever nfore richly ripening fruit, as under the loving pruning and grafting of the great Husbandman it grows and flourishes and puts forth its boughs until it shall shade the whole earth. This, according to the Biblical writers, is the end of election ; and this is nothing other than the salvation of the world. Though in the process of the ages the goal is not attained without prun-ings and fires of burning,—though all the wild-olive twigs are not throughout the centuries grafted in, —yet the goal of a saved world shall at the end be gloriously realized. Meanwhile, the hope of the world, the hope of the Church, and the hope of the individual alike, is cast solely on the mercy of a freely electing God, in whose hands are all things, and not least the care of the advance of His saving grace in the world. And it is undeniable that whenever, as the years have passed by, the currents of religions feeling have run deep, and the higher ascents of religious thinking have been scaled, it has ever been on the free might of Divine grace that Christians have been found to cast their hopes for the salvation alike of the world, the Church, and the individual; and whenever they have thus turned in trust to the pure grace of God, they have spontaneously given expression to their faith in terms of the Divine election. See also Election, Reprobate, Will. Literature.—The Biblical material can best be surveyed with the help of the Lexicons on the terms employed (esp. Cremer), the commentaries on the passages, and the sections in the several treatises on Biblical Theology dealing with this and cognate themes; among these last, the works of Dillmann on the OT, and Holtzmann on the NT, may be especially profitably consulted. The Pauline doctrine has, in particular, been made the subject of almost endless discussion, chiefly, it must be confessed, with the object of softening its outlines or of explaining it more or less away. Perhaps the following are the more important recent treatises:—Poelman, de Jem Apostolmanque, Pauli prceserthn,, doetrina de prcedestinatione divina et morali hominis Ubertate, Gron. 1851; Weiss, ' Predestinationslehre des Ap. Paul,' in Jahrbb. /. D. Theol. 1857, p. 54 f.; Lamping, Pauli de prcedestinatione decretorum enarratio, Leov. 1858; Goens, Le rdle de la liberti humaine dans la pridestination Paulinienne, Lausanne, 1884 ; Menigoz, La pridestination dans la thdologie Paulinienne, Paris, 1885 ; Dalmer,' Zur Paulinischen Erwahlungslehre,' in Oreifswalder Studien, Gutersloh, 1895. The publication of Karl Muller's valuable treatise on Die GottluJie Zuvorersehung und Erwahlung, etc. (Halle, 1892), has called out a new literature on the section Ro 9-11, the most important items in which are probably the reprint of Beyschlae'8 Die Paviinisehe Theodicee (1896, first published in to B. Weiss (Gottingen, 1897). But of these only Goens recognizes the double predestination; even Miiller, whose treatise is otherwise of the first value, argues against it, and so does Dalmer in his very interesting discussions; the others are still less in accordance with their text (cf. the valuable critical note on the recent literature in Holtzmann's NT Theologie, ii. 171-174). Discussions of the doctrine of post-Canonical Judaism may be found in Hamburger, Real-Encyc. ii. 102f., art.' Bestimmung'; Weber, Jtid. Theol. 148 «., 205 £f.; Schurer, HJPu. ii. 14 f. (cf. p. 2f., where the passages from Josephus are collected); Edersheim, We and Times of Jesus, i. 316 ff., art. ' Philo' in Smith and Wace, 883», and Speak. Com. on Ecclesiasticus, pp. 14,16 ; Eyle and James, Psalms of Solomon on 9' and Introd.; Montet, Origines des partis sadueien et pharinen, 258 f.; Holtzmann, NT Theologie, i. 82, 65 ; P. J. Muller, De GoSsleer der middeleeuwische Joden, Groningen, 1898 ; further literature is given in Schurer.—For post-Canonical Christian discussion, see the literature at the end of art. Elbctio.v in the present work, vol. i. p. 681. B. B. WAEFIELD. PREDICTION__See Prophecy, p. 120 f. PRE-EXISTENCE OF SOULS.—The only hint in NT of a belief in the existence of human souls prior to birth is in Jn 92, where the disciples of Jesns put the question, 'Rabbi, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind ?' The primd facie interpretation of this passage certainly is that the disciples believed it possible that the soul of this man had sinned before the man was born. Many commentators, as, e.g., Dr. David Brown, hold this to be untenable, because 'the Jews did not believe in the pre-existence of souls.' If by this is meant that this belief did not form part of the older Jewish religion, that would be correct, for the tenor of OT teaching is distinctly traducian. In Gn 27 we are taught that the soul of the first man was due to the Divine in-breathing; and Gn 5s tells that ' Adam begat a son, after his image.' But to affirm that Jews in Christ's time did not believe in pre-existence, is simply inaccurate. The disciples of Jesus had at all events some points of affinity with the Essenes; and Josephus expressly states that the Essenes believe that the souls of men are immortal, and dwell in the subtlest ether, but, being drawn down by physical passion, they are united with bodies, as it were in prisons (BJ